"Hamas 2.0"

In Foreign Affairs, here

".... The perception of Hamas as an organization intrinsically incapable of compromise has driven Western policy for more than 20 years and remains one of the most influential dogmas in Middle East diplomacy. Western observers justify their belief that any rapprochement with Hamas would be futile by pointing to its history of terrorist attacks and the movement's supposedly inflexible ideology. They bolster their argument by referring to the Hamas charter, the group's 1988 founding manifesto, which outlines a militant doctrine aimed at "liberating the land of Palestine" by force and invokes such anti-Semitic tracts as "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.".........

However, such critics fail to grasp the transformation currently taking place within Hamas. Today, the charter has ceased to play a significant role in the group's ideology. As early as 1990, Hamas began to distance itself from the document, which has since fallen into neglect. Although Hamas has not officially renounced the charter, no references to it can be found in any of the group's recent statements. Moreover, Hamas leaders, such as Mahmoud Ahmad al-Ramahi, the secretary-general of the Palestinian Legislative Council, have recently begun downplaying the charter's relevance by clarifying that "it should not be confused with the Holy Koran."........

Rather than focusing on Hamas' unbending symbolic positions, Western diplomats should acknowledge the organization's reduced aspirations and ideological softening. Hamas has ceased to act purely as a terrorist organization and has demonstrated that it is capable of political development and ideological pragmatism. This shift is supported by all factions of Hamas: the hard-liners in Damascus represented by Mashal, moderate detainees incarcerated in Israel, and Haniyeh's middle-of-the-road leadership in Gaza.

Unfortunately, recent reactions from Washington have been less than promising. The deputy spokesman for the U.S. State Department, Tom Casey, rejected Mashal's groundbreaking speech, stating, "Nothing has changed in terms of Hamas' basic views about Israel and about peace in the region." Focusing on Hamas' abstract ideological positions, he went on to say that "Hamas still believes in the destruction of the state of Israel and does not believe in Israel's right to exist."

Rather than reciting the same worn-out formulations, Western diplomats must acknowledge the favorable developments on the ground and abandon their policy of boycotting Hamas. Instead, the United States and its European allies should signal their acceptance of a Palestinian government that includes Hamas. Such an approach would encourage Hamas to further reinvent itself and increase the chances for Palestinian reconciliation -- opening up new negotiating opportunities for Western, Israeli, and Palestinian decision-makers. In the end, only talks without preconditions will resolve the current ideological stalemate and pave the way for a two-state solution and lasting Israeli-Palestinian peace."