Swiss, as I pointed out, Israel is not insisting on changing the Hamas Charter as a pre-condition for talks. If there is a peace agreement, something will no doubt be agreed to which will take care of such a problem. (Note that negotiations will be held with Abbas, not Hamas.) One way, for example, is for the new Pal state to prohibit any political party that does not accept peace with Israel. I am not talking about verbal agreement. A peace treaty is a written document. As far as the other pre-conditions for talks, Olmert stated them today: 1. Renounce violence; 2. Recognize Israel; 3. Accept prior agreements with the PLO. (All these are demanded of a national unity government, i.e., Hamas, since Fatah agrees.) The Europeans have already realized that these are nonstarters. The EU adopted the Spanish plan, which keeps quiet about these, and for a good reason. I will elaborate, but let me just say that it takes Israel under Olmert a long time to see the light; eventually it will. 1. Hamas is a national liberation movement (using terror tactics). Such movements do NOT renounce violence before a final agreement is reached with them, or else they lose all influence. Example: the IRA. 2. Recognition: It is enough that Hamas will agree to a referendum at the end to accept the peace agreement. (Actually, the Prisoners' Document stipulates that.) In any case, Meshal agrees to recognoition. We are only talking about PRE-conditions for talks. 3. Past agreements: I don't know what is referred to other than the existence of the PA, and points 1 and 2. In short, Preconditions should be minimized if they don't affect the substance of the talks.
French tourist arrested for waving Israeli flag on Temple Mount (Haaretz)
from the article: Haniyeh blasts Rice for bringing 'perilous vision' to Middle East