Mohamed Sid-Ahmed asks whether "inventing" a way out of the Middle East quagmire is still possible A number of wholly unexpected developments have rocked the Middle East political landscape in recent weeks. First came Ariel Sharon's surprise decision to leave the Likud, where he was facing growing resistance to his unilateral Gaza disengagement plan, and create a new party, Kadima. Shortly after launching his new party, Sharon suffered a debilitating stroke that has effectively ended his political career. Then came the stunning electoral triumph scored by Hamas last week, the first time the radical group has taken part in parliamentary elections. Winning a clear majority of seats in the Palestinian Legislative Council -- 80 out of a total 132 versus Fatah's 45 -- Hamas has replaced the PLO as the representative of the majority of Palestinians. This development has led to a historical impasse: contrary to the PLO, Hamas does not recognise Israel, while Netanyahu, who was elected as Likud leader following Sharon's departure, refuses to deal with Hamas, which he labels a terrorist organisation. The prospects of any sort of settlement between protagonists who do not recognise one another are remote, to say the least, and the situation is likely to remain frozen on both sides. For the impasse to be overcome, two things need to happen. One, Hamas's refusal to recognise Israel must not stand in the way of negotiations between the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli government; and, two, the PA must continue to negotiate with Ehud Olmert, regardless of Hamas's position on the issue. With regard to the first condition, this will depend very much on the balance of power between Likud and Kadima, more specifically, between Netanyahu and Olmert. Before Sharon's stroke, polls placed Kadima ahead of Likud in the upcoming parliamentary elections. With Olmert at the helm, however, a Kadima victory is not necessarily a foregone conclusion. In the eyes of the Israeli right, the new party leader does not enjoy the status of Sharon or even, perhaps, of Netanyahu. In the event, Olmert has so far tried to satisfy all concerned parties, especially Tzipi Livni, Israel's new foreign minister and a Sharon protégé. On the other side of the confrontation line, there is a new reality to contend with following Hamas's remarkable showing in the Palestinian legislative elections, and it is hard to predict how this will affect the course of events. With regard to the second condition, this will depend essentially on the relationship between Fatah and Hamas, whose victory at the polls caught everyone, including the PA, by surprise. From the start, there were signs of growing tension between the two Palestinian organisations. The West expressed dismay at the Hamas victory, but said there would be no immediate suspension of aid for the PA. The Quartet announced it was granting Hamas a grace period of no more than three months to recognise Israel and renounce violence before cutting off aid. In a separate statement, Bush announced that aid to the PA will continue as long as Mahmoud Abbas remains in power. The Palestinian elections were held as other Islamist groups gained strength throughout the region, in Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Iraq and most recently in Egypt, where the Muslim Brotherhood won one quarter of the seats in parliament. Western capitals are becoming increasingly worried that this trend (which they initially fostered and encouraged) could be getting out of hand, and are trying to come up with a solution to the problem. Then there is the question of how to deal with a government formed by what they have branded a terrorist group. One way out is for Hamas to nominate someone from outside their organisation to head the government, thus allowing Western capitals a face-saving way out of having to deal directly with parties attributed to terrorist activities. In any case, from the theoretical point of view, the right to negotiate with the Israeli side is vested neither in the PLO nor in Fatah or, for that matter, in Hamas, but only in the person of Mahmoud Abbas in his capacity as head of the Palestinian Authority. And both Abbas and the leaders of Hamas have called on the international community not to cut off economic aid to the Palestinians, which will go towards salaries, daily life and infrastructure and is vital for the elimination of terrorism altogether. British foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, announced that European governments are still deliberating how they will deal with the Hamas issue. Diplomats and analysts have come forward with a distinction between what they describe as "indirect aid", which comprises medical care, educational programmes and other vital issues under the auspices of the United Nations and its regional agencies, and "direct aid" funnelled through NGOs based in Europe and the Arab world. The US has reiterated that it is not ready to finance an organisation that calls for the destruction of Israel, advocates violence and refuses its obligations under the Quartet's roadmap peace plan. The Israeli government for its part announced that it will stop the monthly transfer of tens of millions of dollars in Palestinian salaries and tax rebates if a Hamas government is installed. A halt in foreign funding would be devastating for the PA, leading to massive layoffs and igniting violence in an area already primed to explode. Whatever their differences, the PA and Hamas will have to share responsibilities together. To begin with, they will have to decide on the question of who will command the security services, currently divided between them.
