The current controversy related to the Hamas-led government of the Palestinian people is a report first released in the New York Times and later reiterated by CBC news (Link: http://www.cbc.ca). Apparently, some sources close to Israel and the United States claimed that there would be attempts to undermine the Palestinian government so that the people would revolt against the Hamas-led leadership and re-elect the Fatah group, which had previously been in control.
The CBC report claims that Hamas is ignoring the claims because they believe that it would be against the principles for which the United States stands, those of democracy. This claim is interesting on several levels.
First, and most obvious, Hamas has been a proponent of violence and the application of violence as a solution to political problems. This is not very different from some US solutions to similar problems, but it still may not be entirely consistent with the utopian picture of democracy that Hamas believes will forestall US/Israeli meddling in their affairs. I find it interesting that they believe that the US and Israel are not willing to apply a double standard to themselves, since Hamas has done the same thing itself at times (whether or not we agree with their actions, the fact remains that it has applied double standards).
Second, they bring up a very interesting point. In order for the United States to be consistent, it needs to avoid meddling with the affairs of Hamas. Whether or not we agree with their policies, at this point, they are a democratically elected party, albiet one that has been associated with terrorism, and, while we can refuse to acknowledge them in the UN, and while we can impose sanctions on them unless the promise to cease violent behavior, we should not, for instance, ask Israel to stop collecting taxes for the Palestinian people. If we do not treat Hamas like a legitimate group (ie: sanction them as a political body instead of subverting them), then we run the risk of raising Muslim ire against us (more than there already is).
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
