Hamas has been elected to head Palestinian gov't

[DaForce]

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/01/26/international/i083432S33.DTL

So there it is.


My favorite quote so far?


"You cannot have one foot in politics and another in terror," said U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, adding that for the United States, Hamas is still a terrorist organization.



:D Psst! Condie! Look up the word 'hypocrite' in the dictionary.




Also...



The EU has given millions of euros (dollars) in aid to the Palestinian Authority to help reconstruction efforts in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank — funding that was called into question following Hamas' win.


"It is obvious that the EU would never countenance funding a regime that continued an armed fight against Israel," said Ignasi Guardans, a Spanish member of the European Parliament. "But we cannot push for democracy and then deny the result of free and fair elections."



Yup, but you know the U.S. was wishing they could push another Hussein into power there.

[Bokchoi Cowboy]

And the 1st Prize goes to Daf for posting the first outwardly political thread in the New Lounge!

[DaForce]

Thank you! Thank you! OMG!

I never thought that this would be possible! It was a dream of mine ever since I was a small lad.

I have so many people that I have to thank, I don't know where to begin...

First off there's the great people at Dell that made it possible to make one of the crappiest computers that my company could afford to set me up with, and then there's the great people in my IT department whom I'm actually surprised know what the business end of a server looks like.


Then there are the great people that put the news together [music starts to well up from the orchestra]...

I'm not done yet you muthaf**kers!!! Don't you start playing that crappy music when I'm talking!!

Where was I? Oh yeah...the news people [music starts to well up from the orchestra again] ...

Hijo de puta!! I'll show you how to play a trombone byatch!!



[Editor's note: The rest of this transmission has been censored for violence. We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread.]

[American]

Bush won't recognize Hamas as the legitimete government until they put their weapons down and talk peace. But i doubt that will happen.

[Bokchoi Cowboy]

With American's entry into the thread:


"...and the horses are off!"




The circle is now complete....




I declare this Lounge to be officially tainted!

[DaForce]

Hakuna matata.

[Cncrman]

For some unknown reason when I heard this news this morning all that went through my head was:

"I fought Hamas and Hamas won" to the tune of "I fought the Law"

Sigh...Insanity is so random at times.

[Intelligent_Design]

For some unknown reason when I heard this news this morning all that went through my head was:

"I fought Hamas and Hamas won" to the tune of "I fought the Law"

Sigh...Insanity is so random at times.


First thing I thought was, I'll take an Hamas with a side of eggs.

[Space Tycoon]

This should be interpreted as a protest vote, not an endorsement of Hamas by the majority of Palestinians. I was hoping the Third Way party, led by pacifist Mustafa Barghouti (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustafa_Barghouti), would make a stronger showing. I wonder why they didn't? I mean look at what they represent:

In December 2005, the Independent Palestine list, a coalition of independents and NGO members in the legislative elections scheduled for January 2006, announced Mustafa Barghouti as its top candidate. The list promised to fight corruption and nepotism, demand the dismantlement of what it termed the "apartheid wall", and to provide a truly democratic and independent "third way" for the large majority of silent and unrepresented Palestinian voters, who favour neither the autocracy and corruption of the governing Fatah party, nor the fundamentalism of Hamas


Good, positive stuff, right?

Oh, but then maybe it had something to do with this:

Mustafa Barghuthi was detained on Tuesday 03 January 2006 while campaigning in the Arab quarter of east Jerusalem and was taken for questioning to a local police station. A statement on behalf of Al Barghuthi read: "Dr Barghuthi was meeting with ordinary Jerusalemites near Damascus Gate, discussing their needs and the situation of Palestinians in east Jerusalem, when he was approached by six undercover Israeli security agents, arrested, and taken to the Russian Compound jail where he remains under detention."


DaForce:

Psst! Condie! Look up the word 'hypocrite' in the dictionary.


Exactly. Fatah has it's roots in militant resistance, as surely as does Hamas. We deal with them pretty consistently. The difference being that violence is only part of Hamas' activities-- social assistance and education being another.

Given the corruption of the ruling party, I wonder why people are so surprised that poorer Palestinians would turn to the voice of the voiceless. What else is democracy for?

[MPG]

"You cannot have one foot in politics and another in terror," said U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, adding that for the United States, Hamas is still a terrorist organization.I don't know about that. The first Israeli government grew out of a terrorist organization, so it can work just as "well" here. It also seems to work for Sinn Fein in Northern Ireland. I'm not saying that it's working great, but who knows what the situation in Northern Ireland would be like if the IRA didn't have a legitimate political arm.

The Hamas winning this election at least can't be any worse than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad being the president of Iran.

[Space Tycoon]

Good article by Rami Khouri in the Globe and Mail today:

There are good reasons for Hamas's victory (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20060127/COPALS27/TPComment/TopStories)

...the election campaign was not a referendum on making peace or war with Israel. Hamas did not win because it promised to wipe out Israel. It won because it held out the promise of redressing some of the terrible imbalances, chaotic distortions and deep indignities that have plagued Palestinian domestic society in recent years. These include corruption and incompetence in the Palestinian Authority, lawlessness at the local level, fragmentation as a result of Israeli occupation policies, and a humiliating inability to protect the integrity, humanity and day-to-day normal life of Palestinian communities. Hamas won because Palestinians think it can do a better job than Fatah in restoring order and self-respect to their lives.

[Space Tycoon]

The article has been limited in it's availability, so I'l archive it here:

CommentaryThere are good reasons for Hamas's victoryBy RAMI KHOURI

Friday, January 27, 2006 Page A15

The dramatic victory by the Palestinian Islamist movement Hamas in Wednesday's parliamentary elections is a historic turning point, and perhaps also a potential political opportunity -- but only if sober minds prevail on all sides and everyone calmly separates the causes of the victory from its possible consequences.

The hysteria brigades are already on the march in North America, Israel and other quarters where Hamas and fellow Arab Islamist political groups are seen primarily through the lens of their attitude to Israel, with which they are at war. The twin priorities now are for Hamas to wield its new power with responsibility and wisdom, and for Israel and the United States not to repeat the mistakes of the past two decades that have promoted Hamas's ascent to power.

For years, the Israeli government believed fantastically that it could speak of wanting to make peace with the Palestinians, while it pursued a policy of occupying their territory, expropriating their land for Jewish settler-colonies, toying with the Palestinian Authority, and assassinating Palestinian militants from Hamas and other groups who resisted the Israeli occupation.

Hamas's steady growth since its birth just two decades ago is a direct response to the Israeli occupation policies and the incompetent response by the PLO and the Palestinian Authority, which have long been led by the Fatah group of the late Yasser Arafat. All concerned must acknowledge this victory for what it really signifies and portends. Three key points stand out.

The first is that the election campaign was not a referendum on making peace or war with Israel. Hamas did not win because it promised to wipe out Israel. It won because it held out the promise of redressing some of the terrible imbalances, chaotic distortions and deep indignities that have plagued Palestinian domestic society in recent years. These include corruption and incompetence in the Palestinian Authority, lawlessness at the local level, fragmentation as a result of Israeli occupation policies, and a humiliating inability to protect the integrity, humanity and day-to-day normal life of Palestinian communities. Hamas won because Palestinians think it can do a better job than Fatah in restoring order and self-respect to their lives.

The second important aspect of the election result is that Hamas will now experience the responsibility and accountability that come with incumbency. As a democratically elected governing authority, whether on its own or in coalition with Fatah and other Palestinian groups, Hamas will have to act in a manner that broadly reflects the views of the majority of the Palestinian citizenry. That majority is at odds with Hamas's view of Israel. Palestinians have clearly and consistently expressed a desire to negotiate a fair, permanent peace with Israel and co-exist in peace with the Jewish state, rather than to wipe it off the face of the Earth.

The third important point about Hamas's victory is that it represents a brand of political leadership legitimacy that has been rare in the modern Arab world. Islamists in other Arab countries, Iran and Turkey have also made important political gains in the past three decades, because the existing modern Arab political order has largely failed the crucial tests of good governance, satisfying statehood and legitimate leadership.

Turkey is the most heartening example of an Islamist political movement that achieved power democratically -- in a NATO country, no less -- and has ruled with credibility, rationality and efficiency. It holds out important lessons for what happens when moderate, mainstream Islamists are shunned and banned, or are allowed to engage in democratic politics according to fair rules.

Hamas came into being as a direct response to Israel's harsh occupation policy that reflected a broad denial of Palestinian national legitimacy. Hamas's policies, therefore, cannot be viewed in isolation, but rather must be seen in the context of the struggle with Israel. Unilaterally demanding that Hamas disarm its resistance wing, or unilaterally acknowledge Israel's existence, will get nowhere if such a call is not matched by confidence-building measures from the Israeli side.

The priority now is for would-be third-party mediators -- and I hope Canadians, Swedes, Norwegians and others will be among them -- to calmly craft a process that simultaneously identifies the legitimate rights and aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians, and the diplomatic steps to achieve those rights.

Rami Khouri, a Palestinian born in Nazareth, is editor-at-large of The Daily Star, published in Beirut.

[kah]

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/biography/arafat.html

This is a biography of Arafat and Fatah. I don't know that Hamas could be worse. Either way, it's a holy war, and depending on the perspective, God, or Allah, is on either side (Israel or Palestine) and they're not terrorists, their freedom fighters. Who are we to say? Look back on every war, ever, and it's the same story. Rebels, Anarchists, Terrorists, Freedom Fighters- they're all the same, they're just given different names based on perspective.

I am not glad Hamas is in power. Was I glad with Fatah in power? No. But a change has been made and we shall soon see if it is for the better.

[Space Tycoon]

One thing can be said for them-- once they have said they are going to do something, they do it, for better or worse. They're kind of predictable, perhaps even honourable, in that way. I think this election took them by surprise as much as anyone else.

If they decide to change, renounce violence, I think they could be trusted to follow through. I mean ask yourself, have they lied much that you're aware of? They seem to mean exactly what they say, which is more than could have been said about Mr. Arafat at times.

Still, they would not exactly be my choice if I was a Palestinian elector. I remain hopeful that Barghouti and the Palestinian Third Way will use this time to build a base of support among everyday Palestinians, if the Israelis will let them. Sometimes I think the only thing more dangerous to Israel than an armed resistance is a peaceful one. Militant attacks provide them with ample justification for repression, targeted assassinations, continued settlements, missile attacks etc.

What if a Palestinian Ghandi or Mandela rose up to challenge Israel, Fatah, and Hamas? Israel would have little choice but to seriously sit down and work out a solution. And that's probably why the Barghouti cousins remain languishing in prison while much worse characters move about with impunity.

[American]

The Hamas winning this election at least can't be any worse than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad being the president of Iran.
You're right there. Iran's guy is a psycho. Hamas's rethoric is mild compared to Ahmadinejad's. Hamas doesn't have the military might to really threaten Israel compared to Iran

[MPG]

It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion - stupidity in the making:
Paper: US, Israel Mull Palestinian Change (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060214/ap_on_re_mi_ea/us_israel_hamas)

First of all, this shows everyone in the Middle East that the US really doesn't have any respect for democracy at all.

Second, it shows that US doesn't care about the well-being of the people in the Middle East: "What is new is the strategy to force regime change by impoverishing the Palestinians even further" So it is now ok to attack a government of a country by attacking its citizens? Not too long ago, that was considered "terrorism", wasn't it?

Third, they are now trying to get the Palestinians to grow disillusioned with the Hamas government, because (and now comes the funny part) they are hoping that then, the Palestinians will re-elect Fatah, with whom they have previously grown disillusioned. A rethorical question: What does it mean for a democracy if the people get to choose between two parties they are totally disillusioned with?

Quote: "The strategy's risks include the probability that Hamas would try to make up withheld money from the rest of the Muslim world, and from private donors, and that Palestinians would blame the United States and Israel, and not Hamas, for their growing misery"

What do they mean by "risks"? It's a certainty, not a risk.

[neglet]

A rhetorical question: What does it mean for a democracy if the people get to choose between two parties they are totally disillusioned with?

A not-so-rhetorical answer:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/08/images/20020809-1_ranch8-515h.jpg

[Space Tycoon]

First of all, this shows everyone in the Middle East that the US really doesn't have any respect for democracy at all. Yes and no. The neo-cons want a democracy that fits their ideal of secular, western style government--as opposed to the Islamist Democracy which is taking shape in Palestine and elsewhere. They want small-l liberal democrats who will follow orders and keep oil prices low. Which is not really in the spirit of "people power."

"What is new is the strategy to force regime change by impoverishing the Palestinians even further" So it is now ok to attack a government of a country by attacking its citizens? Not too long ago, that was considered "terrorism", wasn't it? Depends who you ask. Some liberals and conservatives have defended economic punishments of one kind or another, often for ideological reasons. Sanctions were considered a legitimate alternative to force when applied to South Africa in the 80's, Iraq during the 90's, or Cuba for the past forty years. It all depends on the prevailing political winds. Truth is, sanctions have a tendency to hurt the everyday people, while the elite usually manages to protect it's own interests until they are forced out of power.

Quote: "The strategy's risks include the probability that Hamas would try to make up withheld money from the rest of the Muslim world, and from private donors, and that Palestinians would blame the United States and Israel, and not Hamas, for their growing misery"

What do they mean by "risks"? It's a certainty, not a risk.
I like the way they put the word "probability" shortly after the word "risk." If it's probable, it's not exactly a risk is it? :rolleyes: More mealy-mouthed doubletalk.

Whether we like it or not, Hamas is here to stay. They are the democratically elected government of the Palestinian people. The US and Israel have cultivated the soil of Islamism for generations, as a Cold War political tool to prevent the success of Communists and Moscow-tilting secular nationalists.

Looks like it worked.

[American]

It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion - stupidity in the making:
Paper: US, Israel Mull Palestinian Change (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060214/ap_on_re_mi_ea/us_israel_hamas)
First of all, this shows everyone in the Middle East that the US really doesn't have any respect for democracy at all.
What democracy? With Hamas in power? You are funny. Teaching young children to put on suicide belts is part of democracy?

[Space Tycoon]

What democracy? With Hamas in power? You are funny. Teaching young children to put on suicide belts is part of democracy? As opposed to bombing civilians with F-16's and attacking them with Apache helicopters? Bulldozing homes with people inside? Or how about keeping them segregated in open-air prisons and calling it a "two-state solution?"

Hamas aren't my personal ideal but they should be given a grace period like any other newly elected government. Let them prove themselves in office before we cut them off. If we could support the government of the ANC, some of whose supporters employed the ruthless tactic of necklacing; (http://www.pathguy.com/lectures/necklacing2.jpg) Sinn Fein(political wing of the IRA); and for that matter the State of Israel itself, we can deal with the relatively modest Hamas.

[DaForce]

What democracy? With Hamas in power? You are funny. Teaching young children to put on suicide belts is part of democracy?


You're missing the point by stating something completely unrelated. Hamas was voted into power by the people, in other words, by democracy. Now the U.S. and Israel are miffed that the Palestinian people were pissed off enough at the way they've been treated (by both the U.S. and Israel) to actually vote a radical faction into power by popular vote.

Frankly, if the U.S. and Israel had worked towards better relations with the Palestinian people, instead of supporting things like walling off Israel, then this probably wouldn't have happened.

Hamas was voted into office legally.




I mean, it wasn't like the absurdity of the 2000 U.S. election.


:smirk:

[MPG]

Yes and no. The neo-cons want a democracy that fits their ideal of secular, western style government--as opposed to the Islamist Democracy which is taking shape in Palestine and elsewhere. They want small-l liberal democrats who will follow orders and keep oil prices low. Which is not really in the spirit of "people power."Well, yea, that's basically what I meant. I mean, it's like saying "You have the right to elect whoever you want, as long as they are the people we want." Really great.Depends who you ask. Some liberals and conservatives have defended economic punishments of one kind or another, often for ideological reasons.Well, to be honest, I think that in a democracy, all the people are responsible for the actions of their government (even the people who didn't vote for the government in power). It's the implicit Social Contract - an elected government automatically speaks for all the people. So if a democratically elected government makes mistakes, everyone is responsible, there are no innocent people to me, so I would actually be willing to condone sanctions against democratic countries (assuming, of course, that they could achieve a certain goal, which in this case they wouldn't). However, it seems to be the general stance of the US government that making a statement about a government through killing civilians by flying planes into office buildings is not ok, but now it seems to be ok to make a statement about a government through killing civilians by possibly depriving them of food or health care? Is it ok because it's a less obviously brutal way of killing people?Whether we like it or not, Hamas is here to stay. They are the democratically elected government of the Palestinian people.What I don't get is why people assume that things necessarily have to become worse now. Perhaps Hamas is capable of actually getting the turmoil in the area under control. For them, it's now a "put up or shut up" kind of situation. They can't stand at the sidelines anymore, trying to manipulate the political situation to fit their interests - now they have to take responsibility.

[Space Tycoon]

ISo if a democratically elected government makes mistakes, everyone is responsible, there are no innocent people to me, so I would actually be willing to condone sanctions against democratic countries (assuming, of course, that they could achieve a certain goal, which in this case they wouldn't).

Against democratic countries, perhaps. Even so, I wouldn't want to be a Danish exporter of pastries right about now...

I'm biased towards freedom of commerce as a general principle, I admit it. Even with undemocratic regimes, within reason. But I think that more often than not, sanctions are politically motivated to serve the interests of a special interest group or groups, of which there are many in a democracy.

The drive for South African sanctions and divestment were largely driven by black civil rights groups, taken up by their white liberal allies, and finally implemented by conservative governments in the US and Canada. Much the same is true for Cuba, only with the ideological poles reversed. Why is that "imprisoned island" still under US economic blockade? I suspect it has little or nothing to do with communism or human rights and everything to do with a rather demanding Miami Cuban community whose votes are essential during Presidential races. I feel something similar is at work with Hamas. A strong Israel lobby will not tolerate business as usual with a Palestinian government dominated by Islamists.

In any event, I think we're pretty much on the same page with this. Isolating Hamas will not serve our interests, or Israel's. And, it's just not the right thing to do.

Time for some good old fashioned realpolitik.

However, it seems to be the general stance of the US government that making a statement about a government through killing civilians by flying planes into office buildings is not ok, but now it seems to be ok to make a statement about a government through killing civilians by possibly depriving them of food or health care? Is it ok because it's a less obviously brutal way of killing people? Basically, that's how a lot of people feel. It's cowardly, but popular.

What I don't get is why people assume that things necessarily have to become worse now. Perhaps Hamas is capable of actually getting the turmoil in the area under control.

I believe the potential is there, if we were smart about it. If you look at the PLO's history, they have a lot more blood on their hands than Hamas, over a much longer period of time. And once in power, they stole or mismanaged the billions upon billions we sent them. Hamas, by all accounts, is efficient, dsiciplined, and just basically good with money. It will be interesting to see what they can accomplish.

Especially in light of this promising development. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060213/wl_mideast_afp/mideasthamasisraelrussia)

[American]

Quote:
Originally Posted by American
What democracy? With Hamas in power? You are funny. Teaching young children to put on suicide belts is part of democracy?
_____________________________________

As opposed to bombing civilians with F-16's and attacking them with Apache helicopters?
First of all, we don't target civilians intentionally.

Second of all, democracy doesn't usually come easy. Sometimes it comes from the barrel of a gun. Hamas just blows up civilians because that is what Allah supposivly wants them to do.


Frankly, if the U.S. and Israel had worked towards better relations with the Palestinian people, instead of supporting things like walling off Israel, then this probably wouldn't have happened.
Israel has tried to create a dialogue with Palestine in the past, but Hamas and Islamic Jihad continued to blow themselves up. Walling off Israel seems the only solution.


Hamas, by all accounts, is efficient, dsiciplined, and just basically good with money. It will be interesting to see what they can accomplish.
Yeah...real good with money. And what do they use that money for again? Oh that's right...suicide belts and payoffs to family members of bombers

[Space Tycoon]

First of all, we don't target civilians intentionally.Actually, I was talking about Israel. Funny how quickly people associate them with "we." :smirk: In any event, I'm no longer convinced that civilian deaths can be that easily dismissed.

The Israelis always manage to take out at least some noncombatants during these retaliatory strikes of theirs. As do the Americans, Russians, etc. Always knowing these deaths can be attributed to "collateral damage" or some other excuse. The Russians in particular have been notoriously indiscriminate in their long campaign against the Chechnyans.

And frankly, with todays awesome firepower, I don't see how civilian deaths could be avoided? As long as your dropping that kind of ordnance, civilians will die. I get that much. But we can't in good conscience go on telling ourselves these casualties are all purely accidental--as if these people got hit by lightning or something. That's insulting to the intelligence of the victims, who know better.

Second of all, democracy doesn't usually come easy. Sometimes it comes from the barrel of a gun. Hamas just blows up civilians because that is what Allah supposivly wants them to do. Suicide bombing didn't orginate with the Muslims, and for that matter neither did terrorism. What we call "terrorism" is a tactic the weak have always used against the strong, and probably always will, until there is some shift in human consciousness.

Yeah...real good with money. And what do they use that money for again? Oh that's right...suicide belts and payoffs to family members of bombers And health services, and education, and employment, and so on...

[MPG]

First of all, we don't target civilians intentionally.
Did you even read the article I linked to? I quote once again: "What is new is the strategy to force regime change by impoverishing the Palestinians even further"

So yes, the US does target civilians intentionally. The method seems a bit more subtle than just flat out bombing them to hell, but morally, it's just as questionable.

[Intelligent_Design]

One thing I find interesting is alot of people came down on Palestine when the moderate government was in power because they supposedly didn't do enough to stop Hasbala or Hamas, but the US government seemingly gets a free ride as far as allowing radical rightwing hate groups exist within its borders.

[Space Tycoon]

Interesting.

Palestinian PM-designate lays out conditions for recognising Israel (http://www.financialexpress-bd.com/index3.asp?cnd=2/27/2006&section_id=26&newsid=17025&spcl=no)

2/27/2006

JERUSALEM, Feb 26 (Xinhua): Palestinian Prime Minister designate Ismail Haniyeh said Saturday Hamas is "ready to recognise" Israel if it gives the Palestinians their full rights and a state on lands occupied since 1967, including the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
"If Israel declares that it will give the Palestinian people a state and give them back all their rights, then we are ready to recognise them," Haniyeh told the Washington Post in an interview posted on its web site.
Haniyeh did not say which form the recognition would take.
He also said Hamas was ready to mull over talks with Israel if the Jewish state withdrew from the West Bank and East Jerusalem and recognised the "right of return" for Palestinian refugees who fled in the 1948 war and their descendants.
Haniyeh, 42, was officially appointed Tuesday by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas as prime minister to form a new cabinet within five weeks after Hamas won a landslide victory in parliamentary elections last month.

[Space Tycoon]

Zawahiri urges Hamas to fight on... (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4775222.stm)

...but Hamas ain't havin' it:

Zawahiri urged Hamas to "continue the armed struggle" and reject agreements signed between its predecessors in government and Israel, describing them as "surrender accords".

Hamas leaders have dismissed Zawahri's comments.

Political leader Khaled Meshaal, speaking on the last day of a visit to Moscow, said the group did not need al-Qaeda's advice.

Hamas had its own vision, he said, and always acted in the interests of the Palestinian people.
Chief Hamas legislator Mahmoud al-Zahar denied his movement had "walked into a US trap" when it participated in the Palestinian elections.

"Entering these institutions does not mean that we will be a carbon copy of other factions, something that Mr al-Zawahiri warned of. Our position is very clear in this regard," he told al-Jazeera.





So right now the ball is in Hamas' court. There are reports that al-Qaeda operatives are entering Gaza unchecked or unnoticed by the Egyptian government. They surely see the new democratic Palestine as ripe for infiltration and subversion. But so far, Hamas' leadership seems to be staying independent, even entering into a partnership with the socialist PFLP.

Stay tuned...




.

[Space Tycoon]

Israel and Hamas united on ditching road map (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article349541.ece)

Kadima and Hamas, the ruling parties of Israel and Palestine, united at the weekend in burying the international road map, the blueprint for peace that was previously endorsed by the governments of Ariel Sharon and Yasser Arafat.

Since Hamas won the Palestinian election and refused to recognise the Jewish state, renounce violence or accept previous agreements, Ehud Olmert, Israel's acting Prime Minister, is no longer even paying lip service to the road map presented by the United States, European Union, United Nations and Russia.

Instead, Kadima is drafting a four-year plan to evacuate at least 17 outlying West Bank settlements. If, as the polls suggest, it wins the general election on 28 March, it will unilaterally draw a new border that will keep major settlement blocks under Israeli rule.

In Moscow on Saturday, Khaled Meshal, the exiled head of Hamas's political bureau, rejected a Russian request to accept international terms for a dialogue. Although Hamas is floating the possibility of an extended ceasefire, its long-term objective remains an Islamic state from the Jordan to the Mediterranean. "We believe that Israel has no right to exist," said Mr Meshal, the target of a failed Israeli assassination attempt in Amman in 1997....






.