Amman meeting fails to find answers to questions haunting the Palestinian Authority, Khalid Amayreh, in the West Bank, reports In a high-profile convention in the Jordanian capital Amman earlier this week, questions about the future of the Palestinian Fatah movement were left unanswered. The meeting was attended by much of the top brass, including Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas, Fatah chief Farouk Qaddoumi, head of the Palestine National Council (PNC), Salim Za'anoun, and members of the movement's executive committee. For two days, leaders discussed a host of issues, including Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) elections, the convening of the Fatah General Congress, internal reforms and the aftermath of the planned Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. However, apart from re-asserting all the well-known platitudes, such as rejecting of the concept of a Palestinian state with "interim borders", the meeting seems to have utterly failed to resolve the most pressing issues. One of those issues is the organisation of legislative elections. Senior Fatah leaders failed to designate even a new date for the elections, leaving many to conclude that they remain in dread of their possible outcome. The PA decided in May to postpone the PLC elections -- which were slated for 17 July -- until further notice, citing "procedural matters" and "lack of preparation". It was clear to all, however, that the decision was prompted by fears that Fatah would resoundingly lose to Hamas, the main opposition. Some Israeli press sources even suggested that the Bush administration had "advised" Abbas to delay in order to enhance Fatah's prospects and avoid a "dangerous" Hamas victory. That Fatah is a party with problems was well illustrated in Amman. While failing to address the PLC elections issue, the Amman meeting did take the "strange decision", to use the words of Palestinian columnist and political analyst Hani Al-Masri, to hold the long-awaited Fatah General Congress after, not before, PLC elections, contrary to common sense. The decision generated widespread disappointment among Fatah's junior leaders and followers who interpreted the move as an undemocratic, even despotic, bid to maintain the status quo. Hani Al-Masri, who castigated the decision in his newspaper column Tuesday, accused senior Fatah leaders of fearing the outcome of all elections: not only legislative elections but elections within Fatah as well. "They are clinging to their chairs," he wrote. "They realise that Fatah's rank and file and grassroots supporters will not elect them," which is why "they don't want any elections to take place, it is as simple as that." Al-Masri reported that the Fatah executive committee was insisting that the Fatah primaries be attended by only hundreds of carefully selected local leaders and representatives, not thousands of Fatah members, as grassroots leaders insist. The reason, says Al-Masri, is that the Fatah old guard is worried that their chances of getting elected will diminish drastically if thousands of young Fatah members are allowed to attend and choose PLC candidates. Besieged by internal divisions, the PA Fatah- dominated leadership invited Hamas and other Palestinian opposition factions to join a possible national unity government. Initially ambivalent, Hamas said it would study the proposal favourably. However, after brief consultations with the movement's leadership abroad, Hamas in the Gaza Strip sent word that it rejected the idea outright, calling it a "distraction" and accusing the PA of trying to evade PLC elections. "We won't be part to any efforts to rob the Palestinian masses of their right to democratically and freely elect its leaders and representatives," said Hamas leader in Gaza, Mahmoud Zahhar. Zahhar and other Islamist leaders called on the PA to designate "sooner than later" a new date for legislative elections. "It is unfair and unacceptable to hold the Palestinian masses hostage to Fatah's internal problems," said Osama Hamdan, Hamas's representative in Lebanon. Countering the PA's national unity government offer, Hamas proposed the formation of a "referential body", that would include the PA and all Palestinian political factions, to govern Gaza after the planned Israeli withdrawal. Hamas argued that such a body would prevent intra-Palestinian friction and ensure the prevalence of law and order. Predictably, the PA rejected the idea, arguing that there is only "one Authority" and that all Palestinians ought to heed its decisions. Meanwhile, the PA reached a draft agreement with Israel on the creation of an overland connection between the West Bank and the Gaza Strip following withdrawal. According to the agreement, Palestinians would be able to travel by car between the West Bank to Gaza. Initially, Israeli security forces will escort Palestinian convoys travelling at proscribed times in both directions. Eventually, a four-lane sunken highway or railroad would be created to link the two territories, which are nearly 50 kilometres apart. The World Bank estimates this would cost $175 million and take three years to complete. However, it is amply clear that this plan will remain a distant, even unrealistic, dream in the absence of any real movement towards a lasting political settlement and the creation of a viable Palestinian state. Given developments on the ground -- especially the continuation of Jewish settlement expansion as well as the construction of the gigantic separation wall in the heartland of the West Bank -- this seems utterly unlikely in the immediate and foreseeable future. Indeed, most observers in Palestine and Israel view the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza not as an opportunity to advance the peace process but rather as the calm that precedes the storm, given Israel's dogged efforts to impose a fait accompli on the Palestinians.
