Reaching out to Hamas is bad process leading to no peace
By Michael Singh In comments published by the Times of London yesterday, former British PM and current Quartet Representative Tony Blair suggested that Hamas should be “brought into” the peace process. Although he repeats the Quartet’s three conditions for engaging with Hamas -– renunciation of violence, recognition of Israel, and respect for past Israeli-Palestinian agreements ...
By Michael Singh
By Michael Singh
In comments published by the Times of London yesterday, former British PM and current Quartet Representative Tony Blair suggested that Hamas should be “brought into” the peace process. Although he repeats the Quartet’s three conditions for engaging with Hamas -– renunciation of violence, recognition of Israel, and respect for past Israeli-Palestinian agreements -– other commentators have argued for ditching these conditions and even Blair posits a distinction between engaging in peace negotiations with Hamas and engaging them as the “de facto rulers of Gaza.” However, talking to Hamas in any capacity, and thereby easing their international isolation, would have the perverse effect of strengthening the group and setting back peace efforts further, rather than advancing them.
It is vital to recall the nature of Hamas. Both by its charter and by its actions, Hamas has demonstrated itself committed to both the destruction of Israel and the persecution of its fellow Palestinians. The recent conflict in Gaza was sparked by indiscriminate rocket fire at Israeli towns, despite the fact that Israel had long ago withdrawn completely from the Strip. This was not a conflict to drive Israel out of Gaza, but to draw it in; like Hezbollah in 2006, Hamas dragged people on both sides of the border into war against their will. Hamas, with the encouragement of Iran, seeks to destroy; responsible Palestinian leaders like Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad seek to build. We must be clear-headed and full-throated in our condemnation of the former and support for the latter.
Hamas does not hide its opposition to peace. Their spokesman, Osama Hamdan, recently stated that reconciliation between Hamas and Fatah depended on the latter ending its involvement in the peace process. It took decades for Palestinian leaders to agree to foreswear the destruction of Israel and to instead pursue a negotiated resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict based on the two-state concept. Seeking to engage Hamas in the peace process would mean erasing that progress and resuming the process at square one. It would mean a return to the days of Israel having to defend its right to exist, and of peace-seeking Palestinians being marginalized. This would be a mistake –- rather than focusing on rejectionists who wish to move backwards, we should move urgently forward with the majorities on both sides who earnestly desire peace and prosperity.
Michael Singh is a senior fellow and the managing director at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. He was a senior director for Middle East affairs at the U.S. National Security Council during the George W. Bush administration. Twitter: @MichaelSinghDC
More from Foreign Policy

Can Russia Get Used to Being China’s Little Brother?
The power dynamic between Beijing and Moscow has switched dramatically.

Xi and Putin Have the Most Consequential Undeclared Alliance in the World
It’s become more important than Washington’s official alliances today.

It’s a New Great Game. Again.
Across Central Asia, Russia’s brand is tainted by Ukraine, China’s got challenges, and Washington senses another opening.

Iraqi Kurdistan’s House of Cards Is Collapsing
The region once seemed a bright spot in the disorder unleashed by U.S. regime change. Today, things look bleak.