The PA still has some cards left to play

Israel is trying constantly to create the impression that it is the only the party that possesses any cards in the Middle East power game. It does so in order to present a fait accompli to its enemy; one that ensures that the enemy’s leadership is left with no option but to accept Tel Aviv’s conditions.

As a response to the Palestinian Authority’s decision to obtain UN recognition for Palestinian statehood in more than 15 international organisations and charters, the Israeli leadership has decided to freeze all tax revenues that it has collected on the PA’s behalf. Tax collection is not a charitable act by Israel; it controls the borders. Moreover, the Israeli government has also frozen the PA’s infrastructure projects with the international community.

Despite all of this, Benjamin Netanyahu and his colleagues are well aware that the Palestinian leadership does in fact possess many cards with which it can damage Israel’s interests. They know that if the PA takes its decision to go to the UN to its logical conclusion, it will end up teaching Israel a lesson it will never forget, internationally and domestically. The Israeli public will know that the ensuing consequences will be a result of their government’s treatment of the Palestinian issue.

Although there are numerous factors that suggest that the Palestinian Authority is not interested in waging a full blown resistance operation against Israel, this does not change the fact that if it decides to go ahead with the UN move, it should be part of a greater, comprehensive resistance strategy. This must include the dissolution of the Palestinian Authority, initiating resistance diplomacy and agreeing on a broader national project.

Benefits of dismantling the Palestinian Authority

As of late, the Palestinian leadership has confronted American and Israeli officials by threatening to dismantle the PA, an outcome that Israel fears, if the Israelis do not halt settlement activity. Regardless of whether or not this threat is genuine, the possibility of dismantling the PA will have numerous economic and political consequences for Israel, the most important of them being instability over state security. The lack of an authority will also reduce much of Israel’s control over the Palestinian territories, which is something that it currently uses against the Palestinians.

Dismantling the PA will deprive Israel of the privilege of continuing a relatively “low-budget occupation”, one that allows it to expand its settler colonial project through settlement building and its other Judaisation policies. Israel will no longer be able to burden the Palestinian Authority with the task of providing services and goods to the Palestinian people; in any case, even with the PA in place this is the responsibility that should have been undertaken by Israel as the occupying power. In addition, Israel would no longer be able to sell settlement goods to residents of the West Bank.

In the event that the Palestinian Authority is dismantled, Israel will be obligated to provide the minimum amount of goods and services that are necessary to maintain and sustain Palestinian life as part of its numerous responsibilities as an occupying power. Israel will be forced to bear the responsibility of providing healthcare and education among other goods and services, which means that it will have to bear this economic burden, estimated at no less than $7 billion a year.

If we also take into consideration two of the obstacles that are being faced in Israel, the housing crisis and the high cost of living, both of which have propelled young Israelis to leave and search for opportunities elsewhere, we would find that bearing the economic responsibilities of the Palestinian Authority will have a negative impact on the Israeli economy to an unprecedented degree.

Even so, the economic burdens that Israel would have to bear are small in comparison to the consequences that it would face in the security sector. At the moment the PA and Israel cooperate heavily in terms of security coordination. Losing its partner in this would complicate matters for Israeli intelligence and the army. General Eitan Dangot, the official responsible for Israeli affairs within the Palestinian territories, has stated many times that Israel’s coordination with the Palestinian Authority on matters of state security has improved greatly the security environment in both Israel and the West Bank, easing the huge burden on the state.

If the Israeli security forces are distracted from Palestinian protests against the brutal manifestations of the military occupation, not only would Israel be forced to interrupt its settlement expansion and confiscation of holy sites, but it could also possibly have to deal with a third intifada. Israel would have to face resistance operations as well as numerous transformations in the Arab world.

Dismantling the Palestinian Authority would also present significant harm to the settlement project in the West Bank and Jerusalem and deny Israel of the most important factors that ensure its continuance. One of the many reasons for secular Jews to move to the West Bank is to improve the security environment there by cooperating with the PA’s security sector. Many Jewish settlers do not live in settlements for ideological reasons; they want better economic and living conditions provided by the Israeli government, which includes cheap housing and land. It is quite clear that a worsening security situation in the West Bank would not only stop secular Jews from moving to the West Bank but could also lead to reverse migration from the West Bank into Israel itself.

Israelis are also aware of the fact that the resumption of resistance activities in the West Bank threatens Israeli security on a personal level. Prime Minister Netanyahu wants to create the largest Israeli industrial zone in an area that lies parallel to Ma’ale Adumim, a settlement located north east of Jerusalem. His intention is to encourage foreign companies to work with Israel. A new intifada will create an unstable environment that would deter foreign investors; this actually happened during the Al-Aqsa Intifada from 2000-2005.

It is clear that a deteriorating security environment in the West Bank would discourage foreign investment in Israel, increasing the economic consequences that would ensue from dismantling the Palestinian Authority.

The diplomatic circle

Both Israel and America are well aware of how much damage they will have to endure in the event that Palestine is accepted in international organisations and institutions. Israel will face the direct consequence of such a step should Palestine have access to the International Criminal Court. Furthermore, America’s attempt to thwart Palestine’s move will lead to Washington’s embarrassment and severe diplomatic and political consequences, especially in the light of multiple international tensions and crises such as Russia and the annexation of Crimea.

With Palestine accepted as a member of international organisations like the ICC, the dissolution of the PA would deprive Israel of being to argue (erroneously) that international laws and conventions regarding occupation do not apply to the Palestinian territories. Thus, the Israeli officials responsible for the illegal occupation and colonisation could be prosecuted.

If we are to take into consideration the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign facing Israel and couple it with Palestine’s ascension to the international stage, we would see that both of these measures reduce Israel’s international standing. A decision to dismantle the Palestinian Authority would force Israel to deal with a number of economic, social and political consequences that will expose the ruling right-wing coalition’s intentions and reduce its credibility with the Israeli public.

Although the political and ideological factors that affect the attitudes and direction of Israeli policy are extensive and complex, the failure of the current government to manage conflict on the Palestinian front could lead to a change in the internal balance of power. The more moderate Israeli left could once again control the government.

While it is true that the solutions being proposed by the left-wing in Israel do not meet the bare minimum of Palestinian requirements, such a general shift of power would force Zionists to change their positions on the Palestinian issue because they will realise their limitations when facing a people who are clinging on to freedom and life. It would no longer provide the Israelis with the opportunity to make impossible demands such as forcing others to recognise the Jewishness of Israel and suchlike.

A comprehensive national programme

It is quite clear that much of the above depends on the Palestine Liberation Organisation’s ability to restore national unity, as achieving it will restrict Israeli legitimacy. More importantly, PA President Mahmoud Abbas’s representation of the Palestinian people is the biggest obstacle facing them in their attempt to be part of international forums.

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said recently that Abbas represents half of the Palestinian people at best and that any potential settlement would require all Palestinians to agree for him to act as the representative of all people. Reconciliation will not only improve Palestine’s chances of international recognition but also help the Palestinian people to agree on a comprehensive national programme that will prevent Israel from exploiting internal weaknesses and contradictions.

Dismantling the Palestinian Authority will certainly remove many of the obstacles that Palestinians faced when they attempted to end the national division. This is due primarily to the fact that it will address many problems that are embodied by political agendas, power-sharing and elections. All three of these factors fuelled the state of internal polarisation.

At the same time, this national programme must be based on a consensus as to how the Palestinian leadership will manage and control the conflict with the occupation. It must also work to reduce Israel’s impact and ability to exploit political disagreements among Palestinian factions.

The PA leaders will make a mistake if they choose to use their acceptance by the United Nations as a card for compromise with Israel and if they allow themselves to be persuaded to return to the negotiating table in exchange for the release of a large number of Palestinian prisoners. Mahmoud Abbas recently made a pledge in front of Fatah’s revolutionary council, saying that he will not allow himself to be swayed back into the path of negotiations. He also stated that he is unwilling to end his life with such an act of betrayal that is orchestrated by a joint American-Israeli will which seeks to compromise the Palestinian cause.

It goes without saying that Abbas’s credibility will be completely compromised should he allow himself to go back to the negotiation table. He will have proven his commitment to disabling Palestine’s true sense of power in the cars that it still holds in exchange for a mirage of legitimacy that is embodied in the talks.

Translated from Al Jazeera net, 9 June, 2014

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.