A Modest Proposal: Why Hamas May Move Towards a Settlement with Israel

More than two months after the unilateral ceasefires in the Gaza War, there has been little progress in discussions on Israel and Palestine. Not only have unity talks between Fatah and Hamas failed to reach a conclusion, but the Israeli-Hamas talks on a prisoner exchange have also been fruitless.

So what's the hold-up? Self-confidence. Hamas self-confidence.

According to all measurements, Hamas's popularity has been increasing, even in the West Bank, since the end of the war. Surviving the border blockade of Gaza and the heavy bombardments of Operation Cast Lead Hamas has strengthened its position in Gaza, as it has put out a constant anti-Fatah rhetoric.

In the unity talks to establish the pre-conditions for an election to form a unity government, the Palestinian Authority (dominated by Fatah) has been insisting on the principles of the Quartet of the US/UN/EU/Russia. These call for Hamas to renounce terrorism, recognise Israel, and abide by the 2005 agreement between Tel Aviv and the PA. Hamas does not and cannot accept this for the time being.

Despite its stronger position, Hamas is walking on a thin and fragile tightrope: it must either accept the Quartet's conditions and work in partnership with Fatah, or it will be excluded from the political arena and be increasingly marginalised. If the Obama Administration's regional policies move the new Israeli Government, because of deepening economic crisis or a resurgence in perception of Israeli "security" in US domestic politics, Hamas can lose everything it has now.

Hamas is putting its bargaining power on the line. It may get more concessions from Israel at the behest of the US over the course of time. However, even this will never allow Hamas to sustain its uncompromising stance against recognition of Israel and acceptance of the 2005 agreements.

What does this mean? Hamas officials, who are aware of this dilemma, will not insist on political principles that can never be fulfilled. As they gain more of a role in a Palestinian Government, encouraged by their showing in the next elections, they are going to recognize Israel.

This will probably take years. At first, a long-term truce (hudna) based on pre-1967 borders and some economic, political, environmental, and security cooperation will be established. That in turn may establish the platform for a long-standing peace agreement in the following years.

Those who are sceptical should look back to early 2006, just before Hamas's triumph in the Gaza elections. On 4 March, Hamas leader Moussa Abu Marzouk stated that recognition of Israel would be a rejection of the rights of Palestinians, and other officials claimed during the election campaign that Fatah's 16 years of peace talks with Israel were a waste of time. However, another top official, Mahmoud al-Zahar told CNN in January that a long-term truce was possible if Israel withdrew to pre-1967 borders and released Palestinian prisoners. T

Three years later, Hamas spokesman Ayman Taha has said that the organization is unwilling to recognize Israel and to accept the agreements signed by the PA. Yet, as it manoeuvres in negotiations in Cairo and with Tel Aviv, Hamas has to consider if that position will jeopardise its political future.

In 2006, the US would not recognise Hamas' victory in Gazan elections because it believed that the organisation would be reinforced in its refusal to accept any relationship with Israel. Three years later, Hamas can defy this prediction:  establishing and consolidating its gains in a Palestinian Parliament and possibly a Presidency, the Gazan leadership could decide to come in from the political cold. The process would take time and careful language, but acceptance of the Quartet's conditions and a unity government in Palestine are possible. And so, eventually, is a regional peace based on pre-1967 borders with Israel.

The Latest on Israel-Palestine: Lull Before the Diplomatic Flurry? (1 March)

Update: Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has warned of "a sharp, painful, and strong respone" if the firing of rockets from Gaza into southern Israel does not stop. Nine rockets were launched this weekend.

On the eve of the Gaza donors' conference, which is more of a political dance than a significant effort to rebuild the area, and the tour of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (pictured) of the Middle East, there are a lot of meetings for show but no substance...yet.

After the Cairo discussions on Palestinian "reconciliation", including Hamas and Fatah delegations, Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas has tried to re-seize the initiative with a declaration that all aid for Gaza must go through his organisation. It is a call that may be supported by the donors' conference --- European Union representative Javier Solana immediately pledged allegiance after seeing Abbas on Saturday, "I would like to insist in agreement with the president that the mechanism used to deploy the money is the one that represents the Palestinian Authority."

In Palestine, however, Abbas' declaration may have little significance unless the Palestinian Authority can shore up its ebbing support in Gaza and, indeed, the West Bank. And that in turn probably rests upon some significant Israeli concession to allow goods and materials into the Strip.

Abbas supported his power play with a declaration that any Palestinian unity government must recognise Israel. Hamas in turn refused any recognition in advance of negotiations with Tel Aviv on other issues. "We reject any pre-conditions in the formation of the unity government. Hamas will never accept a unity government that recognizes Israel," said its spokesman Ayman Taha.

Abbas's statements follow his meeting on Friday with US envoy George Mitchell. The American gave away little on Washington's position in advance of Hillary Clinton's visit.

More intriguingly, Ha'aretz has reported US military assurances to Israel in advance of any negotiations. The head of US European Command, General John Craddock, met Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Israeli military commanders to discuss how to improve Israel's missile interception capabilities, not primarily against Hamas but against Iran.