fbpx

Analysis

BICOM Briefing: Hamas-Fatah Unity Deal

[ssba]

Last update: 09.00 BST, 24/4/2014

Key points

  • Both the US and Israel have expressed disappointment with the announcement of a unity deal between Fatah and Hamas, which further complicates efforts to secure an agreement to extend peace talks with Israel.
  • Many question marks hang over the content of the deal, and considerable scepticism surrounds it given the history of previous similar deals which were ultimately never implemented.
  • Israel’s security cabinet will meet today to consider its response, and will likely stress the importance of the Quartet conditions that any Palestinian government must recognise Israel, renounce violence, and accept previous agreements.

How does the announcement impact on peace talks?

  • Israeli and United States officials reacted with disappointment to the announcement that the Fatah faction of Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas had agreed to form a unity government, highlighting the negative impact it would have on the prospects of Israeli-Palestinian peace. Hamas is regarded as a terrorist organisation not only by Israel, but by the EU and the US.
  • Immediately prior to yesterday’s announcement, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave Abbas a stark choice, saying “Does he want peace with Hamas or peace with Israel? You can have one but not the other.”
  • Justice Minister and lead Israeli negotiator Tzipi Livni called the unity deal “a bad step” which would “cast a heavy shadow on the possibility of progress.” A meeting between Livni, her Palestinian counterparts and US special envoy Martin Indyk, scheduled for yesterday evening, was cancelled with Washington’s approval.
  • Meanwhile, US State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said “we were certainly disappointed in the announcement” and predicted, “This could seriously complicate our efforts” and “the efforts of the parties to extend their [peace] negotiations.”
  • The parties have been working on a package deal in which they would agree to extend current negotiations on a final status agreement for a further nine months. Under the deal being discussed, Israel would release the fourth tranche of Palestinian prisoners agreed under a July 2013 deal, and impose restraints on settlement building, whilst the Palestinians would agree to freeze unilateral efforts to join international conventions and institutions.

How will the announcement impact international relations with the Palestinians?

  • US State Department Spokeswoman Jen Psaki reiterated yesterday that a future Palestinian government must agree to recognition of Israel, renunciation of violence and acceptance of all previous agreements between Israel and the Palestinians. These three conditions were agreed by the Quartet after the election of Hamas in parliamentary elections in 2006, but Hamas has not accepted them.
  • The coming days will likely see a debate between international parties, Israel, and the Palestinians, over how to evaluate compliance with these conditions. Israel will likely insist that Hamas itself has to accept them, whilst other international parties may say that the conditions need only be met by the unity government itself or its individual members.
  • Hamas’ participation in a Palestinian government raises legal issues over European Union and US funding for the PA, on which the Palestinians are heavily dependent, as both proscribe Hamas as a terrorist organisation.

What is the content of the deal and the prospects for implementation?

  • Sitting alongside Fatah official Azzam al-Ahmad, Hamas prime minister Ismael Haniyeh announced that a Palestinian unity government would be established within five weeks and Palestinian elections held by the end of 2014.
  • However, many observers received the news with considerable scepticism, since numerous similar agreements since 2007 have been announced with much fanfare, but never implemented.
  • A short-lived Palestinian unity government came to an end in 2007, when Hamas violently expelled Fatah forces loyal to PA President Mahmoud Abbas from the Gaza Strip. Since then, the two factions have been at loggerheads, and there no indication that this agreement bridges their deep political and ideological differences.
  • The agreement leaves many questions unanswered. The two sides will have to agree over the ministers that will serve in the new government, including its prime minister. It is also not clear how elections will be carried out and whether each side will allow monitoring of elections in the other’s territory. Further questions surround how Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (apparently also party to the deal) will be integrated into the PLO, which officially represents the Palestinian people internationally.
  • As yet, there is also no indication whether Fatah and Hamas security forces will cooperate in both the Gaza Strip and West Bank. This is especially sensitive in the West Bank where the Fatah-dominated PA currently coordinates with Israel over security and counter-terrorism, whereas Hamas has continued to back terror attacks. There is also little indication of whether or not Palestinian territory will ultimately be governed by a single Palestinian law, with Hamas currently ruling the Gaza Strip according to its own legal code.
  • Another crucial unanswered question relates to the peace process. Fatah representatives stress that the agreement does not impinge on President Abbas’s ability to negotiate with Israel, but Hamas leaders continue to dismiss the negotiations and reject the goal of a negotiated agreement.
  • The agreement comes at moment of weakness for both Fatah and Hamas. Both sides lack legitimacy for their rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip respectively, with no Palestinian elections having been held since 2006. Meanwhile Hamas has become isolated since the collapse of the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt, whilst Fatah has little to show either from its unilateral efforts to gain international recognition, or its talks with Israel.