Tell us the truth
As of now, Hamas is the official Palestinian interlocutor
Close to a year ago Palestinians in the Territories elected Hamas at their leading political party, albeit without an absolute majority. Israel could have responded to the elections (surprising, as usual) in two ways.
The first option, of isolation and pressure, was supposed to have led to re-elections in the Palestinian Authority, in the hope that Fatah would win the next time around. The second response, the one of acceptance, would have led to the recognition of Hamas as a new and legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.
These two options required that Israel make national-strategic decisions that could have become historic. However, the cabinet avoided making such decisions and thus failed miserably on both fronts.
Currently, the Hamas government is easing itself out of isolation; the embargo is dissipating, and Mahmoud Abbas' efforts to establish a Palestinian unity government have been taken off the agenda. Hamas is being perceived as an organization that is holding the key to calm in the Middle East, and therefore it is imperative that we come to terms with it.
And the Israeli cabinet has indeed come to terms with it. The so-called ceasefire in the Gaza Strip does not mean the end of Qassam fire, but rather, Israel's absolute abandonment of pressure in a bid to topple the Hamas government, whether it be military, political or economic.
Thieves in the night
And so, just like thieves in the night, without any in-depth public debate and without asking the people, the Israeli cabinet accepted the Hamas rule as the de facto government in the Palestinian Authority. And this is without Hamas accepting a single condition of recognition or dialogue, as stipulated by Israel.
According to Israel, the decision has been made, and the cabinet would do well to conduct itself transparently and tell the truth: As of now, Hamas is the official Palestinian interlocutor.
Mahmoud Abbas only fills the role of a cardboard policeman positioned on the side of the road in wait for President Bush's visit to the Middle East. The minute bush leaves, Abbas will be folded up and put away.
And then what? Hamas' stance is well known. In exchange for a full Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 borders, as outlined in the Taba proposals and in the Clinton outline, it would be prepared (at most) for a long-term ceasefire with Israel, a "Hudna" for a generation. Hamas will not recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish State; it will not sign any peace agreements and will not deem the withdrawal as an end to the conflict.
In other words, the agreement with Hamas is far worse than the agreement Israel tried to make with Yasser Arafat - and that agreement wasn't popular amongst Israelis either.
Focus on Syria instead
Professor Shlomo Ben Ami wrote in his book "A Front Without a Rearguard: A Voyage to the Boundaries of the Peace Process," that Arafat had never prepared his people for a compromise. This is even more potent when it concerns Khaled Mashal. Really, what's the point?
With regards to Israel, since the collapse of talks with the Palestinians in the winter of 2001, the Israeli public's suspicion and hostility has grown immensely, and the preparedness to withdraw from the West Bank and East Jerusalem without a solid agreement that would put an end to the conflict has waned almost completely.
Neither Ehud Olmert nor Mahmoud Abbas, nor Marwan Barghouti or even Ismail Haniyeh emerge triumphant from this critical conflict between the Israeli and Hamas governments. The victor is Khaled Mashal, a dealer in terror, a dark and fanatic character, who has often appeared on Israel's list of targeted assassinations.
Instead of chasing the rainbows of a "political horizon" with Hamas, which would result in the recognition of Hamas as a de facto government, Israel could and should have entered into dialogue with an Arab nation prepared for comprehensive peace with us, namely Syria. This is the only attainable peace.
