There’s
something a little misleading in the
media reports that routinely describe
the fighting in Gaza as pitting Hamas
against Fatah forces or security
personnel “loyal to President Mahmoud
Abbas.” That characterization suggests
somehow that this catastrophic civil
war that has killed more than 25
Palestinians since Sunday is a
showdown between Abbas and the Hamas
leadership — which simply isn’t true,
although such a showdown would
certainly conform to the desires of
those running the White House Middle
East policy.
The Fatah
gunmen who
are reported to have initiated the
breakdown of the Palestinian unity
government and provoked the latest
fighting
may profess fealty to President Abbas,
but it’s not from him that they get
their orders. The leader to whom they
answer is Mohammed Dahlan, the Gaza
warlord who has long been Washington’s
anointed favorite to play the role of
a Palestinian Pinochet. And while
Dahlan is formally subordinate to
Abbas, whom he supposedly serves as
National Security Adviser, nobody
believes that Dahlan answers to Abbas
— in fact, it was suggested at the
time that Abbas appointed Dahlan only
under pressure from Washington, which
was irked by the Palestinian Authority
president’s decision to join a unity
government with Hamas.
If Dahlan
takes orders from anyone at all, it’s
certainly not from Abbas. Abbas has
long recognized the democratic
legitimacy and popularity of Hamas,
and embraced the reality that no peace
process is possible unless the
Islamists are given the place in the
Palestinian power structure that their
popular support necessitates. He has
always favored negotiation and
cooperation with Hamas — much to the
exasperation of the Bush
Administration, and also of the Fatah
warlords whose power of patronage was
threatened by the Hamas election
victory — and could see the logic of
the unity government proposed by the
Saudis even when Washington couldn’t.
Indeed, as the indispensable Robert
Malley and Hussein Agha note,
nothing has hurt Abbas’s political
standing as much as the misguided
efforts of Washington to boost his
standing in the hope of undermining
the elected Hamas government.
Needless
to say, only an Administration as
deluded about its ability to reorder
Arab political realities in line with
its own fantasies — and also, frankly,
as utterly contemptuous of Arab life
and of Arab democracy, empty
sloganizing notwithstanding — as the
current one has proved to be could
imagine that
the Palestinians could be starved,
battered and manipulated into choosing
a Washington-approved political
leadership.
Yet, that’s exactly what the U.S. has
attempted to do ever since Hamas won
the last Palestinian election,
imposing a financial and economic
chokehold on an already distressed
population, pouring money and arms
into the forces under Dahlan’s
control, and eventually adapting
itself to funnel monies only through
Abbas, as if casting in him in the
role of a kind of Quisling-provider
would somehow burnish his appeal among
Palestinian voters. (As I said, their
contempt for Arab intelligence knows
no bounds. )
But while
the hapless Abbas is little more than
a reluctant passenger in Washington’s
strategy — and will, I still believe,
repair to his former exile lodgings in
Qatar in the not too distant future —
Mohammed Dahlan is its point man,
the warlord who commands the troops
and who has been spoiling for a fight
with Hamas since they had the temerity
to trounce his organization at the
polls on home turf.
Dahlan’s
ambitions clearly coincided with plans
drawn up by White House Middle East
policy chief, Elliot Abrams — a
veteran of the Reagan Administration’s
Central American dirty wars — to
arm and train Fatah loyalists to
prepare them to topple the Hamas
government.
If Mahmoud Abbas has been reluctant to
embrace the confrontational policy
promoted by the White House, Dahlan
has no such qualms. And given that
Abbas has no political base of his
own, he is dependent entirely on
Washington and Dahlan.
Seeing the
disastrous implications of the U.S.
policy, the Saudis appeared to have
put the kibosh on Abrams’ coup plan by
drawing Abbas into a unity government
with Hamas. And as
Mark Perry at Conflict Forum detailed
in an excellent analysis
Dahlan was just about the only thing
that the U.S. had going for it in
terms of resisting the move towards a
unity government. Although his
fretting and sulking in Mecca couldn’t
prevent the deal, the U.S. appears to
have helped him fight back afterwards
by ensuring that he was appointed
national security adviser, a move
calculated to provoke Hamas, whose
leaders tend to view Dahlan as little
more than a torturer and a de facto
enforcer for Israel.
But Dahlan
appears to have made his move when it
came to integrating the Palestinian
Authority security forces (currently
dominated by Fatah) by drawing in
Hamas fighters and subjecting the
forces to the control of a politically
neutral interior minister. Dahlan
simply refused, and set off the
current confrontations by ordering his
men out onto the street last weekend
without any authorization from the
government of which he is supposedly a
part.
The new
provocation appears consistent with a
revised U.S. plan, reported on by Mark
Perry and Paul Woodward, that
emphasized the urgency of toppling the
unity government.
They suggest the plan emanates from
Abrams, who they say is operating at
cross purposes with Condi Rice’s
efforts to appease the Arab moderate
regimes by reviving some form of peace
process. They note, for example, that
Jewish American sources have told the
Forward and Haaretz that Abrams
recently briefed Jewish Republicans
and made clear to them that Rice’s
efforts were merely a symbolic
exercise aimed at showing Arab allies
that the U.S. was “doing something,”
but that President Bush would ensure
that nothing would come of them, in
the sense that Israel would not be
required to make any concessions.
Whatever
the precise breakdown within the Bush
Administration, it’s plain that
Dahlan, like Pinochet a quarter
century, would not move onto a path of
confrontation with an elected
government unless he believed he had
the sanction of powerful forces abroad
to do so. If does move to turn the
current street battle into a frontal
assault on the unity government,
chances are it will be because he got
a green light from somewhere — and
certainly not from Mahmoud Abbas.
But the
confrontation under way has assumed a
momentum of its own, and it may now be
beyond the capability of the
Palestinian leadership as a whole to
contain it. If that proves true, the
petulance that has substituted for
policy in the Bush Administration’s
response to the 2006 Palestinian
election will have succeeded in
turning Gaza into Mogadishu. But it
may be too much to expect the
Administration capable of anything
different — after all, they’re still
busy turning Mogadishu into Mogadishu
all over again.
http://tonykaron.com/2007/05/15/palestinian-pinochet-making-his-move/