Abbas losing support from Fateh

Mahmoud Abbas is supposed to be the head of the Fateh movement, as well as of the PLO (!) and the US-supported Palestinian Authority (PA.)
Yesterday, Abbas swore in a new PA ‘government’, headed as before by the strongly US-backed Salam Fayyad… and most members of Fateh’s own parliamentary bloc opposed the move and refused to join!
This is a further illustration of the fact I have mentioned before, that Fateh no longer has any coherent internal organization at all– let alone one that could make any strategic or tough decisions or exercise other functions of national “leadership.”
And the more money the US and its friends shovel into the PA project, the faster the internal disintegration continues.
This commentary from Ma’an News tries to unpack Abbas’s reasoning for forming the new “government”. The one I find most convincing is that Abbas and his American masters/friends figured it would look bad if he turned up in Washington May 28 without having some kind of a Potemkin government in tow. (My somewhat liberal paraphrasing there.)
The Fateh PLC bloc’s grounds for objection are interesting. They center primarily around the legitimacy of the move. I guess that back in June 2007, when Abbas appointed the first Fayad government, he was still uncontestedly the PA President; and he claimed a right under the PA’s Constitution to form an “emergency” government.
But even that was supposed to last for only 30 days.
Also, Abbas’s mandate as President ran out last January.
I find it interesting that the Fateh LC members are standing up on the basis of the PA’s Constitution. The PA was only ever meant to be a short-term (five-year), transitional body, pending conclusion of the final agreement that would– all palestinians hoped– give the the full powers of an indpendent state.
Surely that would have been the time to work out a proper Constitution?
Instead of which, a lot of people became heavily invested in fashioning a constitution for this transitional body, the PA; and now both Hamas and the Fateh parliamentarians have become very attached to it.
All of which is almost completely meaningless–Potemkin politics; a misleading substitute for the real thing– unless there is a strong and workable final-status deal involving real national independence… and soon!

10 thoughts on “Abbas losing support from Fateh”

  1. … all completely meaningless; Potemkin politics; a misleading substitute for the real thing …
    Aha! The sybil has foreseen the (“two-state”) future — and she doesn’t think it’s the least bit funny.
    Happy days.

  2. But how does this story play should the US make a 180 degree turn into legitimately driving and funding a unitary Palestinian entity, instead of undermining it in cahoots with Israelis as in the past?
    There is nothing sensational, new or unexpected as regards the Israeli posture concerning Palestinians. And if Obama is going to achieve any measure of success in his initiatives, it will be in the face of Israeli intransigence and opposition.
    If Obama had not anticipated this than he has committed an unforgivable error and deserves not only to lose, but his presidency destroyed as well.

  3. Helena,
    Fatah?
    Did you remebred there were some US help/Aid to Fatah against Hamas as reported in few media oulets?
    So if US happy with Abbas , then Fatah should happy ….unless this guy for US/Israel should go, a new face will be emerged soon….

  4. Whatever. The cuddly Obama/Netanyahu coochy coochy for the cameras suggests the US and the Quartet is not gonna change its demands on Hamas to (a) recognise Israel (b) accept the agreements entered into by the PA and (c) renounce terror.
    Fateh whingeing at its snouts being kept out of Quartet financed trough … who in the Quartet is going to care?
    Obama sits alongside Bibi and tells Iran publicly its got til Christmas ….. that is the real story.
    That, and Doug Feith cheering on Obama today …

  5. Obama sits alongside Bibi and tells Iran publicly its got til Christmas ….. that is the real story.
    Seems to me quite a number of different versions of that meeting came out, bb. Why is yours right?
    Whichever way it really went, nobody is likely to say, and that’s what we got.

  6. “Seems to me quite a number of different versions of that meeting came out, bb. Why is yours right”?
    Because I heard and saw President Obama say it with my own eyes on television, Alex. Bibi was sitting right alongside him. It was their press conference. Weren’t you watching?

  7. I agree that the only thing that came out of the Obama-Netanyahu session was a deadline for Iran. And since indications are that the Obama diplomacy process is intended only to build support for action against Iran, there is close to zero chance that there will be any progress by the end of the year. The political establishment in the US seems to have achieved consensus that the next step will be economic war on Iran, collective punishment for its people. This will surely be followed by an over military attack – assuming Israel doesn’t pre-empt the whole charade well ahead of Obama’s schedule, which is what I think will actually happen.
    Why is it so important to attack Iran? Future historians will no doubt ponder this question, and no doubt they will conclude that it had to do with the resource wars and the drive towards global empire. I doubt whether they will find that claims about Iran’s threat to Israel and to the US and to Europe and to the Galaxy pass any laugh test.
    Re. Palestine: what they need to do is declare a state, now, go from there. Waiting on Israel and the US is a huge mistake. A declaration doesn’t make it a fact on the ground, of course, but it is an absolutely critical first step.

  8. I agree that the only thing that came out of the Obama-Netanyahu session was a deadline for Iran. And since indications are that the Obama diplomacy process is intended only to build support for action against Iran, there is close to zero chance that there will be any progress by the end of the year. The political establishment in the US seems to have achieved consensus that the next step will be economic war on Iran, collective punishment for its people. This will surely be followed by an over military attack – assuming Israel doesn’t pre-empt the whole charade well ahead of Obama’s schedule, which is what I think will actually happen.
    Why is it so important to attack Iran? Future historians will no doubt ponder this question, and no doubt they will conclude that it had to do with the resource wars and the drive towards global empire. I doubt whether they will find that claims about Iran’s threat to Israel and to the US and to Europe and to the Galaxy pass any laugh test.
    Re. Palestine: what they need to do is declare a state, now, go from there. Waiting on Israel and the US is a huge mistake. A declaration doesn’t make it a fact on the ground, of course, but it is an absolutely critical first step.

Comments are closed.