Palestinians seek timetable amid debate about Abbas’ future
[WEST BANK] – There are no surprises expected when Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas takes to the podium at the United Nations General Assembly on Friday even if different parties come away with vastly different reactions. While many will be looking for an indication that the Palestinian position has softened following fifty days of warfare between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, for their part the Palestinians will be looking to Washington for some indication that the American administration has its back, can be trusted to be the honest broker, and will be willing to pressure Israel into making commitments long talked-about but never agreed-to or implemented.
Far from “dropping a bomb” in Turtle Bay, Abbas and other Palestinian officials have been making his proposal clear and understood in recent days: nine months of renewed talks predicated, per an American promise, upon a return to the pre-1967 borders that will conclude with a guaranteed schedule for the withdrawal of all Israeli forces from land acquired in the 1967 war over the next three years. In Abbas’ words, “An end to the occupation” and an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
While some argue Abbas is oversimplifying one of the most complex conflicts in today’s conflicted world, his associate Dr. Mohammed Shtayyeh, an economist and senior member of the West Bank's dominant PA-affiliated Fatah faction, told The Media Line that the Palestinian Authority leader believes he can finalize his plan with the Americans – including the 3-year timetable — based upon discussions earlier this month with US Secretary of State John Kerry.
Inserting the American administration into the old adage, Shtayyeh admonished that, “It’s not enough to bring the horse to the river because you can’t force him to drink. But if he becomes thirsty, you can force him to drink and that hasn’t happened with Netanyahu,” said Shtayyeh.
The Palestinian official says Abbas’ time in New York will feature meetings with a variety of diplomatic personalities. “There will be a review of the financial situation of the Palestinian situation focusing on how to break the status quo,” which he explained means returning to violence or starting a new round of non-productive talks.
This time around, though, the Palestinian brain trust is demanding a different demeanor from Washington. Shtayyeh termed “very disappointing” the fact that the US is leading a Middle Eastern coalition against ISIS which, he argues, diverts attention from the issue of Palestine. With most observers predicting that the Obama administration will cast a veto if the Abbas plan is placed in the form of the United Nations Security Council binding resolution he seeks, Shtayyeh warns that the resulting disillusionment with the entire peace process will not be limited to the political echelon, but will embrace the public as well. He warns that, “A veto by the Americans will only bring more frustration to the people who had high hopes when Barack Obama was elected president.”
PA Foreign Ministry’s UN expert Ammar Hijazi agrees. He suggests that a US veto of Abbas’ plan will send the wrong message to the Palestinian people and would be counterproductive.
“We are not in the business of confronting the US, but finding solutions,” Hijazi told The Media Line. He says the Palestinian leadership is working hard for the two-state solution but is being undermined by Israel. “We don’t see why we should be blocked; it’s not the right step forward to achieving a Palestinian state,” he said adding that the US should at least abstain rather than veto.
Last week Abbas said that in case the U.S. does veto, he would seek membership in a number of international institutions and agencies, including the International Criminal Court (ICC), which could see Israel tried for war crimes.
But the presence of the Palestinian leader at the UN has already put a strain on US-Palestinian relations.
Political Analyst Nour Odeh describes the PA’s relationship with the US as a lopsided one, far different than bilateral relations America enjoys with others. “The Palestinian leader cannot confront the US. The people know this,” she said.
However, Odeh calls the PA’s position towards Israel’s security illogical and damaging to the president and to the Palestinian cause.
“They (the Americans) have to yet realize that the more the Palestinian leader is praised for protecting the security of Israel, the less the popular he will be among his people,” she said. “Advancing the cause of the Palestinians should be the PA leader’s priority.”
Odeh’s comments hint at the broader debate heard on the Palestinian street: “Is the US an honest broker?”
Dr. Amneh Badran-Abu Sitta, chairman of the department of political science at Al-Quds University, doesn’t think so. She says Abbas is “trapped in a “damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t” situation.
“The PA has trapped itself in the Oslo agreement and they are not able to get rid of it because getting rid of it means breaking the chains that Israel and the international community have imposed on them. At the same time, they will lose everything they’ve started to build in terms of state institutions.”
Badran-Abu Sitta goes on to say that she says it’s a shame that the Palestinians are the ones that always have to prove eligibility for negotiating with Israel. Being eligible, she says, “means meeting Israeli security demands plus accepting facts on the ground.”
“Abbas has caused ‘Palestine-fatigue’ in much of the international community because of his indecisiveness as a president,” insists Fadi Elsalameen, a senior fellow at the American Security Project. “He decides to go to ICC then the next day sends his foreign minister to withdraw the application. People are tired of him.”
Referring to topics of conversation at the UN during opening week, Elsalameen argues that, “The talk here is containing Ebola in Africa and fighting ISIS in the Middle East. No one is discussing Abbas or Palestine the way they used to, thanks to Abbas.”
Meanwhile, Shtayyeh says that it has not been a pleasant ride for the Palestinian people and sometimes they move backwards rather than forwards. “The worry is that there is no political horizon. That’s the reality. But we will not go into violence. We hope that the internationalization of the cause will do something and that’s why Abbas is going to the UN,” he said.