Ostracising Hamas Will Not Help in the Search for Peace

It seemed bizarre at first, in the wake of the London attacks, to sit down with men whose organisation has sent hundreds of suicide bombers into Israeli cities. But it was a valuable reminder that the use of political violence on civilians, however brutal, always has a specific context. To respond by declaring a generalised "war on terror" or condemning "this assault on civilised values" obscures the problem and makes the search for solutions harder.

Hamas - or the Islamic Resistance Movement in Palestine, to give its full name - denounced the London bombs within the first hours. They give both moral and pragmatic reasons. The victims were not legitimate targets - too remote to bear any responsibility for the crimes the bombers were avenging.

"One of our aims is to have good relations with Europe and all peoples of the world," says Salah al-Bardawil, chief columnist for al-Risala, the Hamas weekly. "There is a big difference between our attitude towards Israel and our view of Europe. Hamas decided 15 years ago not to transfer the struggle outside Palestine."

The target of his anger stares him in the face daily. The high concrete walls of the Gush Katif settlement, with its gun towers and mine-strewn death strip, is less than 200 yards from his book-lined study. These are not random commuters at King's Cross but armed occupiers who had no hesitation in supporting their own government's use of violence against civilians, and only rebelled when Sharon chose to close the Gaza settlements.

Hamas regularly hit the settlements with mortars and home-made rockets. When the Gaza withdrawal began to seem genuine early this year, Hamas declared a ceasefire, which included a halt to its suicide bombers going into Israel (this week's bombing in Netanya was carried out by another group, Islamic Jihad).

Al-Bardawil talks of the "logic of war, which Israel imposed on us, forcing Palestinians to do the same". And he says: "When I see a bombing in Tel Aviv on TV, I sometimes cry. We have not lost our humanity."

Ghazi Hamed, al-Risala's editor, says: "Hamas killed around 300 people in the four years of the intifada. Israel killed about 4,000, including 400 children under 16."

Tit-for-tat arguments about the cycle of terror are not the main feature of the Hamas story. More relevant is the fact that the movement is rapidly gaining strength among Palestinians.

After a decade of frustration since the Oslo agreement - with no peace, no prosperity, and still no internationally recognised state - people are looking for new flagbearers. They feel Hamas has upheld Palestinian dignity and can offer a chance of ending corruption.

Voters rewarded it with a string of victories in local and municipal polls this year, in the West Bank as well as Gaza. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement did so poorly that he is delaying the parliamentary elections for fear that Hamas would win them too.

So the crusade for democracy that Bush has been pushing in the Middle East is facing its greatest challenge not in Iraq, Saudi Arabia or Lebanon but in Palestine, where large turnouts are freely choosing leaders whose suspicions of western policy could hardly be deeper. Will the US press for early elections and accept the result?

"Hamas supporters are in every home and every family," says Ziad Abu-Amr, an independent MP and analyst. "They are the new power. They are part of our claim to pluralism."

The green flag of Hamas provocatively flutters on lamp-posts along the roads outside the ministry buildings in Gaza City, where Fatah appointees still cling to power.

In Bani Suheila, where Hamas won 12 of the 13 seats, the new mayor is a 69-year-old businessman who draws no salary, and uses his own battered Mazda instead of the official car. A cultural centre financed by western aid that only used to admit Fatah loyalists now hosts women's sewing classes and computer courses for young people on an open-door basis. Along with its municipal functions, Hamas retains the movement's network of private welfare centres.

Yet Hamas's short-term confidence is coupled with a sense of Palestine's strategic weakness. The movement's meteoric rise goes along with nervousness about taking power at this stage and a feeling that Palestinians would do better with a government of national unity after the elections than with another round of single-party rule.

The imminent departure of Jewish settlers is seen as a trap. Palestinians will be able to travel freely within Gaza without Israeli checkpoints and road closures. But Israel will retain control over access to the outside world, turning Gaza into a giant prison. The withdrawal, Hamas says, has won Sharon western praise and bought him more time to expand settlements on the West Bank. "Sharon will say he's testing the Palestinians to see whether they are civilised or barbarians," says Ghazi Hamed. "We will be worrying about mounds of garbage and trying to get investment, while he carries on building a wall around Jerusalem."

Mahmoud al-Zahar, known as one of the more hawkish Hamas leaders, says the agenda behind Sharon's withdrawal is "to minimise Israeli suffering, reduce international pressure and get round the intifada". "It is a waste of time to talk to him. Do you think Palestinians sacrificed in order just to secure Gaza? The intifada should continue," he insists.

Where does this leave the west? The G8 summit produced impressive promises of cash - $3bn a year over the next three years. But "throwing money at the problem is not as useful as throwing politics at it", in the words of an official in the current government. He wants western pressure on Sharon to allow Gaza's airport to reopen, let its exports move quickly to market, and guarantee no more attacks on its infrastructure.

The west must also recognise Hamas's popularity. The Palestinian population is becoming more militant, not less. Caught between a rampant Sharon and a declining Abbas, the European Union, if not Washington, has to define a new policy.

It is not enough to clutch at the hope that, once in power, Hamas will be de-fanged. Hamas is starting a difficult internal debate over the terms on which it might negotiate with Israel. But to expect it to abandon its armed struggle before a peace agreement is foolish.

Western governments that go on ostracising Hamas as a terrorist organisation and make vacuous calls on Abbas to "crack down on the militants" only disarm themselves. The "war on terror" rhetoric makes things harder, and the London attacks do not help to bring reason. But the need for even-handedness and cool western heads in the search for peace between Israel and the Palestinians has never been more urgent.