Too tired to post much, but Vanity Fair has a pretty extraordinary (and deeply reported) article in its upcoming issue about how the U.S. tried last year to get Fatah to essentially mount a coup against Hamas:
Within the Bush administration, the Palestinian policy set off a furious debate. One of its critics is David Wurmser, the avowed neoconservative, who resigned as Vice President Dick Cheney’s chief Middle East adviser in July 2007, a month after the Gaza coup.
Wurmser accuses the Bush administration of “engaging in a dirty war in an effort to provide a corrupt dictatorship [led by Abbas] with victory.” He believes that Hamas had no intention of taking Gaza until Fatah forced its hand. “It looks to me that what happened wasn’t so much a coup by Hamas but an attempted coup by Fatah that was pre-empted before it could happen,” Wurmser says.
I actually wrote a piece for Slate last year about the U.S.'s arming of Fatah, a policy that struck me as completely dunder-headed:
The idea is simple: Squeeze Hamas, fortify the opposition, and hope for the best. It's a tempting concept, but it's a bad idea. The United States and Europe employed a similar game plan through much of the 1990s—throwing cash at the Palestinian government, the security forces in particular, just as long as they opposed Hamas. It not only proved ineffective, it made things worse.
Go read for the Vanity Fair story and you'll see all the sordid details,including how the U.S. supported Mohamed Dahlan, one of the bigger sons-of-bitches in Gaza.