Hamas, hummus, what's the diff?

It's always with great trepidation that I enter into the Israel/Palestine fray, but anytime Bush enters it himself, hilarity ensues.

With Gaza now under the control of the militant Islamic group Hamas, Mr. Bush said Palestinians have arrived at a “moment of choice” between the violent path that Hamas has charted against Israel and the more peaceful route to a Palestinian state embraced by Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, and his Fatah faction, which retains control of the West Bank. Hamas would be excluded from the regional meeting that Mr. Bush proposed.

The planned meeting, the first of its kind in Mr. Bush’s presidency, signals another pivotal shift for an administration that is desperately seeking some kind of foreign policy victory in the volatile Middle East that would draw attention away from the war in Iraq. For several years, the Bush administration has eschewed direct engagement in peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians, and has refused to press Israel to dismantle settlements or to sit down at the table with Palestinian counterparts to discuss a future Palestinian state.

But now the United States is mired in Iraq and looking for a way to build good will among Arab allies that have pushed for America to re-engage in Middle East peace talks. Administration officials also are hoping to capitalize on growing anti-Hamas sentiment among leaders in Egypt and Jordan. Both of those countries have diplomatic relations with Israel; the big question remains whether Saudi Arabia, which does not, will embrace the administration’s approach.

If it is possible for George W. Bush to be less popular than he is in the United States, it would probably have to be in the Middle East. So his throwing of support behind one faction in the Palestinian civil conflict seems mighty counterproductive. Congratulations, Mr. Abas, the Crusaders are behind you. As Steven Erlanger writes, Bush paints a picture of a "moment of choice" that Palestinians themselves would not recognize. They don't conflate Hamas with terrorist organizations and are angry that the government they elected has not been allowed to govern because of U.S. sanctions. And there is a reason they voted against the corrupt, inept Fatah.

Furthermore, trying to capitalize on the "anti-Hamas sentiment" of the tyrannical country of Egypt does not really say much about Bush's vision of democracy for the region.

It's great that the Bush administration has apparently defeated the Cheney faction for the time being and is encouraging "talks." But simply paying lip service to the "occupation" will not lead Palestinians to perceive Bush as a fair broker five years into a term in which Israel was not discouraged from building more settlements in the occupied territories, and saying with patriarchal solemnity that they have to choose between a path to violence and a path to peace will only remind them that they really don't have any choices at all.

UPDATED to fix syntactical issues which are so common in posts that don't read, in their entirety, "what Digby said."