The Foreign Affairs Committee in Britain’s House of Commons recently recommended that the British government formally engage in direct talks with Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as the Egyptian Brotherhood. The report recommending these actions, titled “Global Security: The Middle East,” was released Monday.

Admitting that Hezbollah’s influence is “malign,” that Hamas is a recognized terrorist organization, and that the Egyptian Brotherhood has known connections to Hamas, the Foreign Affairs Committee report states that the influence of these groups is too strong to be ignored any longer.

Concerning Hamas: “Hamas is part of the fabric of Palestinian society and engaging with the movement is the only way to prevent radical elements within the movement side-lining more pragmatic moderates.” Regarding Hezbollah: “We conclude that Hezbollah is undeniably an important element in Lebanon’s politics, although its influence, along with Iran’s and Syria’s, continues to be a malign one. … [T]he government should encourage Hezbollah to play a part in Lebanon’s mainstream politics. We recommend that the government should engage directly with moderate Hezbollah parliamentarians.”

This report emerges at a time when Western nations are reviewing and revamping their approach to Middle Eastern politics. The Quartet on the Middle East, led by recently appointed envoy Tony Blair and consisting of the U.S., the EU, the UN and Russia, has already laid down ground rules for directly dealing with these organizations. One of the main stipulations before sitting down at the negotiating table is that they must first recognize Israel’s right to exist, which none of them currently do. Another is some sort of commitment to non-violence. Given Hamas’s coup in Gaza and Hezbollah’s massive and continuing re-armament, along with their ongoing history of every-day violence, meeting this requirement seems even less likely.

Despite the obvious reluctance of these terrorist groups to repent of their violent ways, the Foreign Affairs Committee suggests that London enter talks in an effort to try to coerce these terrorist organizations into recognizing Israel, and try to exclude the militant wings of Hamas and Hezbollah.

The committee reasons that the influence of these groups is so strong that diplomatic silence is no longer a viable option; such groups are the reality of the Middle East. After all, Hamas did win the popular vote in its latest elections, and the report says, “[I]t is important the Palestinian people are not punished for exercising their rights as voters.”

The report also mentions the influence of Syria and offers an opinion concerning the war in Iraq: “We conclude that it is too early to provide a definitive assessment of the U.S. ‘surge’ but that it does not look likely to succeed.”

Throughout the report, one nation is given special attention: Iran. “We conclude that Iran is rapidly increasing its influence and power across the Middle East. It has demonstrated that it is able to generate or exploit crises in a range of countries, thus furthering its own interests.” The report recognizes that Iran is behind, and profiting from, much of the instability in the Middle East.

While this report is merely a 200-plus-page suggestion for British policy and not an imperative, it is still a product of the dangerous thinking pervading many British leaders. That these politicians want to conduct direct talks with unrepentant terrorist groups reveals just how much ground the West has lost already. The Foreign Affairs Committee’s willingness to accept Hamas, Hezbollah and the Muslim Brotherhood reveals the weakness of Britain and the real strength of these terrorist organizations.

How long before Western nations realize that engaging terrorists with direct talks is not the solution to the crisis hitting the Middle East?