Dear Ed,
I'd like to "weigh in" on the Hamas victory in Palestine, as this development will probably have a significant long-term effect on US policy in the greater Middle East.
The first issue to look at is the "who wins and who loses" tote board. As I see it, the biggest winner other than, of course, Hamas itself, is the Likud Party in Israel. I feel that Netanyahu's prospects in the upcoming election are now excellent, particularly when adding to the mix Ariel Sharon's de facto demise. Although the Hamas victory portends well for Likud, particularly in the short run, I have my doubts as to whether the victory is a good omen for the State of Israel. Because rather than approaching common ground, the Israelis and the Palestinians are moving toward more polarization, which, of course, could quickly spin out of control.
Elsewhere, I believe that Iran is a big winner, as Iran is shaping itself out to be the strongest nation-state player in the Muslim world. Although Hamas is Sunni and Iran Shi'a, Iran will have much more moral sway with Hamas than will, say, the EU.
Likewise is the Hamas victory an advance for the Muslim Brotherhood based in Egypt, the popular movement which Husni Mubarak has done so much to squelch. Actually, Hamas is thought to be an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. Thus if the Hamas victory is good for the Muslim Brotherhood, it does not portend well for Mubarak and the Egyptian regime.
It seems to me that Hisb'Allah in Lebanon is well-satisfied with the election result, as is Islamic Jihad, closely related to Hisb'Allah.
The result as it pertains to the EU is, in my view, presently neutral. The EU, whose leadership tends to demonstrate more wisdom than Washington, will probably try to work with Hamas, by providing financial assistance as well as political pressure on Israel to go to the negotiating table in earnest. If the EU is successful here, it will be a major victory for Europe and will signify a major diminution of Washington's regional power.
I should mention that the current thawing of relations between the EU and the US shows only a friendship of convenience: the prize that both are vying for is -- not the energy resources themselves -- but control over those resources and their distribution. Thus, the EU will play the Hamas/Palestine card with a view toward improving relations with the Islamic world, which will work to the exclusion of Washington.
Regarding the US, I don't see how the Hamas victory can be viewed as anyting other than an ignominous defeat. Bush and his entourage have been cackling about fostering democracy in the Middle East as the best way to achieve a regional peace. The Hamas victory shows that Palstinians have democratic aspirations, and now those aspirations are being jammed down Bush's throat.
In likelihood, Bush will play his hand foolishly, as will his successor, be he or she a Republican or Democrat. Bush will advocate the application of financial pressure on Palestine, as well as Israel's throttling of Palestinian public services such as water and sewage, all in an effort to destabilize the Hamas-dominated Palestinian government. The problem here, however, is that now Palestine has a legitimacy that it hasn't had before: they're playing by the same democratic rules that their critics have for so long chastized them for breaking. So if Bush moves to squash a duly-elected democratic government which happens to be Muslim, it will be quite plain to the Muslim world where Bush's true sympathies truly lie.
To conclude, the developments in Palestine will probably not amount to much in the short term. But in the longer term, the election can be seen as a rejection of a US-dominated Middle East in favor of a Middle East that chooses to carve out its own course.
Brian
