IF it is true that Israeli and US leaders have agreed not to deal with a new Palestinian government that does not denounce violence, recognize Israel and accept previous peace agreements, then today’s three-way summit does not stand much chance of achieving anything. There is further gloom if Mahmoud Abbas’ take-it-or-leave-it proposition is factored in — that the world will have to deal with a new Hamas-Fatah coalition even if its platform falls short of international demands such as the recognition of Israel. On the Israeli side, there is also concern that once formed, a Palestinian national unity government will speak in an internationally acceptable language of moderation and that will prompt the international community to pressure Tel Aviv to be more forthcoming in peace negotiations.

The US may be withholding final judgment on whether a Palestinian national unity government constitutes an acceptance, either directly or by implication, of Israel and America’s conditions. All the signs from Washington, however, are that the US is unimpressed. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is demanding an explicit statement of recognition rather than the Hamas decision to respect past Palestinian peace deals which do seem to imply recognition of Israel without actually saying so. So what was supposed to be a summit meant to restart peace talks after more than six years of fighting, discuss the borders of a future Palestinian state, the fate of Jerusalem, and the right of return of Palestinian refugees, may now be downgraded to one in which Abbas spends his time trying to defend last week’s Makkah deal and persuade the US and Israel that he has not sold out to Hamas.

Abbas concedes he can do no more on the issue of moderating Hamas. Hamas’ willingness to respect and honor previous agreements, replacing its statements that the accords were treacherous, represents a significant evolution in the movement’s political posture. It is thus becoming more political and less ideological. However, Hamas will not hasten to recognize Israel, especially as long as Israel shows no willingness to recognize itself as an occupier of Palestinian land.

The unity government may not end Western economic sanctions but it is being formed in an attempt to stop bloodshed among Palestinians. The Hamas-Fatah miniwar does not make sense and had become a bitter deviation from a norm of unity and national cohesion. Not only are both victims of Israeli occupation and atrocities, but they are also each supposed to be fighting the occupation, not each other.

Washington deems that the Makkah accord brings Abbas closer to Hamas instead of bringing Hamas closer to Abbas. That is one way of looking at it; the other is that Fatah and Hamas have chosen internal unity over the potential for diplomatic progress and the removal of sanctions. With so many deaths brought about by inter-Palestinian battles, few, save the US and Israel, would disagree with the choice.