Hamas members are seemingly adept at straddling the political and military spheres

According to the report, the Quartet’s approach towards Hamas has failed to deliver any progress in the Middle East peace process, therefore a more inclusive approach is required. As it stands, prior to any engagement with the proscribed “terrorist” group, three conditions must be met. Firstly, Hamas must recognize previous agreements made with the Israelis by the PA. Secondly, Hamas must renounce violence. Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, Hamas must recognize the right of the state of Israel to exist, not merely its existence as a political reality.

The committee’s chairman, Michael Gapes, claimed that the current policy of non-engagement was “ineffective,” and added that the government ought to, “urgently consider engaging with moderate elements within Hamas,” as had been done with Hezbollah in the past. Gapes pointed out, wisely it must be noted, that the Quartet’s objectives are completely unrealizable without the cooperation of Hamas. Only when Hamas is included can it moderate its maximal objectives, and the Quartet’s goals become realizable, is the rationale.

Political supremo Khaled Mashall is likely to be one of the moderates we need to include

It’s also good to see that Gapes’ committee is aware of his parliamentary duty to represent the views of his parliament’s constituents, unlike the incumbent British government or the puppet installation in Ramallah. In an effort to do so, Gapes’ report condemned continued expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and the blockade of the Gaza strip. Gapes furthermore demanded unrestricted access for humanitarian assistance, which you might like to think would be taken for granted in this twenty-first century, but alas it is not.

In a bizarre episode of naivety, however, the committee called for elections that could be accepted by all parties. Forgive me for a moment, but what about the PLC elections in January 2006 that Hamas won? Why can’t we realize that Hamas is going to be reluctant to take part in any elections in the near future because its victory in 2006 had effectively become ignored by the summer of 2007? You can’ t have democracy if you won’t respect the results of a democratic election. If the Palestinian people want to elect Hamas, then Hamas we must all learn to deal with. Otherwise, you have to be candid and admit that you’d rather have an acquiescent puppet government instead of democracy. You can’t have both.

Hamas' support in the Palestinian territories was strong in 2006, but doubts exist over its constituency following Operation Cast Lead

For that very reason, the emphasis of this report is indeed very encouraging. How this translates into policy is another story altogether, particularly given that the EU and Israeli-American sponsored Fatah-run PA feel they have a right to proscribe all of Hamas’ democratically elected parliamentarians as “terrorists” without even attempting to include the moderates among them.

Yes, Hamas does target civilians with its rocket attacks, it should be noted. However, the Israeli incursion into the Gaza strip has demonstrated that we can’t simply pick sides in this conflict; Israel is certainly not the saint that we seemingly desire Hamas to be. Both are equally reprehensible for their treatment of civilians. Hamas for targeting civilians directly, Israel for its flagrant disregard for human rights demonstrated by its blockade of Gaza and carpet-bombing of the coastal territory this past winter.

It’s about time we get over the stigma attached with “negotiating with terrorists” and realize that this philosophy hasn’t got us anywhere to date. How exactly the offering of an olive-branch constitutes capitulation I don’t know. Capitulation is the status-quo; an entirely preventable humanitarian catastrophe.

The humanitarian situation in Gaza has become critical following the Gaza War

:: :: :: :: :: ::

Facebook have controversially decided to remove Haniyeh's fan-page.

Facebook’s administrators have decided to remove the fan page for Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, delivering a severe blow to freedom of expression in the process.

Haniyeh’s fan page, titled “Commander Ismail Haniyeh,” had around 10,000 members at the time when it was closed down by the social networking giant, according to the London paper al-Hayat that broke the story.

Al-Hayat have claimed that Facebook’s administrators were fulfilling a request from Israeli and U.S. lobbyists to remove the pages supporting Palestinian resistance movements, although such reports are unconfirmed and many Hamas related groups remain online.

Haniyeh has faced persistent vilification from American and Israeli supported agents in the Palestinian Territories.

It seems that Facebook’s censors have not yet directed their attention towards the page created on behalf of the group’s exiled political “supremo” Khaled Mashaal. The Syrian-based leader has accumulated around 17,000 “fans,” and his page remains intact, for the moment.

According to the Palestinian Ma’an News Agency, a Facebook user “connected with” Haniyeh’s page commented that Facebook have not yet offered any explanation for the removal of the page. This same source also predicted that other Hamas-related pages, including Mashall’s, could be the target of censorship in the days to come.

As noted in the Jerusalem Post, Facebook’s owners have been inundated with emails demanding they reverse their decision and reinstate the page in the name of free-speech.

The JPost also quoted a terrorism expert from “The Investigative Project on Terror,” Mr Steve Emerson. He claimed, “there’s a battle for the hearts and minds of the western world and using social networking sites increases their audience, it humanizes them, and that’s what they want.”

Facebook's importance in the social networking world leaves it open to claims it is curbing freedom of speech.

Those critical of Facebook’s actions surely invoke the right to freedom of expression, and ought to duly note that Ismail Haniyeh was elected Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority in January 2006. As leader of the largest political party, Haniyeh dutifully assumed the position of PM.

However, a reluctance on behalf of the then-incumbent Fatah movement to relinquish power and Hamas’ coup of the Gaza Strip in June 2007 allowed Abbas to force Haniyeh out of his post, instigating yet further internecine conflict.

Abbas' appointment as Prime Minister, Salam Fayyad, lacks legitimacy.

PA President Abbas appointed Fatah member Salam Fayyad to the post using alleged emergency powers. Many have since denounced his appointment as illegal from both the Hamas and Fatah camps.

At the end of the day, Haniyeh remains the only democratically elected Prime Minister in the Palestinian Authority, and Facebook’s efforts to delegitimize his authority are nothing but cowardice.

As long as the Palestinian resistance is split between two camps Israeli Prime Minister Natanyahu can claim that he has no viable partner in the peace process. When peace efforts are forced upon him, he can, and will, side with Abbas’ Fatah faction. Facebook shouldn’t be offering a helping hand in this process.

If the Palestinian people desire to elect a group that utilizes violence against the occupying Israeli regime then they should be allowed to do so without being chastised by Facebook. That’s for the Americans to do.

Predictably, and pathetically, Facebook have so far declined to comment on the story. They ought to be more accountable to their users. Then again, Abbas isn’t setting a good example.

All the while, the irony that Facebook feels the need to curb freedom of speech in order to curb Hamas’ ‘freedom-grabbing’ Islamism is clearly lost on the social-behemoth’s creators.

:: :: :: :: :: ::

At a press conference in Amman, Jordan, Kaddoumi revealed that Arafat had provided him with a transcript of a meeting alleged to have taken place between Abbas, Dahlan, CIA officials and former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on 22 March 2004.

Moreover, according to Kaddoumi, Sharon suggested, ‘To start with, we should kill all the military and political leaders of Hamas, Jihad, al-Aqsa Brigades and the Popular Front in order to create chaos within their ranks which would make it easier for you to finish them off.’ Not a month later, in April 2004, Hamas-leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi was assassinated. Coincidence or not?

Farouk Kaddoumi's allegations could prove damaging to Abbas.

Sharon allegedly went on to say, ‘The first step therefore should be to poison Arafat and to kill him. I don’t want to send him into exile unless there are guarantees from the country that will take him to place him under house arrest…’ Conspiracy theories about Arafat’s death have centered around the hypothesis that Arafat was poisoned, although French authorities ruled this out.

Dahlan, the alleged co-conspirator, was alleged to have been involved in the preparation for a coup in Gaza after the Islamist group won the 2006 PLC election. According to David Rose at Vanity Fair, Hamas’ coup in the summer of 2007 was preemptive, in anticipation of a US and Israeli-backed plan to take over the Gaza Strip at the expense of Hamas.

The embarrassment of the rockets coming from Gaza couldn’t be tolerated any longer it seems. The raison d’etre of Sharon’s Disengagement Plan, the apparent hope to derail a bilateral peace process with the Palestinians, was shattered when Hamas won the PLC election. No longer did the Israelis have their puppet in Abbas.

Dahlan is no stranger to controversy.

While Hamas was driven out of power in the PA and many of its parliamentary members arrested, Hamas held onto power in the Gaza Strip. The Israeli Operation Cast Lead in January this year was most likely an attempt to put the Israeli’s unilateral peace process back on track.

Dahlan’s disdain for Hamas is well-known. It’s quite possible he was in on Arafat’s death. Abbas, on the other hand, is less-likely to have been involved, but I wouldn’t put it past him. The PA President claimed in response to Kaddoumi’s comments, “The statements Kaddoumi made were lies and tempest in a teapot.” He claimed Kaddoumi desired to upset his plans for a Fatah Council meeting, the first in 20 years. More likely is that Kaddoumi is becoming increasingly upset with Abbas’ bunker-mentality and ignorance to the demands of the Palestinian people.

Al-Jazeera were astounded by the PA's decision to ban it, claiming it had not compromised its professional standards.

In an attempt to stir the pot yet further, Abbas decided to (temporarily, it seems) ban the TV network Al-Jazeera from the PA as punishment for airing the interview with Kaddoumi. Moves like this are hardly going to inspire confidence of his innocence in Arafat’s death, on the contrary. Curtailing press freedoms is another dangerous step in a long-line of abuses perpetrated by Abbas.

While it seemed lately Abbas was going to put to an end the political incarcerations of Hamas opposition members, events in the past few weeks have proved otherwise. Add to this that Abbas’ position as President of the PA contested by Hamas, who claim an election ought to have been carried out in January, and Abbas’ rule looks decidedly authoritarian, and increasingly so. But could he have been involved in Arafat’s murder?

I’m starting to wonder.

Update: The PLO Executive Committee has condemned Mr Kaddoumi’s assertions about Arafat’s death. The have branded Kaddoumi’s accusations as “hysterical,” as well as commented that the PLO official had “lost his political and psychological balance.” Predictably, both Dahlan and Abbas have commented that Kaddoumi is a senile man and that his claims are not to be taken seriously. Some Fatah officials have since called for Kaddoumi’s dismissal from PLO and Fatah governance.

The Executive Committee vowed to hold Kaddoumi responsible for his outburst in Amman. Kaddoumi’s critics claim that the “revelations” are related to Abbas’ decision to hold Fatah’s controversial sixth assembly in Bethlehem in August. According to Kaddoumi and many Fatah officials that live outside the Occupied Territories the conference should be conducted in another Arab nation, rather than under Israeli occupation.

It has also emerged that Kaddoumi has been asked to leave Jordan by the governing authorities and has now made his way to Syria, according to Iranian Press TV.