On Wednesday, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians poured into polling centres to elect their representatives for the Palestinian legislative council. This election was seen by observers inside and outside the Palestinian territories as the most decisive one since Yasser Arafat returned to Gaza in 1994 and established the Palestinian National Authority (PNA).
The outcome of this election will decide the pace of domestic reform and the future of the peace process with Israel. While Hamas has won, many fear the peace process might be halted indefinitely and the PNA might be restructured according to Hamas's Islamist ideology.
This fear had prompted Israel, the European Union and the United States to intervene directly sometimes to affect the outcome of the elections. In recent weeks, the US tried to affect the choice of Palestinians by threatening to cut off aid to the PNA if Hamas wins.
The US House of Representatives went even further by approving a declaration urging the exclusion of Hamas from the parliamentary ballot. The US and the EU have also said that they will not recognise a Hamas-led government.
Israel, on the other hand, had warned that if Hamas wins, it might stop paying the PNA the taxes it collects on its behalf. Israel also tried to bolster the chances of the PNA by allowing Marwan Barghouti, the imprisoned popular leader of the Fatah list, to give interviews to the Arab satellite channels Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya.
Barghouti called for a large turnout and urged Palestinians to vote for Fatah.
These discriminatory attempts to affect the outcome of the elections reflected concerns among Western officials over the Islamic group's agenda and strong showing in opinion polls. Yet, if these officials think carefully and thoroughly about the whole issue, they would rather welcome a Hamas victory.
Hamas has proven time and again that it is as rational and pragmatic as any other secular group. In recent months and in an effort to enhance its political legitimacy, Hamas has moved gradually but steadily to the centre of Palestinian politics.
It abandoned its original position, publicly at least, which is committed to the destruction of Israel and the establishment of a Palestinian state on all of historic Palestine for accepting a long-term truce with Israel within its 1967 boundaries.
A few days before the elections, Hamas's leaders announced a more pragmatic position concerning the peace process. They did not rule out talking to Israel, but attach conditions to commence such talks.
Indirect talks
Dr Mahmoud Zahar, a senior Hamas leader, suggested his group might consider indirect talks under certain circumstances. More importantly, perhaps, Hamas seems to be the only party that wields enough legitimacy to strike a deal with Israel to end the generations-old conflict. Its record as a resistance movement as well as its Islamic credentials make it difficult for any one to question its motives and national stand.
In addition, unlike the more militant and smaller group Islamic Jihad which called for boycotting the elections, Hamas has accepted democracy in principle and has largely honoured its self-imposed ceasefire during the past year. Hamas had also tried to assure both the Palestinian factions as well as outside powers that it did not intend to monopolise power should it win the elections.
Under Palestinian law, the party that wins the most seats would be asked to form a government. Hamas said that it does not want to govern alone under any circumstances and would seek to form a coalition with Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen).
Hamas, like most moderate Islamic groups, is more interested in Islamising the society and in building up its power base among the populace. It wants the service ministries, such as health, education and welfare, and would be content to let Abu Mazen handle contacts with Israel, including negotiations.
Hamas's victory could also lead to a comprehensive reform of the institutions of the PNA and would prompt a tough fight against corruption. Poor governance and widespread corruption have always been major hurdles for the establishment of a strong PNA, capable of leading effective peace talks with Israel.
Hamas promises to tackle these problems and Palestinians seem to be trusting it, so why should Hamas not be a good alternative for Fatah?
Dr Marwan Al Kabalan is a lecturer in Media and International Relations, faculty of Political Science and Media, Damascus University, Syria.
