Is Hamas Preparing to Inherit the Palestinian Authority? (JCPA-JERUSALEM CENTER FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS) JERUSALEM ISSUE BRIEF Vol. 3, No. 14 by Jonathan D. Halevi 01/07/04)
Source: http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief3-14.htm
JCPA-Jerusalem Center Public Affairs
JCPA-Jerusalem Center Public Affairs Articles-Index-Top
Publishers-Index-Top
There is growing evidence that Fatah, the Palestinian faction
that today dominates the PLO, may not remain the power center of
Palestinian politics in the post-Arafat era. Hamas is preparing
itself to inherit the Palestinian Authority.
At the Cairo talks in December 2003, for the first time, Hamas
openly and confidently challenged the basic Palestinian view that the
PLO is the sole and exclusive representative of the Palestinian
people. Hamas demanded partnership status in the adoption of all
decisions. It also used the Cairo talks in order to achieve
recognition from Egypt and other Arab states. In this spirit, it
insisted that the U.S. remove it from the list of recognized
terrorist organizations.
The erosion in the PLOīs standing was accelerated by the
establishment of the supreme coordinating framework known as
the "National and Islamic Forces" at the onset of the intifada, with
Arafatīs approval. This body has become the PLOīs rival, since it is
the sole body that includes all the Islamic organizations and secular
groups.
Hamas has established its own "army" in the Gaza Strip as a
source of power and strength in opposition to the Palestinian
Authority, in the understanding that the force that controls the
Strip is the one that will actually succeed the Palestinian Authority.
Any scenarios for the future that do not take into account the
possibility of a Hamas takeover of the Palestinian political system
are seriously deficient.
Who Will Inherit the Palestinian Authority in the Post-Arafat Era?
There is no question that there is a crisis of leadership in the
Palestinian political system as it approaches the post-Arafat era.
The struggle for succession has already begun, even while Yassir
Arafat still controls the Palestinian Authority from Ramallah. Some
in the international community foresee a new generation of Fatah
leaders, some of whom have been involved in recent back-channel peace
initiatives, coming forward and replacing the old revolutionary guard
that established the PLO in the 1960s. Yet there is growing evidence
that Fatah may not remain the power center of Palestinian politics.
From current indications it appears that Hamas is preparing itself to
inherit the Palestinian Authority. Any scenario projected for the
future that does not take this into account will be seriously flawed.
At the Herzliya conference in December 2003, a team of researchers
and security personnel (former and current), lead by Dr. Shmuel Bar,
presented a special report analyzing the political situation in the
areas of the Palestinian Authority and possible scenarios for the
post-Arafat era. The report emphasized the gradual decline of the
generation associated with the old Fatah leadership, epitomized by
Arafatīs expected disappearance, and the increased strength of the
younger generation in Fatah, together with the continued empowerment
of Hamas as an alternative to the existing government.
The prevailing assessment among the members of the team was
that "ultimately the Palestinians will succeed in installing a new
leadership which, while representing the political front, will not
have actual control over Palestinian areas." In other words, the
regional division of power inside the PA is confirmed: "The process
of the division of the Palestinian Authority into regions of control
will be accelerated, and a new strata of regional leaders will emerge
who will confer legitimacy to the new leadership."1
The central presumptions and assessments of the research team relate
to the disintegration of the Palestinian governmental system, a
process that has intensified during the last three years of armed
violence that was initiated by the Palestinian Authority in September
2000. The most important development, however, extends beyond the
weakening of the Palestinian Authority both politically and
militarily in the wake of the conflict with Israel. The Palestine
Liberation Organization, the source of authority for the Palestinian
Authority itself, now confronts the gravest challenge to its position
since the beginning of the 1980s. This challenge is the result of a
change in the balance of power in the Palestinian political map due
to the increasing entrenchment of the Islamic stream headed by the
Hamas, that has systematically encroached on the power of the
nationalist stream, headed by the Fatah movement.
Hamasī Challenge to the PLO at the Cairo Talks
The latest round of talks among the Palestinian factions in Cairo (at
the beginning of December 2003) focused on an attempt to conclude an
agreement on a ceasefire (hudna) with Israel. These talks failed,
thus exposing the depth of the crisis on the Palestinian political
front. For the first time, the Hamas movement openly and confidently
challenged the basic Palestinian view that the PLO is the sole and
exclusive representative of the Palestinian people. Hamas unabashedly
demanded partnership status in the adoption of all decisions in a
manner reflecting its political strength, thus undermining the
current political status quo. According to Hamas, the PLO is no
longer the appropriate organizational framework for leading the
continued Palestinian struggle. Hamas believes a new, unified,
Palestinian leadership (emergency, temporary, or permanent) should be
established to replace the PLO as the supreme source of authority for
the Palestinian people.2
Already in 2002, in an internal Hamas memorandum captured by Israel,
Khaled Mashaal, the head of the Hamas political bureau, noted that
senior officials in Cairo were giving a Hamas delegation a reception
that was "grander than in the past."3 The Hamas memorandum assessed
that the Egyptians understood that the Palestinian Authority was weak
and Palestinian support for the PA was "waning." It contains a
distinct tone of a growing sense of power among the Hamas leadership
as it seeks to fill the power vacuum left by Fatah.
Thus, from the position of a political body that was not part of the
PLO and which competed with Fatah, Hamas has emerged as a key player
in the Palestinian leadership, exercising "veto power" over all key
decisions, and demanding the lionīs share of the Palestinian
leadership, while presenting itself as a possible alternative to the
existing Palestinian leadership.
This was the basis for Hamasī rejection of the Palestinian
Authorityīs request, raised in the Cairo hudna deliberations, for
authorization to negotiate with Israel regarding a ceasefire. Inter
alia, Hamas claimed that the Palestinian Authority no longer
functions as an effective government in view of the current political
and military situation. As a tactical step, Hamas did not
categorically reject the option of joining the PLO. Instead, it
posited impossible conditions for such a move, the most important of
which was the conducting of new elections for PLO institutions, and
the adoption of an amendment to the organizationīs charter in the
spirit of the Hamas movementīs principles, i.e., rejection of the
path of negotiations and advocacy of continued armed struggle for the
liberation of Palestine.4
It is noteworthy that during the December 2003 hudna talks, Hamas
made demands that demonstrate its self-image as a future player in
the international politics of the Middle East:5
a. Removal of Hamas from the U.S. and European Union lists of
recognized international terrorist organizations
b. Permission for Hamas to operate overseas
c. Cessation of all international measures against Hamas charity
groups abroad
d. Recognition of Hamas as the main power center in the Palestinian
arena
The decision of a member of the Hamas political bureau, Mohammed
Nazal, to call for U.S.-Hamas contacts in January 2004 is indicative
of how Hamas sees its new international role.6
The "National and Islamic Forces" as a Rival to the PLO
The erosion in the PLOīs standing was further accelerated by the
establishment of the supreme coordinating framework known as
the "National and Islamic Forces" at the onset of the intifada, with
Arafatīs approval. This body, comprising the 13 most important
Palestinian factions, had its own command structure and insignia. In
the West Bank it was led by Marwan Barghouti. Over time it has become
the PLOīs rival as the source of legitimacy, since it is the sole
body that confers equal representation (one representative for each
organization) and includes all the Islamic organizations and secular
groups. The frequently changing fortunes of the intifada necessitated
the adoption of decisions at a national level (on policies governing
attacks, responses to Israeli action, international pressure,
friction between the organizations, etc.) and converted the "National
and Islamic Forces" into an accepted and legitimate framework for
deliberation on fundamental issues.
The foremost achievement of the "National and Islamic Forces" was its
formulation of the "Gaza Document" in August 2002, stipulating
guidelines for the reorganization of the Palestinian civil structure,
and which still serves as the basis for factional deliberations
today. The document determined the basis for a settlement as:
full withdrawal to the 1967 borders and exercise of the right of
return;
the legitimacy of continued armed struggle for the realization of
Palestinian rights;
the urgent need to establish a temporary "United National
Leadership" to "strengthen the source of united authority" in the
adoption of decisions;
ongoing activity and struggle until the holding of general
and "democratic" elections to the Palestinian institutions.7
How Hamas Has Strengthened Its Standing
Hamas is attempting to strengthen its standing within the Palestinian
public as a legitimate contender for power in the following arenas:
a A renewed emphasis on Hamasī connection to its forerunner, the
Muslim Brotherhood, in order to gain a "softer" Islamic image. For
example, the Egyptian political establishment has reached a modus
vivendi with the Muslim Brotherhood in that country, which would
allow Hamas to gain increased regional acceptance if it invoked these
roots.8
b. Presentation of a political program in competition with that of
the Palestinian Authority, based on a readiness to accept the
principle of "stages" for the solution of the Palestinian problem
(similar to the PLOīs "stages" program adopted in 1974) and to agree
to the establishment of a temporary Palestinian state within the pre-
1967 territory.9
c. Continued social and public activity (Daawa) competing with the
Palestinian Authority in the provision of services to the public.
Hamas was the first to organize an assistance package and donations
to families whose houses were damaged by the IDF in Rafiah. Hamas
went even further on Christmas Eve 2003 when movement activists
dressed up as Santa Claus distributed presents to Christian children
in Bethlehem.10
d. The establishment of the "Hamas Army" in the Gaza Strip as a
source of power and strength in opposition to the Palestinian
Authority, and as a legitimate national military force protecting the
borders of PA territory. Already Hamas is copying the relationship of
Hizballah to the Lebanese government as it fashions its approach to
the Palestinian Authority. But while Hizballah, representing Lebanese
Shiites, could never replace the regime in Beirut, which represents
all religious factions, Hamas could replace the Palestinian
Authority, which is based on a Palestinian Sunni Muslim leadership.11
e. Hamas has concentrated its activities in the Gaza Strip in the
understanding that the political force that controls the Strip is the
one that will actually succeed the Palestinian Authority.12
The strengthening of Hamas and its challenge to the Palestinian
Authority has occurred against the background of a number of
important developments:
a. The Fatah movement, which currently leads the PLO, is in a state
of chronic internal crisis, one of the gravest in its history, and
one which may actually lead to a split. Its main problems are: loss
of direction against the background of the failure of the Oslo
process, an ideological impasse, lack of popular support due to the
PLOīs identification as the ruling party and as part of a corrupt
governmental network, Arafatīs divide-and-rule policy which crippled
the authority of the old leadership and forestalled the emergence of
any new leadership with legitimacy - both inside the territories and
outside, the distancing of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades from the
political leadership of the movement, and the adoption of a political
line closer to that of Hamas.13
b. Many regard the Palestinian Authority as nothing more than an
employment bureau that has gradually lost its authority and
legitimacy in the eyes of the Palestinian public. The Palestinian
security frameworks are weak and have difficulty enforcing their
authority over armed militias who rule by force of arms over various
localities in the Palestinian Authority (Jenin, Nablus, Rafiah, some
of the refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza, and elsewhere).14
c. Arafatīs weakness, his isolation, and increasing criticism within
Fatah of his political behavior will all impact on the post-Arafat
period. Arafatīs descent from the political stage, without an
organized mechanism for the smooth transfer of Palestinian governance
(apart from a temporary period during which the chairman of the
parliament is to serve as the "Rais"), is liable to lead to
governmental chaos and domination by radical factors in different
regions.15
Can Fatah Reform Itself?
Against the background of the Hamas challenge to the existing order,
there is growing interest within Fatah in the prompt implementation
of internal systemic reforms (elections to the movementīs
institutions) and the conducting of elections to the legislative
council and the presidency, as listed in the second stage of the
implementation of the "roadmap."16 The goal is the rehabilitation of
the movement and the prevention of a split, accompanied by the
renewal of public legitimacy for the Palestinian Authority as an
essential element in the preservation of the dominance of Fatah as
the governing party, and in order to guarantee a smooth transfer of
power, without dangerous upheavals, in the post-Arafat era. The
political atmosphere in the region (including Iraq) and the economic
situation in the Palestinian Authority are liable to have conclusive
ramifications in the formulation of Palestinian public opinion in the
next elections.
1. http://www.herzliyaconference.org/_Uploads/961paletineheb.pdf
2. http://www.mic-pal.info/vip/ndwa2.htm
3. http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/bu/hamas/hamas_b.htm
4. Ibid.
5. al-Watan (Saudi Arabia), December 22, 2003.
6. "Hamas īContactsī with U.S. Officials," The Australian, January 6,
2004;
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,8333016%
255E1702,00.html
7. http://www.palestine-
info.info/arabic/palestoday/dailynews/2002/aug02q18_8/details.htm
8. http://www.mic-pal.info/dialog/esmail-hania.htm
9. http://www.ezzedeen.net/Chat/htm/2003/hawar19_04_03.htm
10. http://www.nfc.co.il/archive/001-D-36868-00.html?tag=8-26-36
11. http://www.palestine-
info.info/arabic/palestoday/dailynews/2003/dec03/19_12/details3.htm
12. The Hamas leaders no longer conceal their striving to be the
dominant power and their confidence in Hamasī capability to achieve
this goal. Abd Al-Aziz Rantisi, a senior Hamas leader, said in an
interview (November 2003): "I emphasize that the Hamas movement will
strive to take control of the (Palestinian) regime through legitimate
means...after the liberation of the homeland is accomplished."
http://www.ezzedeen.net/Chat/htm/2003/hawar11_11_03.htm
13. http://www.mic-pal.info/sfian_abouzaida.htm
14. http://www.nfc.co.il/archive/003-D-4323-00.html?tag=8-17-05
http://fateh-org.org/baker/modules.php?
name=News&file=article&sid=45
15. http://www.herzliyaconference.org/_Uploads/961paletineheb.pdf
16. See Abd Al-Aziz Shaheenīs interview on reforms in the Fatah
movement in al-Hayat al-Jadida (Palestinian Authority), December 29,
2003.
Lt. Col. Jonathan D. Halevi is a researcher of the Middle East and
radical Islam. His previous writings include "Al-Qaedaīs Intellectual
Legacy: New Radical Islamic Thinking Justifying the Genocide of
Infidels," Jerusalem Viewpoints #508 (December 1, 2003), "Who is
Taking Credit for Attacks on the U.S. Army in Western Iraq? Al-Jamaīa
al-Salafiya al-Mujahida," Jerusalem Issue Brief #3-3 (August 5,
2003), and "Understanding the Breakdown of Israeli-Palestinian
Negotiations," Jerusalem Viewpoints #486 (September 15, 2002). The
views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the IDF.
Return to Top
MATERIAL REPRODUCED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY