Dr Christof Lehmann
When Palestinian legislator Bassam al-Salhi recently announced the dissolution of the Palestinian Authority as part of reconciliation talks between Fatah and Hamas, and considerations within the Palestine Liberation Organisation, US state department spokeswoman Jen Psaki warned President Mahmoud Abbas against the move threatening “grave implications”.

The Palestinian Authority was established as an interim legislative body following the 1993 Oslo Accords.

It was to be substituted by a constitutionally elected government after the implementation of the provisions of the Oslo Accords and the establishment of a functional Palestinian State, which was made impossible by Israel’s continued occupation, Tel Aviv’s aggressive settlement expansion, and a cohort of other factors, including Palestinians.

The Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority is criticised for being beholden to the USA and the EU and being a quisling.

Israel used a range of skull-duggery to stall the implementation of Oslo and the transition from the interim “Palestinian Authority” to Palestinian sovereignty and statehood.

Israel’s direct response to the announcement about the reconciliation talks, which would include talks about a national unity government and the dismantling of the interim PA, was to bar the senior Palestinian legislator, Dr Mustafa Barghouti from entering the Gaza Strip, were the talks were to be held.

Indeed, the discontinuation of the PA would also, fundamentally, change relations between Tel Avis and Ramallah, not least with regard to the so-called “security co-operation” between the PA and Israeli authorities.

Palestinian factions and senior PLO legislators have consistently demanded that the PA ends the security co-operation which effectively transformed the PA into an instrument for the occupation.

It is within this context that the US State Department may threaten, saying that the dismantling of the PA would have grave implications and fundamentally change relations between the Washington and Ramallah.

Indeed, dismantling the PA would mean fundamental change in US — Palestinian relations. Much needed change, would many of the PLO’s most senior legislators probably say.

Speaking at a state department Press briefing, Jen Psaki added: “A great deal of effort has gone into building Palestinian institutions, by Palestinians as well as the international community, and it would certainly not be in the interests of the Palestinian people for all of that to be lost . . . We, the United States, have put millions of dollars into this effort. It would obviously have very serious implications for our relationship, including our assistance going forward.”

The fact that the US secretary of state would try to use his diplomatic talents and an not unsubstantial amount of pressure ranging from political to economic black-mail, would not be surprising for anyone who has observed the evolution of the US sponsored “peace talks”.

To sum up some of the outcomes of the talks, one could recall that PA President Mahmoud Abbas, in February, agreed to have US/NATO troops stationed in the Jordan Valley.

Many would describe that as a “motivating factor” for the US state department to attempt to salvage the “talks”.

It is especially important to note that PA President Abbas made the astounding suggestion in February, despite consistent demands from the side of senior PLO legislators to end the talks.

To understand just some of the historical context, one could review an article dealing with the murder of Yasser Arafat, written in November 2013.

In a statement to the Press, the nephew of the late Yasser Arafat stressed the words of the then Israeli Prime Minister, Arien Sharon, who at a Press conference said: “Invading Ramallah and the isolation of Arafat is only the beginning of an extended military offensive that aims at uprooting the infrastructure of terrorism.”

Al-Qodwa concluded his statement by reiterating the Arafat’s words, uttered during one of the life-long Palestinian liberation fighter’s last public statements: “They want me to become a prisoner, or wanted, or dead; and I tell them I am a martyr, a martyr, a martyr.”

Washington approved of Israel’s assassination plans. The planned assassination of Yasser Arafat, approved by Israel’s parliament, was dubbed Operation Fields of Thorns.

The operation, that is the murder of Palestine’s first Head of State, was subsequently approved by the United States, who vetoed a Security Council resolution in condemnation of the Israeli cabinet’s decision “to get rid of Arafat”.

Both the core of Fatah and the Palestinian Authority already were corrupted before the murder of Arafat.

Recall, for example, that it was on Arafat’s direct orders that PFLP secretary-general Ahmad Sa’adat was arrested.

The PA, under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas is not only described by Palestinian factions as a “quisling” government with Abbas in the role of a Vidkun Quisling.

Independent international observers, the author included, have come to the same conclusion.

The renowned political analyst and director for the Canada-based Centre for Research on Globalisation, Dr Michael Chossudovsky, denounced the PA for being a Zionist and US proxy, saying: “Mahmoud Abbas is a Palestinian quisling. He was installed as leader of Fatah, with the approval of Israel and the US, which finance the Palestinian Authority’s paramilitary and security forces.”

A Return to a Credible Palestine
When the US state department threatens grave consequences, and when the US state department stresses that dismantling the Palestinian Authority would mean a fundamental change in the relations between Washington and Ramallah, it should be understandable why many senior PLO legislators would insist on adding “much needed, long overdue, fundamental changes in the relations between Washington and Ramallah”.

One might add, that dismantling the Palestinian Authority also could lead to much needed, long overdue and fundamental changes in the relations between Ramallah and Tel Aviv.

These changes would include an end to the so-called security co-operation and a return to a policy of liberation and resistance.

Washington, Tel Aviv, and the most ardent proponents for the continuation of the status quo within Fatah, have good reason to be “concerned” about the dismantling of the PA.

The Palestinian people have nothing to lose by disbanding the “interim” PA. They have noting to lose by tearing down Trojan Horses.

The “people” of Palestine would no longer have to be concerned about an internal enemy that cracks down upon them while they pursue legitimate initiatives to empower themselves in a revitalised, credible struggle for the liberation of Palestine.

Things could hardly get any worse than they have been since the 1993 Oslo accords. — NSNBC International

You Might Also Like

Comments

Take our Survey

We value your opinion! Take a moment to complete our survey