this article highlights what i've been saying all along. the war in gaza is strengthening hamas, or at least making it more popular, and weakening fatah. the idea that fatah will have enough support in gaza to take over when this is over is simply a pipe dream.
actually, the worst-case scenario in terms of long-term israeli security would be if the IDF somehow does succeed in eliminating hamas. al qaeda has been trying, unsuccessfully, to obtain a foothold in palestine for a while, largely because hamas has already cornered the islamist niche in the territory. if hamas magically disappeared, that would facilitate al qaeda in gaining a franchise in gaza. hamas, for all it's uncompromising rhetoric, was willing to and has dealt with israel. but an al qaeda-type group would be a lot less likely to participate in any ceasefires. and unlike hamas, which has no particular beef with the u.s. other than its support for israel, an al qaeda-linked group might start directly targeting american interests in the region.
as the blogger formerly known as aardvark noted last week, this "shows the bankruptcy and strategic dangers of trying to simply reduce Hamas to part of an undifferentiated 'global terrorist front.'" i don't think there's much chance that this offensive will destroy hamas. a more likely scenario is that a lot of hamas' local leadership in gaza won't survive and they will be replaced by battle scarred survivors who are less moderate than their predecessors. but if somehow israel pulls it off, if hamas actually does disappear, i don't see how what comes next will be any better.
