According to Hussein al-Sheikh, the Palestinian official in charge of relations with Israel and one of Abbas’ closest advisers, the Palestinian leader wants to effectively force Israel to shoulder full responsibility, “as a military occupier,” for the two million Palestinians living in the West Bank.
That’s what Abbas may think will happen. But the Israelis — who would not be “military occupiers” of land to which they have legal title according to the Mandate — have no desire to fall into that trap. If Abbas lets go of the whole administrative edifice in the West Bank, the Israelis will look with equanimity on others coming forward to rule in his stead. He and his regime are wildly unpopular. In an opinion poll taken last year by the Palestinian corruption monitor Aman Coalition, 91% of Palestinians said they did not trust the Palestinian Authority. Some Palestinians have this June said they would welcome to be included in any “annexation” by the Jewish state; they would much prefer being ruled by good-government Israel than by the corrupt P.A.
Hamas may step forward to fill the vacuum if Mahmoud Abbas declares the P.A. rule over. In a series of polls taken in the last five years, pitting Ismail Haniyeh, the head of Hamas, against Mahmoud Abbas, Haniyeh has won by large margins every time. Does Mahmoud Abbas want a Hamas takeover of the P.A.’s territories in the West Bank? He well remembers what happened to his fellow Fatah members in Gaza when Hamas took over. Dozens of them were murdered. And Abbas and his sons have important business interests in the West Bank which they would hate to lose. They could find themselves hounded out of the West Bank by popular protest, or even put on trial for corruption.
Hamas is not the only worry for Abbas. Mohammad Dahlan is his rival and sworn enemy, and much more popular with the Palestinian masses. Dahlan has supporters all over the West Bank. He has powerful friends, too, abroad, including the ruler of Abu Dhabi and the President of Egypt. Were Abbas to carry out his threat to let the P.A. government collapse, Dahlan might return from his base in Abu Dhabi to assume power over the former P.A.-run parts of the West Bank. The UAE would likely fund his campaign, and possibly even supply military support. And if it is not Hamas, nor Dahlan, who would take over, there are still others, waiting in the wings for the misrule of Mahmoud Abbas to end in the West Bank, and eager to present themselves as successors. Israeli leaders are no doubt considering all these scenarios, while Abbas can only think of one – a takeover by Israel. The Israelis are not about to be inveigled into that.
“We are not nihilists, or fools, and we don’t want chaos,” Sheikh told NYT. “We are pragmatic,” he added. “We don’t want things to reach a point of no return. Annexation means no return in the relationship with Israel.”
“We are not fools”? Isn’t the refusal, time after time, to accept what Israel offered, an example of such foolishness? Now that the Palestinians have worn out their welcome in the Arab states, and are no longer the cynosure of all Arab eyes, they should follow the Saudi Crown Prince’s advice and “take whatever deal they are offered.” And the Deal of the Century is actually quite a deal for them. The Palestinian Arabs would be allowed to keep for their state fully 70% of the West Bank, all of Gaza, and two large swathes of territory taken from Israel’s Negev to be part of their state. 97% of the Palestinian Arabs would not have to move. And on top of that, they would be getting an aid package of $50 billion. Just for themselves in “Palestine.” By comparison, the only aid package of similar gigantic size was the Marshall Plan, that provided $60 billion (in 2020 dollars), but that was divided among sixteen countries.
Abbas has already suspended security cooperation with Israel, a strategy that Sheikh said “aims to remind the Israelis of the burdens they would assume if the Palestinian Authority disbanded, and to demonstrate that they are willing to let the authority collapse if annexation comes to pass.”
He warned that if the Palestinian would be left unable to pursue statehood, “The Palestinian Authority would be reduced to performing civil functions, making it effectively an agent of the Israeli occupation. I will not accept that my role is a service provider. I’m not a municipality or a charity.”
But why would the Palestinians be “left unable to pursue statehood”? The Deal of the Century was in large part about creating, for the first time, a Palestinian state. The Palestinian Authority would not “be reduced to performing civil functions” in that state. It would have all the authority needed by any government running an independent state. Only one thing would be different: the state of Palestine would be demilitarized. It would not have an army with which to attack Israel. But that’s it. And not having an army hardly constitutes a unique burden. According to the CIA Factbook, there are 31 countries without an active military force. They include, among others, Costa Rica, Iceland, Panama, Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and the Vatican. They seem to be doing all right. The government of Palestine would not be an “an agent of the Israeli occupation.” Israel would have no right to dictate its internal workings, but would intervene only if the obligation to remain demilitarized was ignored.
As part of the steps already taken, the Palestinian Authority has refused to accept the monthly tax funds Israel collects on its behalf.
Yes, that’s certainly showing the world. Abbas is a genius in reverse when it comes to cut-off-your-nose-to-spite-your-face politics. We’ll show Israel. We won’t accept $190 million a month, or roughly $161 million a month (if the Pay-For-Slay sum are deducted) that the Israelis collect for us in tax revenues. And don’t try to make us.
Sheikh, however, admitted that rejecting the funds would send the already cash-strapped PA to the brink of economic collapse.
But who cares, when it can somehow be blamed on Israel, which forced us to refuse to take the money it keeps trying to give us? Who cares, when Abbas, Erekat, Ashrawi, and another hundred top officials are already well-provided for, and won’t be living paycheck to shriveling paycheck like all those people they claim to care about?
He also confirmed that Ramallah plans to suspend its aid to the Gaza Strip, which mostly covers the salaries of Hamas government officials.
Hamas, designated as a terrorist organization by Israel, the United States, Canada, the European Union, and Egypt, ousted Abbas’ Fatah from Gaza in a military coup in 2007, but the PA still supports the rival faction’s clerks.
The move is likely to further destabilize the volatile coastal enclave.
Abbas has been looking for an excuse to cut off payments to his hated rival Hamas. Now he has it. To wit: “It’s all Israel’s fault. If it hadn’t forced us to turn down the tax money, we would have had enough to allow the Gazans to have some. But now we don’t, so they won’t. Blame Israel.”
Still, Sheikh said that despite cutting security ties with Israel, the PA’s 30,000-strong police and intelligence officers would continue to maintain law and order and fight terrorism.
“We will prevent violence and chaos,” he said. “We will not allow bloodshed. That is a strategic decision.”
The decision to “prevent violence and chaos” means we will fight all those who don’t like the P.A. and its leaders. And we will “fight terrorism” because Hamas, and Islamic Jihad, threaten the political and even physical survival of Mahmoud Abbas and his P.A. partners in crime. The P.A. police welcome intelligence-sharing by the Israelis, who have their own sources of informants in the West Bank. But “fighting terrorism” that is directed at the P.A. is not the same thing as “fighting terrorism” that is aimed only at Israel. That’s a different thing. That’s not terrorism – it’s brave acts of derring-do by our “martyrs” against the Zionist colonial-settler state.
But security coordination with Israel was a means to a political end, Sheikh noted, saying, “I want peace and two states. But I’m not a collaborator with Israel.”
Sheikh wants “peace and two states”? But that is exactly what the Deal of the Century provides. Peace – and two states. What he means sub rosa is this: “I want two states, one of them a Jewish state squeezed back within the indefensible 1949 armistice lines, and the other an Arab Palestine, emptied of its Jews, that will hold us, temporarily, until such time as we Muslim Arabs, increasing our military strength, can again go in for the kill.”
And that Palestinian, Arab, Muslim plan is exactly why Israel needs to extend its sovereignty to the Jordan Valley and the settlements, beginning with the three largest ones — Maale Adumim, Ariel, and Gush Etzion.
Westman says
לך על זה.
gravenimage says
🙂
gravenimage says
Mahmoud Abbas Threatens – Ruat Caelum! – to Let the P.A. Collapse (Part 2)
………..
He seems to be unclear on the concept…