Whatever the final results of the Palestinian elections, a new dispensation is being born, writes Graham Usher in Gaza On 23 January Fatah parliamentary candidate Mohamed Dahlan stood before Yasser Arafat's home in Gaza City. "Democracy was born in this house behind me," he told a scrum of Fatah activists, PA security men and TV cameras. "And our message to Abu Ammar [Arafat] is that we will finish what you could not accomplish and what others opposed". He also admitted "mistakes had been made" and "never again will criminals tarnish our movement and our (Palestinian) Authority". It was classic Dahlan: donning himself in the "revolutionary" mantle of Arafat even as he promised a "new dawn" of reform. He knows, as Palestinians went to the polls on 25 January to elect their first parliament in 10 years, the stakes could hardly be higher. Would they again trust his word and return Fatah as the dominant if diminished political power in the PA or would they "punish Fatah for 10 bitter years of PA misrule?", in the words of one independent candidate in Gaza. And would they do so by voting for Hamas? It is testimony to Palestinian democracy that no one could answer that question with any certainty before the poll, including Dahlan. Aware that Hamas was closing Fatah's lead in the polls, he spent the campaign's last hours raising the verbal heat with the Islamists or "others", as he now calls them. At a rally in Jabalia refugee camp he claimed that Hamas's decision to participate in the elections was "an admission that our plan (Oslo) had triumphed". In a TV debate with Hamas national candidate, Mahmoud Zahar, he said that the PA had only arrested Hamas men in the past "for their own protection" (Zahar laughed out loud at this and so did thousands of other Palestinians). And at his farewell stump in his home town of Khan Yunis he met a crackle of machine gun fire with a soothing wave of the hand. "Turn your bullets into votes", he said, "so that the others will face an early defeat". Between rallies, Dahlan had been "persuading" Fatah's 120 independent candidates to stand down in favour of the movement's 60 official ones, courtesy of the usual promises of land, positions and money. Several dozen did so, including eight in Dahlan's constituency of Khan Yunis. But most have not. "Every vote for these candidates is like a vote for Hamas," he told his Khan Yunis brethren. Ghazi Hamad, Hamas candidate for Rafah, says this is the fundamental difference between the two movements. "Hamas is united," he says. "Once the decision was taken to participate in the elections, everyone in Hamas fell in behind it. Fatah is split. There are a 100 Fatahs, and not one of them can govern." But he discounts the claim that a victory for Hamas is simply a protest vote against Fatah. "Hamas presents an alternative," he says. "We are saying negotiations alone are not enough to achieve our rights. We are urging a new strategy based on a national coalition government with a national consensus over our rights, and a proper balance between political and military struggle". The question is what role would Hamas play in such a government? Hamad admits there is a "real debate" within the movement over whether to accept ministerial positions. "I think we should join the government," he says. "If we win big, we should run ministries and improve people's lives". But the majority view in Hamas is that the price of government -- such as Fatah's insistence that it recognise all agreements signed with Israel -- may be too high, at least for now. For many "being a strong opposition has the greater appeal," says Hamad. This is also Fatah's preference, says Osama Al-Fara, governor of Khan Yunis. "If Fatah wins a majority, it should form a coalition with the independent and leftist factions. Given our economic situation, we cannot afford to alienate the donors. But a strong opposition led by Hamas would ensure transparency in government, and that's good. But if we lose, we should go into opposition and complete what we should have done before the elections -- making Fatah a democratic movement with a leadership elected and trusted by its members". Yet even here there is little consensus in Fatah. Even as Al-Fara made these remarks, his jailed leader in the West Bank, Marwan Barghouti, was telling Al-Jazeera that the "aim of the 25 January elections is not whether Fatah defeats Hamas or which party has the most seats. The aim is to form a broad national reform government with the participation of all." Ghazi Hamad agrees. "Without cooperation between Fatah and Hamas, Palestinian society cannot be re-built," he says. "And I think agreement can be reached between us. Hamas is not against a political agreement based on a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders and in line with UN resolutions. But the priority now is reform and change within Palestinian society. How can we promise Jerusalem and the right of return when we can't promise our people a loaf of bread?" Most Palestinians would concur with that sentiment. Whatever the final electoral outcome, the fundamental hope is for a strong government that will impose the rule of law, end corruption, finish the "chaos of arms", generate jobs and stand united against Israel. What is no longer in doubt is that, after 25 January, Hamas will be an integral part of the new political dispensation, whether in government or opposition. In that sense "the era of Yasser Arafat and one-party rule really has come to an end," says Fouad Fawgawi, a Palestinian observer. It has. As Dahlan wrapped up his campaign in Khan Yunis, another, larger rally was happening in Deir Al-Balah in the Gaza Strip. Unlike the Fatah gig, there were no militias in attendance, only row after serried row of Hamas men, women and children, decked in green, radiant in anticipation. "No national liberation movement ever succeeded without a gun in one hand and negotiations in the other," Hamas national candidate Ismail Haniyeh told them. "Now finish your work and account for every penny you spend".
