How the Palestinian Authority Handles Internal Dissent

June 23 2015

Mahmoud Abbas recently froze the bank accounts of Salam Fayyad—who served as prime minister of the Palestinian Authority (PA) from 2007 to 2013—on allegations of money laundering. Elliott Abrams explains:

[T]he main complaint of Abbas’s Fatah party against Fayyad (who is not a Fatah member) was always his honesty. He actually fought against and reduced corruption. For the powers that be in Ramallah to accuse Fayyad of money laundering is absurd and disgusting, and no one is going to believe it. So what is going on? . . .

Fayyad represents an independent voice, an alternative to the Fatah cronies of President Abbas. Moreover, Fayyad’s non-governmental organization [whose assets were also frozen] has had support from the United Arab Emirates, with whom Abbas is feuding because the Emirates also back his rival (and potential successor) Mohammed Dahlan. A political struggle, then, but one in which Abbas uses the power of the state in his statelet to bring criminal charges against his critics and freeze their accounts.

For a very long time (well, six years anyway) U.S. policy has been extremely critical of any Israeli move that the White House did not like, but largely silent about PA actions such as the glorification of terrorists. Here’s another PA move that deserves a strong condemnation from the White House and the State Department, and a stronger private warning to Abbas. And members of Congress who appropriate money for the PA ought to let its “ambassador” in Washington know clearly that this kind of tinpot-dictatorship move won’t be tolerated.

Read more at Pressure Points

More about: Fatah, Mahmoud Abbas, Palestinian Authority, Politics & Current Affairs, Salam Fayyad, U.S. Foreign policy

Expand Gaza into Sinai

Feb. 11 2025

Calling the proposal to depopulate Gaza completely (if temporarily) “unworkable,” Peter Berkowitz makes the case for a similar, but more feasible, plan:

The United States along with Saudi Arabia and the UAE should persuade Egypt by means of generous financial inducements to open the sparsely populated ten-to-fifteen miles of Sinai adjacent to Gaza to Palestinians seeking a fresh start and better life. Egypt would not absorb Gazans and make them citizens but rather move Gaza’s border . . . westward into Sinai. Fences would be erected along the new border. The Israel Defense Force would maintain border security on the Gaza-extension side, Egyptian forces on the other. Egypt might lease the land to the Palestinians for 75 years.

The Sinai option does not involve forced transfer of civilian populations, which the international laws of war bar. As the United States, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and other partners build temporary dwellings and then apartment buildings and towns, they would provide bus service to the Gaza-extension. Palestinian families that choose to make the short trip would receive a key to a new residence and, say, $10,000.

The Sinai option is flawed. . . . Then again, all conventional options for rehabilitating and governing Gaza are terrible.

Read more at RealClear Politics

More about: Donald Trump, Egypt, Gaza Strip, Sinai Peninsula