To Israeli and American officials, it must have been disappointing, to say the least. There was Mahmoud Abbas, the would-be successor to Yasser Arafat, cozying up to Hamas on his visit to the Palestinian refugee camp of Rafah. If that was disquieting, his outright rejection of Israeli demands to crack down on activists, his refusal not to fight them and his saying that he would even go to the extent of shielding them from Israeli attacks could not have been reassuring in any manner. In both Tel Aviv and Washington, there must be some serious questioning going on.

Abbas is the man Israel and the United States say they want, the one they believe they can do business with and the one with whom they will eventually reach a peace deal. After seeing him on the shoulders of gunmen in black — courting the same groups that Israel and the United States call terrorists — the two countries must be wondering whether Abbas is Arafat reincarnate.

Abbas seeks a peaceful settlement; of this there can be no doubt. He has called the intifada a mistake and has criticized violence, saying the past four years of violence have done little to advance the Palestinian cause. At the same time, Abbas has associated himself closely with Arafat’s legacy, presenting an uncompromising list of demands for ending the conflict: Calling on Israel to end its occupation, withdrawing from Arab East Jerusalem, freeing all political prisoners and recognizing the refugees’ right of return.

Those who have been looking to Abbas for a repudiation of the historic position of the Palestinian people may have been jolted by the uncharacteristically hard-line message. This image of Abbas as a replica of his predecessor has now been further cemented by his recent courting of activist groups, including a public encounter last week with a prominent West Bank gunman. What is going on? Is Abbas playing campaign politics or is this a serious attempt to identify with armed groups such as Hamas and Islamic Jihad who are committed to armed confrontation?

There is of course an element of electioneering involved. While he is widely tipped to win the Jan. 9 elections for president, Abbas still needs the support of the Palestinian street for a large margin of victory that will enable him to negotiate with Israel in the future. He must rally groups such as Hamas in order to push his agenda forward.

Israel and the United States should not thus be too uncomfortable with the sight of Abbas and Hamas supporting one another. Abbas is committed to a negotiated settlement. He wants peace and not only between Palestinians and Israelis. He seeks intra-Palestinian calm just as much and as such will avoid a civil war at all costs. His courting of armed groups does not equate to supporting violence. He wants to cooperate with them and not confront them.

Democratic politics anywhere is essentially a balancing act. Nowhere is it as precarious as it is in Palestine.