Palestinian experts say that Palestinian Authority (PA) efforts to thwart a US draft resolution at the UN categorising Palestinian resistance movements — particularly Hamas — as terrorist has several dimensions for the struggle of the Palestinian people. Such a resolution would have serious consequences for factions in the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), including Fatah, as well as on the dispute between the PA and the administration of US President Donald Trump. They add, this does not mean Fatah will shift to a positive position on ending divisions with Hamas, noting that conciliation is complicated and requires more time to reach tangible results. The UN General Assembly shot down a draft resolution proposed by the US denouncing Hamas. Adopting the resolution would require the consent of two thirds of its members, which did not happen. All Arab members voted against the draft resolution despite efforts by the Trump administration to win over their support. The failure of the draft is a diplomatic embarrassment for Washington and a victory for the PA, which lobbied against it. Reham Oda, a Palestinian political analyst, said the PA achieved a great victory in international diplomacy by thwarting the US resolution denouncing Hamas, despite existing disputes between Fatah and Hamas. In fact, the PA played a key role in blocking the resolution. Oda explained the actions of the PA as due to its general sense of being responsible for all Palestinian people and factions in front of the world. It wants the image of the Palestinian struggle to remain legitimate and not terrorist. More importantly, if Hamas were condemned, the move may extend in the future to include other Palestinian factions such as the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which is a member of the PLO, or even Fatah itself which has a history of armed resistance. Oda continued that the resolution could have also been applied to Palestinian detainees (some Fatah members are in jail for armed resistance activities), and if Hamas were condemned then Israel would have demanded the inclusion of Fatah prisoners. Oda said that the PA's position is based on its quarrel with the Trump administration due to the latter's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and relocating its embassy there, as well as shutting down the PLO office in Washington. Oda said that US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley wanted to end her tenure at the UN with a political victory in favour of Israel, but instead failed miserably. Nassef Muallem, a political analyst, said that the PA's position makes it clear that all Palestinian political movements are patriotic and neither the US nor Israel can describe them as terrorist. Muallem added that President Abbas's position is based on international law, which asserts the right of an occupied people to resist occupation by all means, therefore any form of struggle against the occupation is legitimate by international legal standards. He continued that the position of the PA is a step in the right direction towards national unity between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, noting nonetheless that, “conciliation requires great effort.” He added: “And we hope this will contribute to bringing opposite viewpoints together and resolve the dispute.” Tayseer Mohaysen, a political expert, said: “I would have liked this position to bolster the move towards unity, especially for Hamas. Unfortunately, this is unlikely since over the past 11 years there have been events and positions that should have resulted in conciliation.” Mohaysen warned that this small victory could in fact widen the gap between the two sides, since Hamas could feel encouraged after the resolution targeting it, in particular, was defeated. It could view this as international recognition of the group, which could cause it tighten its grip on power in the Gaza Strip, and not agree to hand over power to the PA. Nonetheless, Ismail Haniyeh's reaction was positive, thanking Palestinian UN representative Riyad Mansour, but without going further. Said Mohaysen: “Hamas monopolised power in Gaza and should hand over the reins to the PA after realising there is no alternative to unity in facing challenges. Also, because the world recognises the PA and the PLO as the united and legitimate representatives of the Palestinian people to confront Israeli deals and that the occupation is plotting with the backing of its ally Trump.” He continued that Hamas must take a step back and not view the matter as a qualitative gain, adding that Egyptian mediation should take advantage of events at the UN to pressure both sides to move forward on conciliation. The main reason for the failure of the US draft resolution is due to events that took place 20 minutes before voting. There was an earlier vote on the majority needed to adopt the resolution, and the US demanded it should only be a simple majority, but Kuwait — on behalf of Arab countries — countered it needs to be a two-thirds majority. The Kuwaiti proposal was adopted by a slim majority, and thus the resolution denouncing Hamas became “ink on paper.” While the draft resolution was approved by 87 countries and rejected by 57 with 36 abstentions, it would have been impossible to achieve a two-thirds majority. Among Arab countries that voted against the resolution are ones that have reportedly drawn closer to Israel in recent times, including Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman and the UAE. Jordan, Morocco and Sudan also voted against the resolution, and Chad whose leader visited Israel last month, abstained from voting. Meanwhile, Russia and China voted against the resolution and India abstained. After the proposal against Hamas was shot down, a draft resolution by Ireland was adopted by a landslide pertaining to a two-state solution and against illegal Israeli settlements. Some 156 countries voted yes, and five objected, including Israel, the US and Australia. After the UN vote, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu tweeted: “The draft condemnation of Hamas in the UN General Assembly received a sweeping majority by countries that stood against Hamas. We did not receive a two-thirds majority, but this is the first time that a majority of countries have voted against Hamas and I commend each of the 87 countries that took a principled stand.” Israel's UN Ambassador Danny Danon and Haley whirlwind meetings and talks with ambassadors and government officials from across the world to lobby support for the unprecedented resolution against Hamas. At the end of voting, Danon said: “The huge support we received from ambassadors around the world proves the change that we have led in the UN. With this support, we will continue fighting in the UN against Hamas and for the return of the two corpses of Oron Shaul and Hadar Goldin, and the release of Israeli prisoners. I thank world countries for standing by Israel and the US in their fight against Hamas's terrorism.” Jason Greenblatt, Trump's envoy to the Middle East, tweeted after the UN vote: “Gazans are enslaved by Hamas. If countries truly want to help Gaza, they must vote to denounce Hamas.” Hamas welcomed the outcome of the vote, stating: “The failure of the US proposal at the UN is a slap on the face of the US administration and legitimises the resistance and boosts political support for the Palestinian people and the Palestinian cause.” The Islamic Jihad said that the defeat of the US resolution was a “blow for Israel and the US and their attempt, as usual, to spread lies on the international stage”. Mahmoud Al-Aloul, deputy chairman of Fatah, said that the UN outcome was a “great Palestinian victory.”
