2006年1月25日巴勒斯坦舉行立法議會(PLC)選舉，哈馬斯(Hamas)出乎意料贏得議會過半席次，擊敗執政黨法塔(Fateh)，並依法律組成新政府。 以美國為首的西方國家對哈馬斯勝選感到十分震驚，因為西方國家迄今仍將哈馬斯列入恐怖組織名單。美國表示除非哈馬斯宣布永久放棄暴力及承認以色列生存權，否則拒絕與哈馬斯接觸。 哈馬斯勝選將衝擊以巴和平進程(peace process)的發展。1991年馬德里和會（Madrid Conference）後，以巴之間開啟談判大門，並於1993年雙方簽訂奧斯路協議(Oslo Accord)。然而，哈馬斯不但堅決反對奧斯路協議，更多次在以色列境內發動自殺炸彈攻擊，導致以巴之間衝突不斷，而哈馬斯則被國際社會認為是以巴和平進程的障礙。 事實上，哈馬斯並不完全是西方媒體所描述的恐怖組織。哈馬斯以伊斯蘭作為其政治理念，在各地設立醫院、學校與活動中心等社會福利設施，並強調結束以色列佔領的重要性，獲得多數巴勒斯坦人民認同與支持，以及受到阿拉伯國家與伊斯蘭世界的援助。 本文將先探討哈馬斯成立背景、組織結構、理念與發展經過，再深入分析哈馬斯對以巴和平進程的認知與策略。 本文認為，未來以巴和平進程必須將哈馬斯納入其中。若國際社會一味的排斥與孤立哈馬斯政府，不僅不能促進以巴和平進程，反而使巴勒斯坦社會更趨於孤立與激進，造成以巴局勢動盪不安，進而影響中東區域安全與穩定。 / On January 25, 2006, Palestine held a legislative election; unexpectedly, Hamas won more than half of the seats in the council and defeated the Fateh which dominated the Palestinian Council in the last decade. As s result, a new government was formed by Hamas. Western countries, especially the United States, were astonished at Hamas’s victory. Since the United States still lists Hamas as a terrorist group, Washington insists that Hamas must denounce violence and recognize the Israel’s right to exist, otherwise the U.S. would refuse to deal with Hamas. Hamas’s victory seems to undermine the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. After the Madrid Conference in 1991, Israel and Palestine signed the Oslo Accord in 1993. However, Hamas strongly opposed the Oslo Accord, and launched many suicide attacks within Israel that resulted in the bloody confrontations. In fact, Hamas is not a terrorist group. Hamas uses Islam as the political value to establish hospitals, schools and centers for activities in the occupied Palestinian territory and emphasize the importance of ending Israel’s occupation. Hamas is supported by the most Palestinian as well as by the Arab countries and the Islamic World. This paper first examines Hamas’s background, organizational structure, and its development. Then Hamas’s position toward the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and its peace strategy will be analyzed. This paper argues that if the international community deliberately excludes the Hamas government from the peace process, it will neither promote the peace process nor result in peace.

本研究的問題意識為「為什麼國家體制有時無法成功消弭社會運動的風潮？」為了處理這個問題意識，本文採取一個「策略-關係」途徑的研究方法，並假設「社會運動若能於特定結構之下運用得宜的策略，即能持續生存發展」。因此，本研究探討台灣民主化過程之下一種特殊型態的「指向國家核心的社會運動」，分別是「反核四抗爭運動」以及「紅衫軍反貪腐倒扁運動」。 在本研究的第二章與第四章內容分別描述了這兩個特殊的社會運動興起背景以及台灣民主化的進程；而在本研究的第三章與第五章內容則分別討論這兩個社會運動採取的外部策略與策略互動。研究發現，「反核四抗爭運動」是以一種「以國家為槓桿」的外部策略；而「紅衫軍反貪腐倒扁運動」則採取一種「以大眾媒體為槓桿」的外部策略，這兩個案例在台灣民主化的不同階段之下分別成功形塑了「指向國家核心的社會運動」，共同見證了台灣民主化發展的獨特經驗，因此具有相當程度之指標性意義。 / The original research conscious of this study is” Why state machine sometimes can’t terminate social movement successfully?” In order to face this research conscious, the research adopt” strategic-relational approach”, and assume “If social movement could use suitable strategy in particular structure, the social movement could be exist and develop”. For the reason, this study wants to treat a special type of social movement, and we called social movements with “point at state core”. this study further select two social movements with “point at state core” in Taiwan’s Democratization:”Anti-fourth nuclear power plant movement” and ”Anti-corruption depose-Chen Campaign”. In Chapter 2 and chapter 4, we describe the background of social movement and democratic development in Taiwan; In Chapter 3 and chapter 5, we discuss external strategy and the interaction of the two social movement cases. This research discoveries that Anti-fourth nuclear power plant movement uses the external strategy of “as state as leverage”. On the other side, Anti-corruption depose-Chen Campaign uses the external strategy of “as mass media as leverage”. Finally, this study believes that the two social movements with “point at state core” play an important role in Taiwan’s Democratization.