Mideast talks, cont.

The duration of Middle East peace agreements is typically measured in the fleeting life spans of moths and butterflies. Israel and Hamas fought right up to the start of a truce intended to halt bloodshed and turn on the lights in the Gaza Strip.

Peace is so elusive and fragile, the moment could end before word gets out to celebrate any progress.

One has to draw hope from the willingness of all sides to continue to make the effort. Does one negotiate with — even talk to — one's sworn enemies?

The answer has to be yes. Exploring options to threats and violence is always preferable to stony silence that magnifies disputes and inflames tensions. Talks — direct, indirect or in secret — keep channels open.

In the Middle East, the motivations are all the more complex. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is fighting bribery charges, and skeptics wonder if his openness to Hamas is distracting political theater. For Israelis living within range of rockets, his motivations are irrelevant.

Hamas seized control of the Gaza Strip a year ago from the rival Fatah forces of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. The U.S. has been working to broker a peace accord between Abbas and Olmert's government.

Hamas could outmuscle Fatah, but it has struggled to manage Gaza, and it has been no match for an Israeli blockade that kept fuel and supplies from Palestinians. Hamas has paid a political price for its failure to rein in smaller groups that spill Israeli blood

A lasting peace between Hamas and Israel is improbable, but worthy of pursuit.