Abbas came out firing today, calling Hamas, who he never referred to by name, “murderous terrorists” and cancelling all passports issued in the Gaza Strip. He gave no sign that he has any intention of deescalating the confict.
If he continues on this trajectory it’s going to spell trouble for him. He’s going to back Hamas into a corner and force its hand once again, further alienate Palestinians in Gaza who will believe he is willing to starve one-third of the Palestinian people for political gain, and be increasingly viewed as a US stooge. How are Gazans, largely banned from travelling to the West Bank, supposed to get passports in Ramallah? It’s going to undermine Abbas’ claims that his beef is with Hamas and not all Gazans.
Abbas furthermore has no political way forward without sitting down with Hamas. He can renew his emergency government twice for a total of 90 days and then he’ll need parliamentary approval. At that point, without Hamas on board, the West Bank will become a benevolent dictatorship, and Palestinian democracy, already kneecapped and bleeding in the gutter, will die.
9 responses so far ↓
1 Stephen Levinson // Jun 20, 2007 at 6:20 pm
Very happy to learn you have a blog.
2 bijan daneshmand // Jun 20, 2007 at 6:51 pm
I think you forgot a couple words at the end “Palestinian democracy, already kneecapped and bleeding in the gutter” … by Hamas.
3 Piotr Chmielarz // Jun 20, 2007 at 6:54 pm
You are in place so you have more information but I would like to ask you two questions. As you know there is information that IDF will attack Gaza, I’m not journalist but I think that this is probably rumour. With Olmert and Bush we can expect everything so if olmert will decide attack so in this case Abbas will not be president and his succesor will be probably Dahlan- he do everything what Israelis and Americans do so he is for them excellent candidate. Palestinians hate Israelis for their occupation so if they see that Abbas will arrive with his illegal goverment- I write illegal because Palestinian constitution doesn’t give him right to disband Hanijah goverment- he will be finished and he can olny count on israeli army rifles. On whom he can count It seems from your post Fatah never fights that his commanders can’t count on his soldiers so this was probably reason that they decided to give up. In my opinion the most probably scenario will be intervention of egyptian and jordanian army. The goverments of Jordanian and Egypt will do everything if USA will give them more support. Jordanian has practise in fighting with Palestinian. if this scenario will fulfil will Hamas go under ground or they will fight? What is probabability that this scenario will fulfill?
4 Charles Levinson // Jun 20, 2007 at 7:09 pm
Bijan — I don’t think Hamas deserves all, or even most, of the blame for the demise of Palestinian democracy. The US forced elections on Palestinians in 2006, and then hit them with a crippling boycott when they chose the wrong team in a vote that cadres of international election monitors said was free and fair. After rewriting the Palestinian political system to divest President Arafat of powers in favor of a newly created Prime Ministership, suddenly the international community pulled off a bit of sleight of hand and insisted President Abbas, not PM Haniya, had the lions share of power. How convenient. With money and weapons the US then set about bolstering the losers, the very people that Palestinians roundly rejected in a fair transparent vote. Perhaps you believe these were necessary and justifiable steps to confront Islamic terrorism, or something of they sort, but they also seriously undermined Palstinian democracy.
5 Rattling the Kettle // Jun 20, 2007 at 7:31 pm
Charles - Palestinian democracy is not “kneecapped”. It’s still-born; it never was. Abbas is not facing a choice between fighting terror and supporting democracy. He is simply facing a choice between keeping power and losing it. That his opponents are terrorists does not enter his equation.
6 Peter // Jun 20, 2007 at 7:31 pm
I’m in the same boat as you regarding a possible conspiracy theory. When looking at situations like this I tend to feel that what is often theorized to be a conspiracy is more than likely due to incompetence instead.
Nevertheless I must say that in this case I’m just as suspicious as you. Fatah’s leadership didn’t even try to put up a fight. Ok, so Abbas has a reputation for being weak and decisive. But it’s hard to believe that Dahlan would sit so idly by while his power base in gaza was destroyed, knowing full well that he’d get the blame since he’s been nominally in charge as national security advisor for the past 2 months. At the minimum I’d have thought that he’d have tried to organize a valiant counterattck, from his hospital bed if necessary, while desperately attempting to get his men resupplied. This passivity is so unlike him. His top people also seeemed to be out of Gaza as well.
Then add to that the fact that -immediately- after Hamas won Abbas suddenly shook off his indecision, and is now sounding quite fierce. He not only fired Haniyeh, but appointed a new government headed by Salam Fayyad, the single most trusted Palestinian in the West. Then the very next business day, the US government, which usually moves at a snail’s pace, removed its sanctions against the PA. Suddenly the money spickets are open again less than 48 hours after Hamas’s victory. There certainly wasn’t time for a debate on how to handle the Hamas takeover of Gaza. The US administration immediately jumped on the Gaza take-over by Hamas as if it were an expected opportunity. It all seems too pat me.
My unprovable suspicion is that Abbas and the US made the decision to let Hamas have Gaza and Dahlan was thus forced to go along with it. Without American financial/military support and without Abbas’s political support Dahlan’s men wouldn’t have been able to hold out against Hamas.
Looking at it from that angle, than suddenly it no longer makes sense for Dahlan to order his men to die in a heroic last stand, or for him to put in an appearance himself. It’s better that they not fight at all so they can survive to fight another day. But he wouldn’t have publicly been able to say that so the best course for him would have been to disappear until the fighting was over, which is exactly what happened. It also puts the blame Dahlan has placed on the US for its lack of promised support in an interesting light also. So yes, I’m suspicious too.
BTW, this is an absolutely excellent blog! Keep up the great work!
7 Daygator // Jun 20, 2007 at 8:48 pm
Everyone could certainly be right with their suspicion. Thats a viable theory.
But there could be another explanation to Abbas’s new-found moxy: maybe he’s shoring up his doubters. After reading your entries about Fatah-men’s disillusionment with their leadership, even accusing them of betrayal, it seems plausible that Abbas is paying lip service to their grief and anger.
Of course, that doesn’t in any way negate the suspicion that he planned to forfeit Gaza, just adds a different dimmension.
8 bijan daneshmand // Jun 21, 2007 at 3:41 am
Charles you are mistaken when you state: “The US forced elections on Palestinians in 2006, and then hit them with a crippling boycott when they chose the wrong “team. I respect your work as a journalist but I feel you are a part of a group of individuals who has been perpetuating a number of blatantly false myths about Hamas and the US boycott of Hamas. (1) The boycott of Hamas has nothing to do with their success in the 2006 elections. It has to do with their explicit support of terror and failure to renounce terror and the Hamas Charter Commitment to the Destruction of the State of Israel an ally of the US. (2) You have just reported to us 1st hand the bloody putsch in Gaza carried out by teh Hamas militia against the Fatah and the PA (now you and others are trying to characterise this as an attempt by Hamas to install law and order). I believe your sympathies tend more towards Hamas than Fatah - that is well and good but please stick to facts.
9 bijan daneshmand // Jun 21, 2007 at 4:04 am
“Perhaps you believe these were necessary and justifiable steps to confront Islamic terrorism, or something of they sort, but they also seriously undermined Palstinian democracy.” - Charles/Hamas can’t have it both ways. Hamas cant insist on respect for the rule of law and then constabntly violate it internally and internationaly. First note that being democratically elected does not sanctify a government and allow it to do anything . Hitler was democraticaly elected, Vladimir Putin was democratically elected, hell as much as leftists hate it, even George Bush was democratically elected (twice) - it doesnt allow them to do anything they want. Looking at it from a legalistic perspective, Hamas which is a political party not the government in perpetuity is guilty of using an illegal irregular militia to mount a bloody and illegal putsch aimed at the PA forces authority which is the only legal Palestinian entity. This force has carried out a range of actions including numerous extra-judicial killings including the desacration of Christian Churches all illegal and condemned by Human Rights Watch. Also the legally elected President is entitled to by law to dissolve the government and appoint an emergency government so please Charles dont stand on legal niceties only when it suits Hamas.
Leave a Comment