The Fantasy of a Deal with Hamas

To much of the liberal blogosphere, the flotilla incident proves that Israel must negotiate a deal with Hamas that will deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza while safeguarding Israel's legitimate security needs. But why on earth would Hamas negotiate such a deal?

Friends of Israel have been left uncertain and confused by the response to the Gaza flotilla. Nobody thinks the operation was a success, some think Israel did the best it could under the circumstances, others offers criticisms. Could the flotilla have been stopped before it launched by better diplomatic work? Or by "Rainbow Warrior" style sabotaging of the engines?

But on the liberal side - I don’t mean the anti-Israel left, I mean the "save Israel from itself" liberals - there is certainty.

To them, the incident proves that the Gaza embargo must end - and that Israel must instead negotiate a deal with Hamas that will deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza while safeguarding Israel's legitimate security needs.

Martin Indyk says it outright, but that is the background assumption of much of the comment heard from the liberal blogosphere.

Only problem: the premise is a total fantasy. Why on earth would Hamas negotiate such a deal? Hamas is not in the business of guaranteeing Israeli security. The end of the embargo means more weapons for Hamas. Which is to say: the end of the embargo means the region moves closer to another war.