Talk of the Collapse of the Palestinian Authority and Statements by Azam Al-Ahmed

We return once again to write about the recent statements made by Azam Al-Ahmed, a member of the Central Committee of the "Fatah" movement and Secretary-General of the Palestine Liberation Organization, which sparked mixed reactions. These ranged from welcoming responses from the "Hamas" movement to opposition from a significant segment of the "Fatah" movement - even from some of its leadership. These statements could have passed quietly, like other comments made by Al-Ahmed and others, but their emergence in the context of the financial and political collapse threatening the Palestinian Authority due to Israeli practices, along with previous comments made by the Authority's Minister of Finance and remarks by Sabri Saidam (a member of the Fatah Central Committee) expressing doubts about the Authority’s continued existence, as well as warnings and concerns from international entities pointing in the same direction, and also international demands - even from the Palestinian presidency - for the disarmament of the Hamas movement; all of this compels us to pause at Al-Ahmed's statements and read between the lines.

Azam Al-Ahmed may be right to reject the classification of Hamas as a "terrorist organization"; because the goal of those demanding that is not to target Hamas itself, but to target the principle of resisting the occupation as they did previously with the Palestinian Liberation Organization. However, he should have described it as a movement outside the law and Palestinian consensus, and that it is the party that has failed all reconciliation dialogues, instead of opposing its disarmament, forgetting the statements and positions of Fatah, the Authority, and the Organization that have always emphasized the principle of (one Authority, one law, one weapon), and also overlooking the tragedies that Hamas's weapons have caused to the people of Gaza, and that they have not recently been weapons for resisting the occupation, nor are they capable of protecting the people of the sector, but have rather become the weapon of a group that illegitimately controls the authority and wants to preserve it at any cost.

Some may see in his statements an attempt to draw Hamas into participating in the Palestinian National Council elections scheduled to be held in a few months, leading to a revitalization of the PLO and achieving national unity. But how can this be consistent with his call for Hamas to retain its arms while the PLO is committed to agreements and obligations opposing the resort to violence? If Hamas joins the PLO or if reconciliation occurs while it retains its weapons, doesn’t that mean repeating the experience of "Hezbollah" in Lebanon?

Reading between the lines - which the average citizen may understand - is that Al-Ahmed seems to acknowledge the failure of the Authority's option and the two-state solution, and the failure of the Fatah movement and the Organization’s path that rejected armed struggle and bet on the political settlement and the "Oslo" approach. It seems that Al-Ahmed wants to apologize to Hamas, indicating that the only remaining Authority is the one in the Gaza Strip, and that the one weapon referred to is the weapon of resistance, not that of the national Authority; and thus, the Authority of Hamas and its weapons should be preserved as compensation for the loss of the Authority in the West Bank!

I believe it is premature to assert the end of the Palestinian Authority; not because it is still strong, but because Israel is interested in its temporary existence at this stage so as not to bear the responsibility of providing for more than 3 million Palestinians, or find itself facing the challenge of a single state, and also to avoid provoking further international anger against it.

Even assuming that the Authority is on the verge of collapse, will the alternative be the Hamas movement? And what about the role of the Fatah movement and the Liberation Organization?

It seems that what Azam Al-Ahmed has declared is nothing more than mere "stray thoughts" to affirm his presence in the scene and to win votes to ensure the renewal of his membership in the Central and Executive Committees, even as he approaches eighty years of age.