A Pro-Unity Government Palestinian Minister from Fatah Speaks Out
Yesterday afternoon, I had the pleasure of hosting Advisor to President Mahmoud Abbas and Palestine Minister for Economic Development Mohammad Shtayyeh in my office to discuss the status of Palestinian Government unity government talks between Fatah and Hamas.
This is a highly unusual and important exchange because Shtayyeh is a solid Fatah party leader -- who in contrast to many of his party colleagues -- wants to achieve a workable unity government that includes Hamas. He believes Hamas wants this too and is working hard to counter what he considers to be a disinformation campaign that Hamas is not interested in coming back into a workable governance situation.
Egypt Intelligence Chief Omar Suleiman has been in Washington this last week sharing details about his efforts to generate a unity government agreement between Fatah and Hamas.
Sources tell me that the US government position on a unity government has not yet fully come together and significant divisions exist between key players on Obama's staff.
The talks between Hamas and Fatah will resume on the 1st of April.
-- Steve Clemons is Director of the American Strategy Program at the New America Foundation and publishes the popular political blog, The Washington Note
Thank you for your efforts at promoting this much needed dialogue and posting it here.
March 25, 2009 11:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Seconded. Thanks.
March 25, 2009 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
The U.S. imports 60% of the oil it consumes. 63% of that is used for transportation. How does that have anything to do with this? Because within the next 10-20 years we will move to a more electrical means of moving about and that strip of dirt with three religions, two of which are dying will have the geopolitical relevance of say....East Timor. and none too soon. That said I wish them luck with their "troubles".
March 25, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
This part of your essay deserves repeating:
Sources tell me that the US government position on a unity government has not yet fully come together and significant divisions exist between key players on Obama's staff.
March 25, 2009 12:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. Dennis Ross and everyone else.
March 25, 2009 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's interesting that Clemons singles out Obama's staff as the source of divisions on this issue. Presumably, that's the case as with the possible exception of George Mitchell, Hillary's DoS camp is firmly opposed to the unity government notion.
I would speculate that General James Jones and Dennis Blair could be on the "pro unity" side and the advisors with backgrounds in legislative (Daniel Shapiro) and former administration/thinktank branches would be on the "no change" side.
The former haven't had to manuever within the same political FP superstructure as have the later bunch.I would add that Jones direct experience on the ground studying the security situation in terms of the WB and Israeli demands gives him a different perspective.
Additionally, Jones would more likely have access to the non-political Israelis who have a professionally based understanding of the nature of Hamas. Their similiar military/security backgrounds would encourage discussions on completely different and pragmatic levels.
March 25, 2009 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Doesn't much of this speculation depend on whether or not Hamas and Fatah ultimately reach a unity agreement?
March 26, 2009 8:58 AM | Reply | Permalink
At about 10:40, is Mr. Shtayyeh saying "defuse" Hamas? or "diffuse"? Meanwhile, I keep hearing others explain that Hamas does not oppose the 2-state solution, but no one ever produces any clear and formal statement to that effect by Hamas itself.
March 25, 2009 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think we should embargo all people who oppose the 2-state solution. That means force Netanyahooooooooooo to publically sign a document indicating his government is bound by all past agreements.
Never happen.
Sanctions are only for Arab rejectionists.
And that is why US policy is so very successful.
March 25, 2009 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is it very important that Netanyahu sign the document in public?
March 25, 2009 3:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
No wiggle room. Get the Zionists on camera. Otherwise, they wiggle out of every committment.
Trust, but verify. Verify everything. Every day. And never, never trust them to act in the future. Get the concession today. Or you will never get it.
March 25, 2009 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
NYT today:
Good enough?March 25, 2009 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, if I can see the document with their signatures. And I'll even mail to Dershy.
March 25, 2009 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Any examples of evil Zionists breaking a signed agreement?
March 25, 2009 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Every settlement built since 1993.
Your question is like asking, "Has it rained in the Amazon, or has the sun risen over the Sahara?"
March 26, 2009 9:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fatah is horribly divided Bar. Abbas sent an envoy to the EU to beg them not to talk to Hamas. The recent carbomb killing of a high ranking Lebanese Fatah man is being linked to the deep rifts within the pary.The dead man was considered to be part of the faction that opposes Abbas and ironically, was killed after efforts to reconcile a dangerous situation in a Palestinian refugee camp.
Hamas doesn't have one leader who represents the whole party and so many of those in the political wings have been jailed by the Israelis that it's damn near impossible for the party to coalesce. Despite their circumstances though, Hamas is in fact more unitied than Fatah.
The Hamas insistance on the freeing of Marwan Barghouthi (Fatah) as a part of the prisoner exchange for Gilad Shalit is because he is widely seen as a unifying figure for Palestinians.
As per usual, US/Israeli efforts to split Hamas and unify Abbas' Fatah faction are having the completely opposite effect from the desired goals.
The growing body of opinion that Hamas must be included in a unity government is a positive sign that reality is finally splitting the counterproductive CW asunder.
Unfortunately, the US Congress will again, as per usual, be the hotbed of opposition to moving the policies on this issue into the realist realms.
March 25, 2009 4:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
You've got it exactly right, lally.
This supposedly pro-unity minister didn't exactly raise my expectations. All I heard was how Fatah is bringing Hamas to the table "on our own terms," how the new government would defuse and weaken Hamas.
If that's the avowed goal, the talks will fail.
March 25, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not to mention that the actors involved in supporting one faction or another are legion and range from Iran to Egypt and everywhere in between.
Until THEY come to some sort of consensus among themselves, the situation will remain stuck. If the administration can get firmly into the unity camp, it would help that situation. At present, the DC naysayers are still exacerbating their divisions to a purpose.
March 25, 2009 6:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Fatah lost the parliamentary election because they are corrupt. Then they conspired to overthrow Hamas control, which Hamas won the democratically. And then Fatah asked the international community to punish other Palestinians. And then some Fatah activists collaborated with the murderous assault on Gaza.
And this is the movement which our government claims "represents" the Palestinians?
BTW, Fatah is also afraid of having elections? No wonder.
March 25, 2009 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
mythbuster.
I've been blabbing about this stuff since Operation Defensive Shield and following the micro and more recently, the macro of it all.
I don't post stuff that's already been covered and assume those following these threads get the basic picture.
Then again, we do occassionaly see those who will insist that the Palestinians voted for Hamas solely because they're the best at killing Israelis......aside from Hezbollah, that is. ;~{)
March 25, 2009 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
lally,
Hamas didn't win those elections as much as Fatah lost them by running too many candidates in the districts, splitting many Fatah ballots while Hamas won pluralities. The Palestinian Center for Suvey and Policy Research did alot of work on that.
March 26, 2009 9:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
Correction: Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR). (You can still find their study of the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections here.)
March 26, 2009 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with your "Fatah lost them" analysis. As a committed political secularist, that is good news. If Fatah commits to honest governance, they will win.
March 26, 2009 6:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
At this point, it's sort of like the arguments put forward by the Clinton campaign that the caucases didn't really count....doesn't matter in the long run.
As to your other post, the only obdurate opposition to a unity government (today) is coming from Abbas and Egypt. This is subject to change depending on the phases of the moon from all I can tell; the whole damn region has been in a state of flux over the last several years and is completely unpredictable.
As far as who's playing whom, that depends on what you mean by "playing". Sorry, I realize that reply isn't particularly helpful....
But, if the Obama administration signaled an end to opposition and dropped the conditions, things would start to move forward on multiple fronts, including reconciliations between the 3rd party actors. Until those guys sort out their many differences, there's zero chance of any meaningful and REAL reconciliation with Israel.
I've run across two timely posts that speak to issues under discussion on blogs by people who know what they're talking about.
This one by Marc Lynch is a valuable snapshot of the current situation re the 3rd party actors + the Palestinians:
http://lynch.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/03/25/palestinian_talks_postponed_until_after_doha_and_then
(Marc's sidebar on the right of the page gives a quick look at what's going on in the Arab media.)
Joshua Landis is featuring this entire interview with Kalid Michal (Hamas jefe in exile in Syria) on his blog; a sign he considers it important:
http://joshualandis.com/blog/?p=2519
Just for fun, I'm copying one of the commenter's description of the "moderate Arabs" leadership. This POV is widely held in the region:
"On a more interesting note it seems that Time magazine had a piece about Abdullah of the Saud family and it seems that he is trying to reform the kingdom.
The article to which I am sorry to say I do not have a link to truly shows that since the death of King Faisal there has been complete abdication of the kindgom’s policies to Washington and complete reliance on those policies.
Now that Obama is reciting Hafez and courting Iran they are in a panic as to what to do.
I wrote before that they have produced two types of cadres: extreme Wahabis and dumb clerics. No middle ground no strategy no coherence. Their allies are Mubarak La Vache qui Rit, the pygmy King of Jordan, the stupid Playboy Hariri, and the stooge Abbas."
;~{)
March 26, 2009 8:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for the links lally. I have them bookmarked and hopefully will get a chance to check them out fully in the approaching weekend.
The commenter you quote sounds almost too clever by half. But then we both know I have my own peculiar issues over that sort of thing....
March 27, 2009 9:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
lally,
Do you mean to suggest that the legion of interested third parties, "from Iran to Egypt and everywhere in between," would snap to attention but for Obama administration focus on Fatah-Hamas unity? FWIW, from where I sit I'm still left wondering who's playing whom.
Meanwhile, I still haven't seen any primary source backing up the CW that Hamas can deal with a 2-state solution.
March 26, 2009 9:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Can Likdu? If you compare Netanyahooooo's speeches to the Lidkud Central Committee to those he gives to the world media, you would think he was talking about two different countries.
My sense is the Zionistas don't want to let Hamas try. When Hamas won the Parliamentary elections in 2006, the Israelis, Americans, and Fatah Stooges were panicked by the fact the Palestinians might elect honest officials.
Let Hamas win. And if they continue rejectionism, the EU will cut off funding. It's as simple as that.
IMHO, the real fear is they will say "yes." Yes to pragmatism. Yes, to the Saudi Plan. What they won't say "yes" to is Netanyahooo's plan for "quiet" (permanent occupation] and "economic development" (occupation with more Isareli products.)
Peace means, Israel will have to focus on its dysfunctional internal politics. That means facing that Golum of Settler Fanatics they've created in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
March 27, 2009 10:07 AM | Reply | Permalink