There is good news and bad news in the Palestinian election.

The good news is that the process scored well on criteria of democracy. More than in other Arab societies, there was freedom of competition, more or less law and order on election day, and the opposition is noted as having won the election. Some Palestinians may say, as they have on other occasions, that they have learned the lessons of democracy from Israel.

Assuming the rest of the process goes well (i.e., the actual sitting of the winning party), the bad news is that Hamas is the winning party. Current reports are that it took 76 out of 132 seats in the parliament. Pre-election polls gave a 5-10 percent margin to the ruling Fatah Party of Mahmoud Abbas. It is not unusual for individuals intending to vote for an "anti-establishment" party to avoid pollsters, or to answer questions with something thought to be acceptable.

During the campaign, Hamas leaders engaged a public relations firm and indicated that it had turned its face to peace; that it could serve in a Palestinian government and negotiate with Israel. However, one of the candidates (a mother who had blessed her son's suicide in the name of Palestine), appeared on television to say that the party would pursue both a course of violence and a course of politics in order to free all of Palestine from Israeli occupation. She included Jaffa, Haifa, and the rest of Israel in the areas to be liberated. Another candidate, somewhat more sophisticated, indicated that a Hamas government could arrange a cease fire with Israel, even though it would not recognize the legitimacy of the Jewish state.

Neither option is anywhere close to being good enough for any of the major Israeli parties.

Currently Israeli opposition parties to the left and right are accusing Ehud Olmert of not doing enough to prevent a Hamas victory. What could he have done? The victory is consistent with what we have been seeing in a number of Palestinian opinion polls in recent years. While majorities indicate their desire for peace with Israel, majorities have also indicated their support for violence. The election is another indication about our neighbors. An unknown (and perhaps unknowable) proportion of the vote reflects substantial anti-Fatah, anti-corruption sentiment. Palestinians want the billions in outside aid to help them, and not only to line the pockets of those close to power.

It will take a while to see how this works itself out. There are several possibilities, and tantalizing questions about the near future.

Will the Hamas government continue the bombast heard until now that it wants the immediate release of the several thousand Palestinians in Israeli prisons, the end of Israeli occupation, and the return of 1948 and 1967 refugees to their homes?

Even if the key Fatah office holders leave office in the glare of spotlights and according to the rules of democratic procedure, there are thousands of middle- and lower-ranking functionaries earning their incomes on the basis of patronage. Importers of cars, appliances, cement and other goods have their opportunities as the result of a grant from a Fatah power holder. School principals, personnel in the security services, and social workers likewise owe someone their jobs, and that someone will no longer be in an official position. All these street fighters of politics have had regular salaries while 30 per cent or more of their neighbors are unemployed. They might not let go of their opportunities without a struggle. The West Bank and Gaza may revert to the violent chaos that preceded the few days of quiet before the voting.

What about the shapely Palestinian young women, who dress in tight jeans and wear their hair long and loose like their peers elsewhere? Hamas has a religious agenda that makes it a cousin of the Taliban and the Saudi religious police.

Will the United States and European governments reduce, if not eliminate altogether their financial aid to Palestine? If so, the inflated personnel roles of Palestinian government and security forces will face some payless paydays.

Israel provides a substantial proportion of the Palestinian budget via the taxes it collects on goods imported over its borders. Initial speculation is that Israel will make the first monthly transfer on time. What about the next one?

A recent Israeli decision was to spur the construction of the barrier of walls, wire, and electronic sensors. The government will employ the intransigence of the Palestinians as an argument in Israeli courts against those who view the barrier as imposing intolerable burdens on the Palestinians.

In response to acts of violence, Israel will close the gates in those barriers for short or long periods. Palestinians will face longer waits, or will not be able to work, sell things in Israel, pray, seek health care, or visit relatives. Will Hamas government ministers and other ranking officials be given the same opportunities as enjoyed by counterparts in the Abbas government to travel between Gaza and the West Bank through Israel? What will Israel decide if someone on its wanted list becomes a minister in government?

Early reports from Palestine, Israel, Europe and Washington agree in finding a profound lack of certainty, and a bit of anxiety as to what comes next.