<excerpt>
The question that now faces Israel is whether to fight against EU involvement in the implementation of the internationally backed road map peace plan, and whether to agree to its direct involvement in the territories. The U.S. faces a similar dilemma, on a smaller scale, as it believes there should be no cooperation with Hamas, however indirect.The EU decision does not demand any moves on the part of Hamas that could moderate the organization and get it to accept a resolution of the conflict with Israel through non-violent means. Such demands were made of the Palestine Liberation Organization when it first sought recognition and cooperation from Washington. Among the demands made of the PLO were a declaration that it no longer supported acts of terror, and recognition of UN Security Council Resolution 242 and the State of Israel.
The EU conducted no discussion of such conditions prior to its decision vis-a-vis Hamas.
On a visit to Israel last week, U.K. Foreign Secretary Jack Straw told Haaretz that the revelation that British diplomats had met recently with Hamas mayors did not reflect Britain's general policy. Straw, who was among those who led the move to include Hamas on both Britain's and the EU's list of terrorist groups, said there should be no talks with Hamas' leadership until the organization abandoned violence and recognized Israel.
In 2002 the EU added Hamas' military wing to its list of terrorist groups, but refrained from blacklisting the organization's political arm. France argued at the time that the political arm could play a role in peace talks with Israel in the future. However, following Hamas' attack on a bus in Jerusalem that left 23 people dead, EU ministers denounced the organization's political arm and charged that Hamas was a terrorist group.