"Mahmoud Abbas has worked to weaken all potential candidates for his succession"

A human rights lawyer and senior researcher at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy think tank, Ghaith al-Omari is a recognized player in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, which has stalled since 2014.

The former Palestinian negotiator, notably at the Camp David summit in 2000 and the Taba talks in 2001, and former adviser to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas until 2006 was in Paris in March for the presentation of the project "Whispered from Gaza", a series of animated short films, at the National Assembly.

Former Palestinian negotiator Ghaith al-Omari on March 22, 2023 in Paris. © Marc Daou, France 24

The opportunity for Ghaith al-Omari to give a long interview to France 24. After addressing the distress of Palestinian youth, he addresses in this second part the political situation in the occupied West Bank and the future of the Palestinian leadership while President Mahmoud Abbas has been in power for 18 years in Ramallah. The last Palestinian presidential election was held in January 2005 and the last legislative elections in January 2006.

France 24: How do you view the situation in the occupied West Bank, where Mahmoud Abbas is clinging to power?

Ghaith al-Omari: The inhabitants of this territory face a political and security vacuum that pushes them to abandon their government and institutions and turn to other actors. For example, courts in the West Bank are so under-resourced that it takes years to obtain a judgment. And if you end up getting one, then it takes years to get it enforced. As a result, people no longer turn to the authorities to solve their problems, which contributes to the disintegration of power and the loss of its legitimacy. In every city, in every governorate in the occupied West Bank, the population is taking matters into their own hands because the official authorities cannot ensure their safety. This partly explains the emergence of small armed groups in this territory. In some areas, such as Jenin, it is Islamic Jihad [a radical armed Islamist movement, editor's note] which, alongside other small groups, dominates on the ground. In Hebron, in the south, calm is mainly maintained thanks to the action of tribes and clans. This loss of control and legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority fuels and illustrates its great political weakness. However, when institutions and government are weak, the slightest shock can cause the entire system to collapse. And some fear that when Mahmoud Abbas leaves the scene, either because of his advanced age or for political reasons, he will leave a vacuum behind. A void he helped create. In such a scenario, the possibility of the Palestinian Authority collapsing becomes even more serious.

Are there no leaders who would be able to succeed Mahmoud Abbas?

Palestinian political life was never democratic, but it was alive and active. Today, all this no longer exists: this political space has closed and President Abbas and his entourage have systematically taken care to undermine the image and authority of every leader who began to become popular. Throughout Yasser Arafat's tenure, there have always been two or three potential candidates to succeed him, including Mahmoud Abbas. But today, it is impossible to nominate a frontrunner because the president has worked to weaken all potential candidates for his succession. In short, all those who disagree with him end up being sidelined. For example, I can mention the name of Mohammed Dahlan [former head of security in Gaza, in exile in the Gulf, editor's note], who was expelled from Fatah's central committee ten years ago, or that of Nasser al-Qidwa, nephew of Yasser Arafat, who was also removed. There are currently at least ten figures vying for the presidency, but none of them are strong enough politically or have enough popularity or support to stand out. In the absence of strong or legitimate candidates, the competition between them can go wrong. We know that there are many weapons circulating in the occupied West Bank and that a number of potential successors are recruiting supporters, which makes credible the prospect of a long and violent process.

In your writings, you draw up a severe assessment of the Abbas era. Including the diplomatic strategy that pushed the Palestinian Authority to seek full sovereignty status at the UN.

I am not alone in drawing such a harsh assessment. According to recent polls conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research, about 80 percent of Palestinians believe the Palestinian Authority is corrupt and 80 percent believe Mahmoud Abbas should go. The latter is very much identified with the peace process, since he is one of those who are at the origin of the Oslo Accords and those who signed them (in 1993, editor's note). But the failure of this process has caused it to lose this source of legitimacy. When the peace process failed, the Palestinian Authority tried to make itself useful by going to the United Nations. But there are two problems with this approach: first, it cannot really succeed because, in order to join the United Nations, the Security Council must vote for you. However, the United States, which is a permanent member, has always been very clear that it would not allow that to happen. Not to mention that the Palestinian Authority also did not want to adopt a compromise position in 2011, when it applied to become a member of the UN. France, as a permanent member, and Jordan, as an Arab member, tried to convince the Palestinians to relax the resolution so that they could succeed, but they refused and so the initiative failed. The second problem is that even when it succeeds, the Palestinian Authority having joined some UN agencies, it creates excitement the day the news arrives, but it does not change the reality of Palestinian daily life. Most of them do not believe that these initiatives bring them anything. The Palestinian Authority continues to do so because it has nothing else to do, except that it no longer has the same resonance in the territories and no longer captures the imagination of the Palestinian public.

You were one of Mahmoud Abbas's close advisers. Why did you decide to leave your position in 2006?

Many of us have rallied in the past to Abu Mazen (nickname of Mahmoud Abbas, editor's note) because we had the feeling, when he was Prime Minister of Yasser Arafat, that he was a leader committed to reform, non-violence and diplomacy. When he became president (in 2005, editor's note), he remained committed – and he still is today – to the path of non-violence and diplomacy. But we realized that he was not a reformer or pro-reformer. Mahmoud Abbas has also turned a blind eye to the corruption that still plagues the Palestinian Authority. I decided to leave when I clearly saw that he was trying to sabotage the work of Salam Fayyad, his prime minister at the time. The latter was a reformer who had the potential to create a clean and efficient Palestinian government and to start building a real economy.

Could this chaotic situation in the occupied West Bank benefit Hamas?

Hamas is doing everything it can to encourage an explosion in the occupied West Bank and a collapse of the Palestinian Authority, which it accuses daily of treachery. The ruling movement in Gaza believes that if the Palestinian Authority collapses, it will be the last one standing and will therefore become the sole interlocutor of the international community and the region. Hamas does this in a number of ways, such as having its cells in the West Bank carry out terrorist attacks. We know this from the daily reports on the dismantling of such cells in the territory. Hamas is also trying to financially support some of the armed groups, such as "The Lion's Den" in Nablus. In the past, Hamas only paid money to its own members and supporters, but today it is willing to fund anyone willing to shoot, believing that doing so will help create a mess that can benefit it. Finally, even if it does not want a war in Gaza that could weaken it, Hamas would be ready to provoke a confrontation with Israel, especially during Ramadan, if it believes it will have repercussions on the occupied West Bank. Two years ago, during the month of Ramadan, the movement started a war with Israel. I think at the time, Hamas did its calculations, hoping that the conflict would eventually destabilize the West Bank.

The summary of the week France 24 invites you to look back on the news that marked the week

I subscribe

Take international news with you everywhere! Download the France 24 app