A few years after Yasser Arafat took over the leadership of the Palestinian national movement, he tried to woo the West into offering him something in exchange for what he called "peace." Many still remember him at the United Nations in 1974, wearing a white jacket, saying:
"I come to you with an olive branch in one hand and a revolutionary's rifle in the other. Do not drop the olive branch from my hand."

As one former Fatah leader and companion of Arafat told me, Arafat and his group always believed that liberation should happen in their lifetime, and that they should enjoy its fruits. From the earliest stages, they were convinced that they could not defeat the Zionists, who had American and Western support. Therefore, unlike the majority of Palestinians, they were prepared from the beginning for a solution that did not achieve full liberation. So it was no shock to that friend that Arafat ended up with a deal as bad as Oslo Agreementsecretly arranged by Mahmoud Abbas, his successor.

Most Palestinian factions rejected the agreement, including factions within the PLO. Many members of Fatah and the Palestinian National Council resigned in protest, such as Mahmoud Darwish andIbrahim Abu-Lughod andEdward Saidwho accused Arafat of treason.

Fatah's attempts to lead the Palestinian national movement eventually led to a complete monopoly on national decision-making. The other factions, which were financially dependent on the PLO, were forced to acquiesce to Arafat's decisions even if they opposed them. Those who refused were subjected to demonization, intimidation, and sometimes violent repression, including assassination.

Although there were elections in the institutions of the PLO and other Palestinian bodies, they were mostly a formality. Arafat and most of the Palestinian leadership did not believe in the peaceful transfer of power, and dissent was allowed only if it was cosmetic and served to legitimize what they called the "historical leadership."

In the 1980s, after the rise of Hamas andIslamic Jihad As serious competitors, Fatah tried to counter them. At first, Arafat refused to recognize their existence. Then he spread the rumor - still a rumor - that these movements were created by Israel to divide the Palestinian national decision. Fatah members attacked Hamas and Jihad members in universities, mosques, and even in occupation prisons.

In 1993, the Oslo ConventionFrom that moment on, a deep rift began among the Palestinian people, who were once united behind the option of resistance. Arafat believed - and convinced many - that diplomacy could bring them an independent state. But this beautiful dream was illusionArafat realized it before his mysterious death.

The "peace process" that was supposed to lead to a Palestinian state in six years lasted for nearly two decades, with the result being the entrenchment of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Arafat finally realized that he had become policeman His job is to pacify his people, while their land is annexed and their resources plundered.

With the start of Second Intifada After a break-in Ariel Sharon Arafat began secretly supporting resistance cells and released many Hamas leaders. Sharon andGeorge Bush The occupation army destroyed most of the structures that Arafat had built with European aid, imposed a siege on his headquarters in Ramallah, and forced him to accept Mahmoud Abbas Prime Minister.

It became clear that Israel and America hated Arafat and favored Abbas.

Arafat's health gradually and mysteriously deteriorated until his death, and Abbas took over the leadership. But Abbas did not believe in either armed or peaceful resistance, as is evident in his governing style. He seemed to believe that Convincing the Americans and Reassuring the Israelis is the path to statehood, a thinking that is characterized as Very naive.

But there were obstacles, the first of which was Fatah-affiliated armed groups founded and funded by Arafat, which Abbas was able to quickly liquidate. The biggest challenge was Hamaswhich Arafat himself was unable to contain. Abbas decided to go to elections, believing that Hamas would get no more than 30% and that he would be able to impose his vision through democracy.

The surprise was that Hamas won a majority. Abbas had no choice but to recognize the results, but he began By fighting the government formed by Hamas, and pressured other factions to boycott it. With the help of figures such as Muhammad Dahlan - the then head of Preventive Security in Gaza - launched an armed rebellion, making the government's work almost impossible.

Local Hamas leaders grew tired of the situation and, with their limited power, expelled Dahlan and Fatah leaders from Gaza. Abbas responded by cracking down on Hamas in the West Bank. Since then, Abbas's group has monopolized the representation of the Palestinians, arguing that what happened in Gaza was a "coup" and that there would be no reconciliation unless Hamas handed over everything, giving Abbas complete freedom to proceed with his project unopposed.

Yes, Abbas ruled unchallenged, but he failed miserably.
After thirty years of working to implement the Oslo Accord, he has nothing to say but crude insults against Americans and Israelis, because he has nothing left to do. Abbas lacks the courage to admit that he has led his people to CatastropheHe apologizes and steps down for new leadership.

Perhaps soon, as happened with Arafat, Abbas will leave, leaving behind a people facing a bitter legacy of failures and division.
Source: Middle East Monitor