c. 2006 Religion News Service

(UNDATED) The Hamas victory in the Palestinian election entitles Israeli leaders to one loud, long “I told you so.”

Even as President Bush was pushing for early elections as part of his drive to democratize the Muslim Middle East _ and pouring some $2 million in cash into the campaign coffers of Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah organization _ Israelis were warning Washington it might not care for the outcome. Fatah was not ready, they warned; Abbas sent the same signal. It was badly divided and on the defensive over corruption and poor social services.

“What do the Israelis know?” was the Bush reaction.

He should have listened. As the late Tip O’Neill (or Bibi Netanyahu if you prefer) could have told him, all politics is local.

But Bush gambled. A big Fatah win would rob Hamas of any claim to represent the wishes and aspirations of the Palestinian people and, coming on the heels of the vote in Iraq, would add momentum to his drive for democratizing the region. He rolled the dice. And he crapped out.

The Israelis are not letting him forget, as this reaction by an analyst for Haaretz, Israel’s liberal daily newspaper, makes clear.

“The Bush administration insisted on holding the Palestinian elections and preferred promoting democracy in the Arab world to fighting terrorism,” he wrote. “The results prove that Israel was right when it warned the United States that freedom of choice in the Arab world would award leadership to extremist movements and not to secular, liberal candidates.”

The Palestinian election outcome is further evidence of the administration’s persistent flaws _ lousy intelligence and a lamentable lack of understanding of the Arab world coupled with arrogance in ignoring the advice of those who do know.

The intelligence failure is truly appalling. Original American estimates were that Hamas would get no more than 20 percent of the seats. As the vote drew near, estimates of the likely Hamas total ran between 30 percent and 40 percent. The result was a rout. Hamas captured nearly 60 percent of the seats, an absolute majority and almost double the total for Fatah.

Bush tried to put a good face on the outcome at a press conference last week (Jan. 26). Once saddled with the burden of governing, Hamas may find its energies and resources focused more on the mundane task of providing jobs and social services and less on terrorism, he suggested. Could be. But Hamas’ success could also be read by radical Muslims in other Middle East nations as a sign that militance is the wave of the future.

There is some evidence to support that view. In Egypt’s recent election, the Muslim Brotherhood, militant ancestor of Hamas, saw its seats in the legislature jump from 18 to more than 70.

Outside the Middle East, there was general dismay, especially in the European Union. Kofi Annan, the United Nations secretary-general, said the nations of the world could not help or do business with a regime dedicated to the destruction of another nation, in this case Israel. “Everything we had hoped for, the chance for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, is postponed until who knows when,” said Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian prime minister.

Despite their despair, Washington and the European powers, who together crafted the “road map” charting a process and timetable for peace in the Middle East, are not without leverage. It’s money _ the more than $800 million Washington and the European Union pour into the Palestinian Authority each year.

Washington and the EU face a tough choice _ cut off the cash until Hamas promises to behave (whether it rescinds its commitment to Israel’s destruction or not) or keep at least some of it flowing as a sign of goodwill and a means of getting Hamas hooked on the handouts. Israel presumably will have some say in what Washington and Europe decide.

At the moment, there is only stalemate. Bush, European spokesmen and the Israelis insist there can be no talks as long as Hamas remains committed to Israel’s destruction. And Hamas’ leading candidate and the apparent front-runner for prime minister, Ismail Haniya, was quoted last week saying that “as long as there is occupation, resistance will continue.”

But no one can live with that, not Bush or the Europeans and certainly not Israel or Hamas. The parties will talk, whether openly or unofficially through back channels and third-party contacts. It’s the one certainty in a newly uncertain Holy Land.

MO PH END FARMER

(John Farmer is national political correspondent for The Star-Ledger of Newark, N.J.)