The punditry is going nuts over the Hamas victory in the recent Palestinian elections. The opinion appears to be in two veins. (There is of course a third view: blame Bush. But we'll ignore those shrill cries here).

On the one hand, Hamas is a group of proven terrorists. Financed by a militant Iran, they will ratchet up the violence against Israel and export terror to other parts of the world. Worst case scenario--civil war in Palestine and a bloody intifada in Israel.

On the other hand, some see this as an opportunity to moderate Hamas. The Palestinian Authority depends on aid from the EU, the US and others. If they retain their terrorist rhetoric thereby losing said aid, they will be hard pressed to run their country. This side believes that political office will force Hamas into recognizing Israel and reforming a corrupt Palestinian government.

Which is it? Base10 thinks this election prevented--at least for the time being--the beginning of a Palestinian civil war. But armed Fatah members are not going to lie down. One of the reasons Fatah did so poorly was that their party is fractured. Fatah should position themselves as a unified opposition that wants peace and prosperity.

Of course, there is a good result here regardless of the outcome of the election. Once again, an Arab country had a democratic election. We may not like the result, but it showed that the trappings of democracy can hold.

Nobody said democracy was easy.

- posted by Base10 @ 2:02 PM