Kissinger on Hamas

Long Op-Ed, but worth reading.

A serious peace process assumes a reciprocal willingness to compromise. But traditional diplomacy works most effectively when there is a general agreement on goals; a minimum condition is that both sides accept each other's legitimacy, that the right of the parties to exist is taken for granted.

and

The emergence of Hamas as the dominant faction in Palestine should not be treated as a radical departure. Hamas represents the mind-set that prevented the full recognition of Israel's legitimacy by the PLO for all these decades, kept Yasser Arafat from accepting partition of Palestine at Camp David in 2000, produced two intifadas and consistently supported terrorism. Far too much of the debate within the Palestinian camp has been over whether Israel should be destroyed immediately by permanent confrontation or in stages in which occasional negotiations serve as periodic armistices. The reaction of the PLO's Fatah to the Hamas electoral victory has been an attempt to outflank Hamas on the radical side. Only a small number of moderates have accepted genuine and permanent coexistence.

Unfortunately, I just don't see peace coming. With the recent (vague) agreement by Iran to provide funding for Hamas, umm, Palestine, there is an obvious confederacy of terrorist regimes. This doesn't appear to be a step forward. But then, Hamas has to make up for the money that their political involvement has caused. And, as expected, the EU is already caving in to provide money for some reason.

The European Union agreed Monday to grant $144 million in urgent aid to the Palestinians before a government led by the Islamist militant group Hamas takes power, a move aimed at preventing a financial collapse that could add to the chaos in the Middle East.

But the EU kept silent on what it would do once Hamas assumes control of the Palestinian government.

French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said the aid was required to avoid "economic chaos'' from paralyzing the Palestinian Authority. It was also designed to show European support for the Palestinians remains undiminished at least until Hamas establishes its control.

The EU's decision was welcomed by the U.S. State Department.

I would have thought that chaos is the desired effect for the witholding of the funds. The "cause and effect" reality of politics seems to be missing here. If the US State Department supports this scheme, I'm thinking they are missing this point.

I'd say that the EU decision would have some effect to sway Palestine/Hamas to play nice, except for the involvement of Iran. I find it unlikely that Hamas would prefer funding from the EU. I'd think they'd take funding where ever they can get it, as long as they can maintain their control and agenda. Right now, they are having it their way.