Senior officials in the Fatah movement say that, at this stage, the more likely scenario is that Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas will opt to postpone the elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council. Not because the elections are unimportant to him, but precisely because they could produce a new political reality whose outcome would be difficult to control.
These officials told me that Hussein al-Sheikh, deputy chairman of the PA, is driving this trend.
He is trying to persuade Mahmoud Abbas to approve a postponement and justify it on technical grounds, arguing that the Central Elections Commission cannot hold elections in the Gaza Strip or in East Jerusalem.
The Final Decision Rests with Abbas
Senior security officials say Abbas remains the Palestinian figure best positioned to set the timetable and the rules of the political game.
He is chairman of Fatah, chairman of the PLO, and head of the PA. Therefore, any attempt to rebuild the Palestinian political system must account for his position.
But from Abbas’s perspective, elections carry considerable risks.
First, they could give Hamas and its allies significant political power. Second, an alliance between Hamas and Mohammed Dahlan’s camp could create a new center of power within the Palestinian political system, one that Abbas might find difficult to control.
Third, elections held under the current circumstances could turn into a referendum on the PA and its leadership, which is widely regarded as corrupt by the Palestinian public.
On the other hand, postponing the elections would give Abbas additional time to manage the political system, assess developments in Gaza, and attempt to reach internal arrangements within Fatah itself, which remains divided, before the Palestinian public is called upon to make its choice at the ballot box.
There is also a practical problem on the ground: holding Palestinian elections under the current circumstances would be extremely difficult.
In the Gaza Strip, the security situation, the governing mechanism, and the ability to conduct a regular electoral process remain uncertain. In Jerusalem, there is the question of Palestinian voting. Israel opposes allowing residents of East Jerusalem to participate in the elections, while in Area C of the West Bank, Israel could make political and organizational activity more difficult.
From Washington’s perspective, Palestinian elections are not necessarily at the top of the agenda.
The American focus is on the administration of the Gaza Strip and arrangements for the day after the war.
Senior security officials also point to the timing in relation to Israel’s political system. If the Palestinian elections were held shortly after the Israeli Knesset elections, scheduled for October 27, they could coincide with a sensitive period of coalition-building and the formation of a new government.
In such a scenario, Israel could oppose even more strongly the holding of elections in East Jerusalem, Gaza, and parts of the territories under its control.
Senior PA officials say that internal reconciliation within Fatah is the real test. This is why the meetings in Cairo matter, but there has still been no breakthrough in efforts to reconcile with the reformist faction led by Dahlan.
The new reality in Gaza has forced Fatah and Dahlan’s reformist camp to reassess their relationship. For years, the internal split was primarily an organizational and political matter. Now it has become part of the struggle over the shape of the Palestinian political system on the day after the war.
Dahlan’s camp is expected to demand the reinstatement of Fatah members expelled from the movement, the restoration of their rights, the integration of their supporters into Fatah institutions, and agreements on the future distribution of political power.
The two sides may begin with a gradual roadmap: confidence-building measures, an end to their mutual smear campaigns, the establishment of a joint committee to address disputes, and agreement on the rules governing participation in the elections.
Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Jordan want to reunify the Fatah movement, understanding that Fatah’s unity could be a prerequisite for rebuilding the Palestinian national political system.
From these countries’ perspective, continued division within Fatah weakens the PA. It makes it more difficult to establish a Palestinian political framework capable of addressing the challenges of the postwar period.
For this reason, Abbas cannot ignore the demands of Egypt and other key Arab states, partly because he fears doing so could damage his relations with regional actors on whom he depends.
Ultimately, senior Fatah officials say, the question is not simply whether the Palestinians want elections. The real question is whether Abbas will conclude that elections serve his political interests and those of Fatah.
At the present stage, the answer appears to be no.
The Gaza Strip remains unstable, Hamas is seeking a new framework for political participation, Dahlan is gaining strength in the regional arena, and Fatah itself remains divided. Under these circumstances, elections could produce an outcome that Abbas would be unable to control.
Therefore, senior Fatah officials assess that the more likely scenario is postponing the Legislative Council elections to a later date, citing key justifications such as the security and political situation in Gaza, the difficulty of holding elections in East Jerusalem, and the uncertainty surrounding the arrangements for the day after the war.
But postponement also carries a price. If it turns into an indefinite delay, it could deepen the PA’s legitimacy crisis and strengthen the argument that the Fatah leadership is afraid to face the verdict of the voters.
The Bottom Line
Abbas still holds the key to the elections. He can open the door to the ballot box, and he can close it.
The question is whether he will risk an unpredictable outcome at the polls or buy himself additional time by postponing the elections.
The final decision is expected to be made soon.
