The Washington Post‘s editorialists point today to one of the most interesting phenomenons of the Gaza war — the divide within the Arab world:

Israel’s battle with Hamas in Gaza is producing a schism among Muslim states. Iran and its ally Hizballah in Lebanon have joined Hamas’s Damascus-based leadership in calling for a new intifada, or uprising, against Israel — and also against the governments of Egypt and Jordan, which are accused of silently supporting Israel’s air attacks. Those governments, along with the West Bank Palestinian administration of President Mahmoud Abbas, have issued rote condemnations of Israel. But they have also accused Hamas of triggering the conflict by ending a ceasefire — and they have responded harshly to the Iranian camp, which has “practically declared war on Egypt,” as Cairo’s foreign minister angrily put it yesterday.

Don’t be fooled by this narrative of “moderates” against “extremists.” The real divide is less between organizations and countries than between the “leadership” and the “street.” The governments of some countries (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia) may see the dangers of Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas taking over. But their citizens do not.

Public opinion in Egypt is more likely to side with Hizballah than with President Mubarak. Jordanian citizens are more likely to support Hamas than blame it for causing the war. The 2008 Annual Arab Public Opinion Poll, conducted by Shibley Telhami of the University of Maryland, shows clearly that most Egyptians and Jordanians blame the more moderate Palestinian Authority for the “situation in Gaza,” and more of them identify with Hamas than with the more moderate Fatah.

In the 2006 survey, Telhami found that Hizballah’s Hassan Nasrallah was deemed the most popular foreign leader in both Egypt and Jordan. People in both countries identified Israel and the U.S. as those posing “the biggest threat” to them. Seventy-one percent of Egyptians and 74 percent of Jordanians described their attitudes toward Hizballah after the war as “more positive.” Thirty-two percent of Egyptians supported Hamas; only 8 percent supported Fatah (a majority wanted a unity government).

None of this is new. And the dilemmas it presents to all parties involved are well known. For the next American President it means, plainly put, that supporting “moderate” Arab governments likely means less of a chance to boost America’s image in the Arab street. It also means that Arab governments will eventually not be able to go very far in battling the extremist forces in the region. They cannot constantly defy public opinion without risk ing internal unrest.

Those arguing that Israel‘s actions against Hamas in Gaza only serve Hamas’s cause, elevating its profile and earning it more support in the Arab street, should have the same feeling with respect to Egypt’s war of words against Nasrallah. This is a fight Hizballah is only too happy to have, considering that it is more popular with ordinary Egyptians than their own government. Those hoping for a better Middle East should remember that, in the meantime, the choice is between the devil we know and the one we don’t. In short: either “moderation” (and hypocrisy) or “democracy” (and extremism). If you think that’s an easy choice, think again.