Bana Abu Zuluf & Ameed Faleh
Mondoweiss / December 16, 2024
With the unprecedented destruction in Gaza, the Palestinian Authority sees an opportunity to position itself as central to the strip’s future — once again prioritizing its survival over the liberation of the Palestinian people.
Antonio Gramsci’s famous words—“The old world is dying, the new world is struggling to be born; now is the time of monsters”—capture the grim state of Palestinian politics today. Among Palestinians, one of the most glaring “monsters” is the Palestinian Authority (PA).
The PA’s legitimacy has steadily eroded, particularly under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas, who has clung to power since his presidential mandate expired in 2009. Once touted as an interim administrative body, the PA now functions primarily as an arm of Israeli occupation, prioritizing its survival over the liberation of the Palestinian people.
Its role in the West Bank has become one of containment and counterinsurgency, a betrayal that fuels widespread anger among Palestinians. Now, with the unprecedented destruction in Gaza, the PA sees an opportunity to position itself as central to the strip’s future governance—but this is less a strategy for unity and more a desperate bid for relevance.
The PA’s decay
The erosion of the PA’s legitimacy has been a slow but steady process. In a 2023 poll by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, 62% of Palestinians called the PA a burden, while 68% said the Oslo process harmed Palestinian national interests. Corruption is rampant, with PA officials enriching themselves while ordinary Palestinians suffer. Much of its budget, funded by international donors, props up a bloated bureaucracy and security forces instead of addressing the needs of the people.
It is this international recognition of Palestine by countries such as Ireland, Norway, and Spain that lends the PA some semblance of legitimacy within the framework of the two-state solution. But this recognition rings hollow for many Palestinians, who see the PA’s reliance on donor funding as proof of its prioritization of foreign interests.
The PA’s so-called “security coordination” with Israel exemplifies this dependency. Presented as a measure to ensure stability, it has functioned as a mechanism to suppress Palestinian resistance. It targets dissidents and dismantles grassroots networks, leaving many to view the PA not as a representative of Palestinian aspirations, but as a collaborator in maintaining the occupation.
The West Bank offers a stark picture of the PA’s complicity. Its security forces regularly suppress protests, detain activists, and silence dissent, often violently. During Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza, the PA’s repression escalated further. According to the Committee for Political Prisoners, the PA had killed five Palestinians and arrested dozens more by the end of 2023. Just in the past week, the PA has launched a security campaign to uproot the resistance forces in Jenin. Dubbed “The Protection of the Homeland,” the campaign aims to “[restore] the camp from the grip of outlaws who disrupted the citizen’s daily life and deprived them of their right to access public services freely and securely.” Similarly, in 2008, the PA enacted a counterinsurgency campaign in Jenin titled “Smile and Hope” in order to neutralize the resistance under the guise of law and order.
These actions are justified by the PA as measures to maintain “law and order,” but in reality, they have emboldened Israel’s control over the West Bank. Rather than supporting the broader Palestinian struggle, the PA has entrenched the status quo.
The Gaza gambit
The PA’s conduct in Gaza follows a long history of political opportunism. Since 2007, when Hamas took control of the strip, the PA has treated Gaza with disdain, cutting salaries, withholding essential services, and imposing punitive measures causing misery and immiseration. Now, in the aftermath of an Israeli onslaught, the PA is seizing the moment to reinsert itself into Gaza’s governance.
The strategy is not new. After the Second Intifada, the PA capitalized on international support for reconstruction by introducing donor-driven governance reforms and positioning itself as a stabilizing force. Figures like Salam Fayyad, hailed as technocrats, were promoted to satisfy international demands for “good governance.” Yet these efforts did little to address the underlying causes of Palestinian suffering: apartheid, settler colonization, and the lack of sovereignty.
A similar script is unfolding today, with Mohammad Mustafa’s appointment as prime minister. While the PA touts Mustafa’s technocratic credentials as a step toward revitalization, such moves primarily aim to reassure international stakeholders that the PA remains a viable partner for reconstruction and counterinsurgency.
The PA’s ambitions in Gaza are complicated by rival actors. Hamas remains a significant force, despite the devastation in the strip. It views the PA’s overtures as a veiled attempt to reassert control under the guise of reconstruction.
Adding to the complexity is Mohammad Dahlan, a former Fatah strongman backed by the UAE, who has positioned himself as a contender for influence in Gaza. Dahlan’s 2017 rapprochement with Hamas allowed him to channel Emirati aid into Gaza, boosting his popularity. Recently, he has positioned himself as an alternative to both Abbas and Hamas, branding Gaza’s future under the mantra of “No Abbas, No Hamas.” Dahlan’s UAE backing and ability to mobilize resources pose a threat to the PA’s plans for Gaza, while Hamas continues to resist both forces.
The Committee of Community Support
In the face of these challenges, the PA has turned to a new mechanism: the creation of a Committee of Community Support. This committee, formed in agreement with Hamas in order to establish the “political capital” necessary for a ceasefire in Gaza, is tasked with administering Gaza’s daily affairs—health, education, infrastructure, reconstruction, aid distribution, and border crossings—until elections or a governance framework is agreed upon.
This move reflects the PA’s attempt to establish itself as an indispensable actor in Gaza’s reconstruction. Yet, key issues remain unresolved, particularly concerning the role of Gaza’s security forces and the resistance factions. These omissions suggest the PA is testing the waters, with three potential scenarios in play:
- Regional Security Oversight: The PA may aim to establish a regional security force led by the UAE, as proposed by Israel, while sidelining Hamas through hidden agreements. Such a move could hint at a rapprochement between Abbas and Dahlan.
- Monopoly on aid and reconstruction regime: By monopolizing aid and reconstruction, the PA might seek to weaken both Dahlan and Hamas, presenting itself as an indispensable partner for international donors. However, Gaza’s resistance factions and public opinion are unlikely to tolerate a PA-controlled security presence.
- Bid for Political Clout: The committee could provide the PA with a much-needed boost in political relevance. By cooperating with Hamas on this limited basis, the PA may hope to quell internal dissent and present itself as a stabilizing force in Gaza’s reconstruction.
While these scenarios reflect the PA’s desperate bid for survival, its quest for legitimacy among Palestinians remains questionable.
What comes next ?
Gramsci’s “time of monsters” is an apt metaphor for the PA’s current role. It is a creature of the Oslo era, sustained by the very forces that perpetuate Palestinian suffering. Its reliance on external actors, from donor nations to international recognition, ensures its survival even as it alienates the Palestinian people by acting as a proxy for Israeli security interests.
The stakes for the PA were best articulated by a Palestinian Authority official at the start of the aggression against Gaza, who stated that “this time, Israel must destroy Hamas, otherwise [the PA] is done.” It is through this logic of eliminating Hamas, while keeping the flimsy status quo afloat in the West Bank through coercion and coordination with Israel, that the Palestinian Authority is negotiating the terms of the “Gaza cake.” Attempting to sideline both Hamas and Dahlan while trying to win a faltering international legitimacy, has been the raison d’etre of the PA in the wake of October 7. Israel’s genocide, as such, strengthens the PA’s bargaining position in its negotiations with Hamas through the flattening of neighbourhoods, assassinations of Gaza’s security forces, and the killing of the political and military leadership of the resistance.
Hamas, for its part, is aiming to have a say in the day after while recognizing that any post-ceasefire arrangement will differ from previous aggressions in Gaza. For Hamas, harm-reduction to both the people of Gaza and the autonomy of resistance remains a central issue to which it cannot give up.
Recent developments underscore this dynamic. Abbas’s appointment of Rouhi Fattouh as interim president in the event of his departure signals the PA’s focus on maintaining its structure rather than addressing its legitimacy crisis. This continuity may reassure international donors, but it does little to inspire confidence among Palestinians.
As Gaza’s future hangs in the balance, so does the broader trajectory of Palestinian politics. The PA’s attempts to assert itself in Gaza are unlikely to rebuild trust or address the root causes of the Palestinian struggle. Instead, they risk deepening divisions and perpetuating a system that prioritizes power over liberation.
The time of monsters cannot last forever. But whether the PA’s eventual collapse will pave the way for a unified resistance or new challenges remains uncertain. What is clear is that the Palestinian people are yearning for leadership that genuinely reflects their aspirations for freedom and justice—a leadership that is unlikely to emerge from the PA’s halls in Ramallah.
Bana Abu Zuluf is a PhD researcher in International Law at Maynooth university, Ireland and a member of the Good Shepherd Collective
Ameed Faleh is a Palestinian student at Al-Quds University and a member of the Good Shepherd Collective
