Long live the president, holding all the keys to power.

The Central Council meeting adjourned, and at first glance, it seemed as though it had been expected and required: the creation of the position of Vice President. However, a closer examination of the amendment to the organization's bylaws—despite its illegality, given that the body authorized to amend the organization's bylaws is the National Council, which itself terminated its authority when it illegally delegated all its powers to the Central Council in 2018—reveals that the amendment empowers the President to appoint—upon his nomination—a Vice President of the Executive Committee and with the approval of its members. He may also assign him duties, relieve him of his position, and accept his resignation. This does not achieve the objective intended by those pressuring the creation of the position: the appointment of a Vice President with full powers who would act as the President of the Authority during his lifetime (I repeat, during his lifetime) and succeed him after his death. Even the text of the amendment does not guarantee that Hussein al-Sheikh would assume the presidency of the Executive Committee in the event of a vacancy in the position of President of the Organization. The Executive Committee is authorized to elect its President, but not its Vice President! One thing reminds us of another. The previous decree, issued by the president in November 2024, stipulated that the speaker of the National Council would succeed him as president of the Authority, with presidential elections to be held within ninety days, renewable only once. This is a clear violation of the PA's Basic Law, which stipulates that the speaker of the Legislative Council replaces the president in the event of a vacancy in his position, with elections to be held within sixty days, as was the case after the assassination of President Yasser Arafat. If elections are not held due to compelling circumstances, such as those currently underway, or if—and this is the real motivation behind the decree—there is a fear that the candidate selected by the Fatah Central Committee will not win, especially if imprisoned Fatah leader Marwan Barghouti runs against the movement's official candidate, the same pretext that canceled the 2021 elections will be used: the refusal to allow elections to take place in Jerusalem. The above makes clear that the creation of the position of Vice President of the Executive Committee does not come in the context of real reform, which is achieved through comprehensive change that includes the vision, path, strategies, and the activation of virtually frozen institutions, replacing the individuals who are mostly outdated, flabby, and corrupt, injecting new and young blood, and forming a new National Council in which representatives from the various Palestinian groups, as well as women, participate through real and effective representation, and not through a formal response to external pressures. This angered the Palestinians and most of the factions, because it did not achieve what they wanted in terms of reform, unity, and participation in determining their fate. It will not satisfy the United States of America and the regional parties, which have been demanding for some time the creation of a new Palestinian authority and leadership that is more pliable to American and Israeli conditions. They tried to achieve this by appointing a person to head the government from outside those close to and aides to the president with full powers and by transferring the president to an honorary position, as they tried with his predecessor. President Abbas circumvented them and, after long evasions, appointed Muhammad Mustafa, a close associate of his, to form the government. During the previous months, he strengthened his authority by replacing most of the new leaders of the security services and appointing officers in their place. From the presidential guard who are completely loyal to him; meaning that the president is focusing on strengthening his influence and has not delegated his powers to anyone other than himself, and has not decided on his successor because he realizes that the countdown to his term begins with knowing who his successor will be. Therefore, he is now neither with my lady nor with my master. The Central Council, formed to the required standard, achieved what the president wanted, which was to consolidate his presidency and control over the Palestinian political system with its various components. Hussein al-Sheikh, the vice president of the Executive Committee, is the president of the State of Palestine, who was previously elected by the Central Council, not the Executive Committee, and not the vice president of the Authority, who had previously decided by constitutional decree that the president of the National Council would assume the presidency of the Authority for a transitional period. Of course, the president is keen not to decide on a successor and to maintain the competition, but with slow, gradual submission, as he knows that he is indispensable. From here, we chant, "Long live the president who insists on keeping the keys to all power until God decrees a matter that has already been decided without addressing anything, as the strategy of survival and waiting is the undisputed standard.

I don't need anyone to tell me that everything that is happening is illegal and illegitimate. I know that, but it is necessary to expose the legal, not just political, massacre. This is because it cannot be achieved by appealing to the people through elections. All institutions have not been elected for a long time. It is not based on national consensus, nor on the PLO's bylaws, which require the formation of a new National Council long ago. It is not based on the Basic Law, which was completely destroyed when the elected Legislative Council was dissolved before a new one was elected. As for the existing institutions, they are far from conferring legitimacy on anyone, especially after the harvest of continuous failure. The occupation has not been defeated and independence has not been achieved, neither through negotiations and concessions, nor through resistance. This necessitates review, evaluation, and change. "Sons of Dogs" Are Not the Worst Thing That Happened

The most important, dangerous, and worst thing was not the words the president used in his Central Council opening speech. Rather, the most dangerous thing was that he equated Hamas with the occupation in responsibility for the genocide (contrary to the Central Council statement), which held the occupation fully responsible for the genocide and the new Nakba, if not the president holding Hamas more responsible. He demanded that Hamas relinquish power, disarm, hand over its prisoners, and form a political party. In other words, he demanded that Hamas agree to Israel's conditions without achieving anything and without guarantees that anything would be achieved in return. Instead, he presented credentials in the hope that the PA would remain in the West Bank and return to the Gaza Strip. He also demanded that Hamas agree to the commitments to which the PLO is committed.

After all of this, in a strange and surprising paradox, he called for a national dialogue to achieve national reconciliation. A dialogue about what, and the call was not taken seriously by any party! After the speech, which maintained the old principles, continued to deteriorate, and did not open a window of hope, all that remained was the explicit call for Hamas to raise the white flag. If Hamas was responsible for the genocide, before or alongside the occupation, it must be tried, held accountable, and punished, not negotiated for the sake of unity.

You may or may not agree with the Al-Aqsa Intifada, but there is no doubt that the occupation bears full responsibility for its occurrence. It needs no excuses, even though it is ready to exploit any opportunity, as it did. This should not be overlooked, however, as it is necessary to comprehensively and responsibly assess the Al-Aqsa Intifada and hold Hamas accountable (just as all parties must be held accountable for what they did and what they brought the people and the cause to), and for the errors in calculations and assessments it demonstrates, which led to disastrous results.

Generalizing the PA model and transferring it to Gaza is neither an achievement nor a guarantee.

Even if we assume, for the sake of argument, that Hamas has met the president's conditions, can he relinquish his weapons, given that his authority no longer exists in the Gaza Strip, and the occupying power refuses to return them to it? It considers President Mahmoud Abbas, despite all his concessions, to be practicing diplomatic terrorism, and Netanyahu, as he has repeatedly stated, does not differentiate between Hamas, Fatah, and Abbas. In addition to the above, is what is happening in the West Bank a model worthy of generalization to the Gaza Strip? Does the PA in the West Bank have authority, or is the occupation systematically and gradually undermining sovereignty and full security control, leading, as can be deduced from the Israeli government's program and practices, to either disbanding it and establishing local administrations in its place, or completely emptying it of its political, national, and representative content? After the Central Council affirmed, in its last meeting, its decisions taken since its 2015 session, while suspending their implementation, as indicated in the paragraph that discusses the Executive Committee's development of mechanisms to ensure their implementation, the occupation will continue to undermine the PA with greater vigor. This is because the current Israeli government does not want any unified political framework that embodies national identity, reflects the unity of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, keeps the door open to establishing a Palestinian state, even if it cooperates with it, and unilaterally embodies the political, security, and economic obligations arising from the Oslo Accords.

If the decisions taken by the Central Council were serious, particularly regarding reconsidering the relationship with the occupation, Hamas would not have been demonized. Rather, the locks impeding the establishment of national unity would have been quickly opened, based on a single program, a single leadership, a single authority, and a single weapon under the umbrella of a unified PLO. This could be achieved by beginning to implement the decisions of the Beijing Declaration. It's worth noting that dozens of decisions have been taken in the past without being implemented. Even if there were the intention to implement them, this would require a comprehensive national mobilization of all components of the political system, including factions, unions, federations, and various institutions. A state of emergency should also be declared in preparation for the occupying state's response, rather than simply declaring it and maintaining everything as it is. This would be a deliberate attempt to throw dust in the eyes and preserve the old status quo.

To prevent changes at the expense of the Palestinians, there are changes in the region and the world that have occurred and are on their way. We must prepare for them in all their possibilities, including the possibility of reaching an Iranian-American agreement, ending the Ukrainian war, determining the fate of the trade war and the fate of Syria, the continuation or cessation of the genocide, and major deals between the Gulf states and the US administration, which could be accompanied or followed by new Abraham Accords with a large number of Arab and Islamic countries. There is also an international conference in New York next June to push for the establishment of a Palestinian state, in addition to the escalating struggle to shape a new world in which the United States is no longer the sole superpower dominating the world. All these variables require Palestinians to be prepared to interact with them so as not to be the losers, or to minimize losses and maximize available opportunities.

Enemies agree to confront a common enemy.

Palestinian readiness can either be achieved through unity based on national, democratic foundations and genuine partnership. This is impossible in light of the current power map, the official leadership's orientations, and the results of the Central Council, which deepen division and reinforce hegemony, exclusivity, and the lack of clarity in Hamas's vision and priorities. Alternatively, Palestinian readiness can be achieved through agreement on a joint plan to confront genocide, annexation, displacement, and the plan to liquidate the Palestinian cause in all its dimensions. This plan should prioritize reconstruction, implement the Arab plan, and form a unified Palestinian delegation to negotiate under the banner of the PLO. This is difficult, but not impossible, because both ancient and modern history indicate that even enemies have united in the face of a common enemy and an imminent danger that threatens everyone. Will a joint plan be quickly agreed upon to thwart the common danger, or will the spiral of self-destruction remain dominant?