Engaging Today's Global Citizens

Democracy in the Middle East

Now that Hamas has won the parliamentary election—to the shock of most observers—what does the future hold for Palestinian politics? Should the United States, Israel, and the European Union negotiate with the traditionally militant Palestinian opposition group, even though they have labeled it a terrorist organization? Are there any upsides to a Hamas win?

The Hamas victory is a mixed bag. Apart from the fear that Hamas will try to enforce a strict interpretation of Islamic law domestically, the clearly negative side is that Hamas has carried out violent attacks against Israeli civilians in the past and refuses to recognize that Israel has a right to exist. These positions have attracted the appropriate terrorist label and made most countries reluctant to deal with the organization.

But what distinguishes Hamas from global terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda is that they have managed to hold truces with Israel in the past and have, in fact, been maintaining one for about a year now. Some local Hamas leaders have also met with their Israeli counterparts to discuss basic municipal issues—such as shared power, water, and transportation concerns—and have declared their "willingness to attend an Israeli-Palestinian municipal conference in The Hague...to promote a municipal platform for peace." So Hamas has shown an ability to take a pragmatic stance when needed and has demonstrated, at least conceptually, that it is a party open to negotiation. Both sides should use those municipal channels to establish further dialogue on political issues.

There is another positive side to Hamas's win. The organization might have fared better had they not won, as they could have continued their work in the shadows and taken credit for any positive developments while blaming Fatah and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas for the negative ones. Now that the organization has been incorporated (in a big way) into the political process, it has to take some responsibility for the continuation of a political framework.

Not There Yet

The election won by Hamas also proved a great showcase for the democratic process, a rarity in the Middle East region. Furthermore, the election results were respected by both sides; moderates from each side declared a general willingness to work together for the common good of the Palestinian people.

But further steps are necessary on all sides. Hamas needs to renounce its call for the destruction of Israel—loudly and publicly—to signify a real transition into a political entity. It should also declare a willingness to negotiate with Israel, even if initially through Fatah and Abbas.

Hamas officials have already signaled a willingness to dialogue with Israel, a proposition once thought taboo among its constituency. Those actions by Hamas should ensure that the moderate elements in Israel's political spectrum will not shift toward the right in the next election as a knee-jerk reaction to the Hamas win.

Israel, the United States, and the European Union should also declare a willingness to negotiate if Hamas softens its stance. The United States has rejected outright the possibility of negotiation although EU leaders have shown a limited willingness to do so if Hamas constructively engages with Israel instead of calling for its destruction.

All sides have threatened to cut aid to the Palestinian Authority—a decision that would further marginalize Hamas as well as derail the improving internal conditions in Palestine. That in turn would potentially radicalize those Palestinian citizens who feel unjustly punished and become disenchanted by the failed promises of the political process. It would make more sense to negotiate with Hamas and use aid as an incentive for Hamas's moderate side to prevail.

Exploring Potential Positives

The often-quoted cliché dictates that with crises arises opportunity, and that seems to sum up the situation here. No one counted on Hamas to win the parliamentary elections, but now that it has become a reality it's time to explore the potential positives of that outcome.

It is really a matter of looking at the issue practically. In order to minimize Hamas's extremism, they have to be given a bigger stake in the political process and even more legitimate channels in which to pursue their interests. Though they have been extreme in the past, further incorporation would offer the best incentive for them to move away from militarism and toward a more political approach. If in the future Hamas proves to be unresponsive and continues to work outside the political framework, other parties will always have the choice to disengage. But it would be wrong not to give them the chance.

The current Israel-Palestine political sphere is plagued with uncertainty due to the Hamas win on one side and Sharon's ill health and the upcoming election on the Israeli side. It could be the good kind of uncertainty that results in a shakeup of the status quo and adds a new positive dynamic to the stalled equation.

But the best possible outcome—a viable, effective, and sovereign Palestinian state that exists peacefully alongside a secure Israel—will materialize only if moderates on all sides realize they will need to talk to each other sooner or later.

Want to read more about the Hamas victory?

The Power and Interest News Report (PINR) predicts a hard transition for Hamas from militancy to governance, while Foreign Policy Association's Marco Vicenzino sees the issue as a part of a recent trend of rising Islamic forces in the region. Arab attempts to moderate Hamas are detailed in an International Herald Tribune article. A Washington Post article by Peter Finn shows how the positions of the United States and Europe diverge. Jonathan Steele urges the world community to respect the democratic process in the Guardian, while Haaretz published a poll indicating that the win did not encourage a move to the political right in Israel.

—Sherif Hamdy