Hamas and Fatah: why the two groups are failing

by Jonathan Cook | Published: 00:05, May 17,2018 | Updated: 01:19, May 17,2018

 
 

THE Palestinian national movement, which has led the decades-long struggle against Israel’s takeover of the Palestinians’ homeland, has reached the lowest ebb in its history, according to analysts.
But as Palestinians mark this week the 70th anniversary of the Nakba, the ‘Catastrophe’ that followed the dispossession of their homeland and the creation of Israel in its place, there are signs of possible change.
For more than a quarter of a century, the Palestinian movement has been split into two increasingly irreconcilable ideological factions, Fatah and Hamas — now reflected in a profound geographical division between their respective strongholds of the occupied West Bank and Gaza.
Both camps have not only failed to bring about any significant achievements, say analysts, but illegal Jewish settlements have steadily entrenched across the West Bank and a 12-year blockade, bolstered by Israeli military attacks, has choked Gaza into a humanitarian disaster.
There is no tangible regional or international support for the Palestinian cause, and the Trump administration barely bothers to conceal its role now as cheerleader for Israel.
That includes a decision to move its embassy to Jerusalem this week, effectively recognising Israel’s claim on a city Palestinians regard as their future capital.

Ideological ‘bankruptcy’
‘THE Palestinian national movement has moved beyond crisis to the point of bankruptcy,’ said Ghassan Khatib, a former cabinet minister in the Palestinian Authority, and now a lecturer at Bir Zeit University, near Ramallah.
‘Neither the armed resistance of Hamas nor the diplomacy of Fatah has made any gains,’ he told Al Jazeera. ‘They are failed governments, and the public is deeply dissatisfied.’
The dire situation has left observers wondering whether the Palestinian national movement can reinvent itself and find more successful strategies over the coming years and decades.
Both Fatah and Hamas are preparing for major demonstrations, hoping to bring attention to decades of oppressive Israeli rule.
But the events are also likely to underscore how much ground they have lost to Israel — and how the pressure for new thinking is coming from the ground up, not from the leadership.

‘No need for fear’
RECENT weeks have seen regular protests at Gaza’s perimeter fence attracting tens of thousands of Palestinians, and dominated by young people. The emphasis has been on direct, non-violent mass action, spurning the high-level diplomacy of Fatah and Hamas’ traditional commitment to armed resistance.
Although the Gaza protests — under the banner of the Great March of Return — were not initiated by Hamas, it had shown a willingness to support them, noted Diana Buttu, a former legal adviser to the Palestine Liberation Organisation.
‘Hamas has recognised the utility of the marches,’ she told Al Jazeera. ‘It adopted them rather than crushed them. The hope must be that Fatah will soon realise this too — that they understand there is utility to people resisting.’
Ahmed Al-Naouq, a youth activist in Gaza, pointed out that the focus of the protests was the demand that the refugees — a large majority of Gaza’s population — be allowed to return to the lands, now in Israel, they were expelled from in 1948.
‘In Gaza we are more creative and flexible in our thinking because we have no other choice. We want to break out of this prison,’ he told Al Jazeera.
‘My father worked for many years inside Israel. We are ready to live alongside Israeli Jews in peace — they need to set aside their fears.’

Return to conflict’s roots
NATHAN Thrall, a local analyst with the International Crisis Group, a conflict resolution organisation based in Washington and Brussels, pointed out that the Gaza protests were returning the Palestinian struggle to its historic roots.
‘Even before the founding of the PLO, the central issue in Palestinian nationalism was the refugees — more so than the 1967 issue [of the occupation],’ he told Al Jazeera.
The right of the 750,000 Palestinians made refugees by the 1948 war and their descendants to return to their ancestral lands originally lay at the heart of the platforms of all the political parties, he said.
‘The national movement slowly compromised on that.’
Under the Oslo process launched in 1993, it was widely assumed that the refugees, if they returned at all, would move to a separate and minimal Palestinian state rather than their former towns and villages.
‘There was an intentional ambiguity: the leadership talked about the right of return at the same time as it promoted the two-state solution, even though the two principles appear contradictory,’ said Thrall.

Support for one state
BUT the Palestinians’ historic compromise had turned into a dead-end.
‘The two-state idea was never seen as ideal. No one marches for it or is prepared to sacrifice their life for it,’ he said. ‘But that pragmatism has yielded no results, and has led to great popular disenchantment. Now ordinary people are going back to the roots of the Palestinian issue.’
That appears to return Palestinian nationalism to its original vision of a single state, as long propounded by the PLO under its leader Yasser Arafat. He only accepted partition of historic Palestine in the late 1980s, faced with overwhelming western pressure.
‘It is significant that there has been a steady increase in support for one state among the Palestinian public, now at around 30 per cent,’ Buttu said.
‘That is surprising, given that today not one Palestinian party, in the West Bank and Gaza or the 48 areas [of Israel], publicly supports it.’
Even Hamas, she said, had effectively followed Fatah. It had abandoned its traditional goal of Palestinian-Islamic rule over all of historic Palestine.
‘Gradually Hamas has adopted the two-state formula, plus, in its case, a long-term truce with Israel,’ Buttu said.

‘Critical gap’
IN AN indication of Hamas’ growing desire to compromise, the Israeli media reported this month that ‘unprecedented strategic distress’ had led the movement to offer Israel a truce in return for easing the blockade and allowing it to rebuild Gaza’s infrastructure.
What was evident, said Khatib, was a ‘critical gap’ between the national leaderships and Palestinian public opinion, especially among the youth.
The latter was increasingly interested in popular, non-violent struggle as a way to break out of the Palestinians’ isolation.
‘But there are strong vested interests that will try to maintain the current situation,’ he said, pointing to the Palestinians’ dependence on foreign donors, Israel’s control over the transfer of income to the PA, and in turn the vast number of families relying on PA salaries.
‘Neither Fatah nor Hamas are in a position to advance popular struggle. They are bureaucratic governments, with structures, leaders and ideologies that militate against non-violence as a tactic.’

Waiting for Abbas to leave
BUT Khatib and others admit that change is likely to happen — some think rapidly — once 82-year-old Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas departs the scene.
Asad Ghanem, a politics professor at Haifa University, said ending the factionalism, between Fatah and Hamas, was a precondition for turning the different parties into an effective vehicle of national struggle.
‘There must be a unified national movement,’ he told Al Jazeera.
‘The PA has to stop being the security contractor for Israel. Then we can solve the real problems. We must demand an elected and unified leadership with a single platform.’
The biggest problem currently facing the Palestinian national movement, said Buttu, was that, despite its various institutions, it was dominated by one person in the figure of Abbas.
‘Abbas has made all these institutions irrelevant, and they have allowed themselves to become irrelevant,’ she said. ‘That has entirely marginalised other approaches, like boycotts and the one-state solution. It has ensured the alternatives can’t be effective.’

Hunger strike ignored
SHE noted that Abbas had all but ignored imprisoned Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti during the Palestinian prisoners’ hunger strike last summer.
Barghouti is widely reported to be a student of non-violent strategies of resistance like those of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King. He is said to have found support among the jailed leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
‘Look at the difference between the way the ANC [in South Africa] kept attention on Nelson Mandela while he was in jail,’ said Buttu.
‘They made sure people knew who he was. But Abbas has done his best to extinguish Barghouti, so young people barely know who he is after so many years behind bars.
‘The prisoners are a hugely powerful and symbolic issue for Palestinians, and yet Abbas has preferred not to capitalise on it.’

More Ahed Tamimis
WITH Abbas gone, Thrall thinks Fatah and Hamas may be capable of adapting to new thinking. ‘But they will do so only if there is a groundswell of popular sentiment that forces them to,’ he said.
He pointed to the decisions in January of the PLO’s Central Council to demand the ending of security cooperation with Israel, which Abbas has previously termed ‘sacred’, and to adopt the anti-apartheid-like struggle of the boycott (BDS) movement, even though it conflicts with Abbas’s strategy.
Thrall said the moves reflected pressure, in the case of security cooperation, from the Palestinian public and, in the case of BDS, from civil society organisations in the West Bank and Gaza.
Buttu noted that Palestinians were still conducting popular forms of struggle, despite the lack of institutional support.
‘Look to the Ahed Tamimis,’ she said, referring to the 17-year-old girl arrested and jailed for slapping an Israeli soldier who invaded her home.
‘She isn’t choosing to be a teenager like her peers around the world. She chooses to resist, she is defiant like the rest of her village of Nabi Saleh. The same is true of those marching in Gaza.
‘At the moment they have to operate as one-offs, because of the failure of the bigger political structures.’

Change could be rapid
THRALL observed that what happens in occupied East Jerusalem could prove decisive. Israel, he noted, was extremely concerned about large numbers of Palestinians there seeking Israeli citizenship and voting in city elections.
‘If a majority starts applying for citizenship that could prove to be a deadly blow to a two-state solution, and it could happen very rapidly,’ he said.
‘Then the PA would no longer speak on behalf of Palestinians in East Jerusalem, which is supposed to be the future Palestinian capital.’
That might be the point at which other Palestinians were driven into mass protests for equal rights in a single state, along the lines of a civil rights or anti-apartheid struggle.
Buttu agreed that Israel could be gravely mistaken in thinking it has crushed Palestinian nationalism.
‘I often wonder what it looked like in Algeria in the 1930s or 40s, or in South Africa in the early 1980s,’ she said.
‘The French in Algeria and apartheid’s leaders in South Africa thought they had the situation wrapped up, with a pretty ribbon on the package. They did not realise that in a few years everything would utterly change.’

DissidentVoice.org, May 16. Jonathan Cook, based in Nazareth, Israel is a winner of the Martha Gellhorn Special Prize for Journalism. His latest books are Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East (Pluto Press) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair (Zed Books).

Want stories like this in your inbox?

Sign up to exclusive daily email

Advertisement

images

 

Advertisement

images