Three items for the "Potentially Important if True" file:

• A few weeks ago, The Wall Street Journal reported that Hamas leaders are quietly fleeing their home base of Syria for the more moderate climes of Qatar and Egypt. Why?

Syrian leaders and their terror-supporting allies in Iran funnel money and weapons to Hamas. But the slaughter of thousands of protesters by Syrian President Bashar Assad's military thugs — and pressure on Hamas from Egypt, Turkey and Qatar to leave his rogue state — finally persuaded Hamas to bolt Damascus, the paper reported.

The speculation: Yanking Hamas out of Syria's orbit could moderate Hamas' behavior and blunt Iran's malign regional influence — a double strategic win for the West.

• IHS Jane's, the respected defense and intelligence analysis firm, recently reported that Hamas "is on the brink of renouncing armed resistance and moving to a policy of nonviolent resistance to Israel." The report was full of caveats and wiggle room, but what if … ?

So far, there's no evidence that Hamas leaders are willing to reverse course. Recently, Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh spoke at a 24th anniversary of the terror group's founding and asserted that Hamas would never recognize Israel or abandon violence. "Today we say it clearly. Armed resistance and armed struggle are the strategic way to liberate the Palestinian land from the sea to the river."

In other words, headquarters may be moving, but Hamas isn't necessarily changing its M.O.

• Hamas and rival political party Fatah recently announced that they would unite under the Palestine Liberation Organization, the umbrella organization that represents the Palestinians in on-again, off-again peace talks with Israel.

A unified Palestinian leadership — if it holds — is a positive step only if leaders abide by principles already established: Hamas, like Fatah, must recognize Israel's right to exist. Must renounce violence. And must abide by agreements already reached between the PLO and Israel.

The context here is that the Arab Spring has scrambled alliances in the Middle East. For Palestinians, prominent pollster Khalil Shikaki says, "Things are moving very, very quickly. Hamas is making choices … clearly moving away from its relationship with Iran and Syria and trying to take advantage of the changes they see in Egypt and Jordan, which are leading them to conclude that they can now gain much greater access to the Arab world."

But the Arab Spring is also a political reckoning for leaders who crushed democracy, savaged political opponents and failed to deliver prosperity or freedom for their people. Leaders, that is, much like the terrorists of Hamas, who haven't been held accountable at the ballot box for their failures.

Since Hamas came to power in 2006 elections, its leaders have driven Gaza deeper into poverty and isolation.

In late 2008, Hamas provoked a war with Israel that caused more misery for Gazans.

"The most striking feature of the Arab Spring remains the complete failure of violently radical Islam," the Economist magazine noted recently. In other words, the complete failure of the jihadist philosophy of Hamas.

The realities of the Arab Spring may be driving a political recalculation by Hamas' leaders. They and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah have promised new elections as early as May.

In a recent poll, only 29 percent of Palestinians in Gaza said they would vote for Hamas candidates if legislative elections were held now. Forty-three percent favored rival Fatah.

Springtime for Hamas? Let it be soon.