Israel’s long-planned withdrawal from the Gaza Strip is almost ready to go ahead, and it is becoming clearer what will take the place of Israeli administration there – a coalition government between the Palestinian Authority (run by the secular Fatah Party) and the Islamist terrorist organization Hamas.

The debate over the Gaza pullout has just about pulled Israel apart. Those who favor the pullout argue as follows: Since everyone knows that Israel will eventually have to leave Gaza, and since it is such a financial burden to maintain the few settlements there, it is better to leave now, even in the absence of an agreement with the Palestinians. Unlike the West Bank, which contains many Biblical holy sites, Gaza has nothing of real significance to the Jewish heritage, and this could be a show of good faith in addition to a cost-cutting measure.

Those who have opposed the Gaza pullout have argued that it would give Palestinian terrorists a state, and encourage them to increase the attacks, as was the case following Israel’s withdrawal from south Lebanon. They argue that Israeli should withdraw from territory only where there is an agreement in place with the Palestinians ensuring a peaceful, stable transition. (There are other opponents of the pullout, mainly settler parties, which oppose any withdrawal on the principal that a Jew should never be removed from part of Eretz Yisrael – the Land of Israel – but I am referring to reasonable people above.)

I have always been ambivalent about this issue. Certainly, Israel will have to withdraw from territory taken in 1967, but not if it leads to a terrorist state in Gaza or the West Bank, and it appears that this may well be the result. Today Al-Quds Al-Arabi published an article headlined “Hamas Rejects Abu Mazen’s Call for a Split with its Armed Wing in Case it Participates in Elections.” The fact that PA President Mahmud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) called for Hamas to disarm, and not just in front of Western television cameras, is a good thing. But this also shows how powerless he is. Hamas boycotted the Palestinian presidential elections but did respectably in the local elections, and might win a majority if Gaza has fair elections following the transfer.

Moreover, on Tuesday Al-Hayat published a report entitled “Dahlan Proposes Nationalist and Islamist Power Sharing Responsibility for Gaza After the Withdrawal.” This is a reference to Muhammad Dahlan, current Civil Affairs Minister and a former security chief in Gaza, a member of the younger generation of Palestinians whom some in the West hoped might succeed Arafat. The article notes that he suggested regular bimonthly meetings between Palestinian Authority officials and Hamas and other Islamist parties, and refers to the proposal as including “complete responsibility” for Gaza.

The article also discussed various measures Abbas has taken to manage the transfer, including six “technical groups” to essentially function as ministries after Israel pulls out. These measures included the appointment of Rashid Abu Shabak as security chief over both the West Bank and Gaza. As this Jerusalem Post article explains, Abu Shabak is believed to have been involved in an attack on a school bus that killed two teachers and maimed three children, and is also alleged by Israel to have been involved in the hunting and killing of Palestinians who cooperate with Israel.

So, overall, not a great day on this front.

Contributed by Kirk H. Sowell of Window on the Arab World, and More!