Palestinian Politics and the UN’s ‘Uniting for Peace’ Strategy: A Historical Perspective to Present-Day Dynamics

September 26, 2025

Recent Analysis highlights the increasingly complex obstacles to Palestinian reconciliation, pointing to a shift in leadership and governance that has exacerbated long-standing rifts between Fatah and Hamas. The assessment, based on a detailed discussion with Political Analyst Mouin Rabbani, suggests that a centralized power structure, established after the passing of Yasser Arafat, is a primary factor impeding unity.

The Erosion of Palestinian Authority’s Democratic Foundations

According to Rabbani, the current Palestinian Authority, under Mahmoud Abbas, has evolved into a system that prioritizes alignment with Israeli and Western interests over the needs of the Palestinian people. This transformation, he contends, began with a deliberate consolidation of power by Abbas, effectively diminishing the role of the Palestine Liberation Institution (PLO) and weakening its internal democratic processes.

This centralization reportedly involved limiting decision-making authority and exerting financial influence to suppress dissent and undermine attempts at broad-based reconciliation. Western nations, the analysis suggests, further complicated the situation by consistently recognizing Abbas as the sole legitimate representative while simultaneously isolating Hamas, thereby stifling opportunities for collaborative dialog and power-sharing.

Hamas’s Role and Repeatedly Failed Agreements

While acknowledging Hamas’s demonstrated willingness to consider compromise, Rabbani notes that its overtures were consistently rebuffed by Fatah and the Palestinian Authority leadership. He describes a recurring pattern where agreements, sometimes garnering widespread support, were abruptly abandoned following external pressure from Israel, the United States, or European union member states. This pattern, he argues, has left the Palestinian national movement fractured and increasingly vulnerable.

A Historical Comparison: Arafat Versus Abbas

The analysis draws a stark contrast between the leadership styles of Mahmoud Abbas and his predecessor, Yasser Arafat.Despite Arafat’s own acknowledged flaws, he is portrayed as having prioritized maintaining the PLO as a unifying force for all Palestinians. Abbas, in contrast, is accused of dismantling the institutions that once represented a broad Palestinian consensus, reducing them to instruments of his personal authority.

This shift,Rabbani insists,represents a critical turning point and a detrimental legacy of the post-Oslo era. Did You Know? The Oslo accords, signed in the 1990s, were intended to establish a framework for peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians but have been widely criticized for failing to deliver a lasting resolution.

Gaza Crisis as a Defining Moment

The current crisis unfolding in Gaza is presented as a crucial test for Palestinian unity.Reconciliation is seen not merely as a desirable outcome but as an essential prerequisite for rebuilding representative institutions and replacing leaders perceived to be complicit with the ongoing occupation.Without internal cohesion, Rabbani stresses, Palestinians will struggle to resist israeli aggression or leverage international support effectively.

The core question raised by Rabbani-Can the Palestinian national movement overcome decades of division and perceived betrayal or will it succumb to authoritarianism and occupation?-remains central to the future of the region and the pursuit of justice. Pro Tip: Stay informed about the evolving situation in the Middle East by consulting reputable news sources and self-reliant analyses.

Leadership	Approach to PLO	Relationship with Hamas	External Influence
Yasser Arafat	Preserved as a national umbrella	Engaged in dialogue, despite tensions	Navigated diverse international pressures
Mahmoud Abbas	Diminished role, centralized power	Consistently rejected and isolated	Prioritized alignment with Western and Israeli interests

Understanding the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a protracted dispute over land and self-determination with roots stretching back to the early 20th century. Key issues include the status of Jerusalem, the rights of Palestinian refugees, Israeli settlements in the occupied territories, and the establishment of a viable Palestinian state. The conflict has experienced numerous periods of escalation and de-escalation, with complex negotiations and failed peace initiatives. understanding the historical context and the perspectives of both sides is crucial for comprehending the current challenges. Recent data from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) indicates that approximately 5.9 million Palestinians are registered refugees as of December 2023.

frequently Asked Questions about Palestinian Reconciliation

• What is Palestinian reconciliation? It’s the process of uniting the two main Palestinian political factions, Fatah and Hamas, to form a united government and pursue a common political strategy.
• What are the major obstacles to reconciliation? Internal power struggles, differing ideologies, external interference, and a lack of trust are significant barriers.
• How has Mahmoud Abbas’s leadership impacted reconciliation efforts? Critics argue his centralization of power and prioritization of external alignment have undermined unity.
• What role does Hamas play in the reconciliation process? Hamas has shown some willingness to compromise, but faces rejection from Fatah and international isolation.
• Why is a unified Palestinian front vital? Unity is seen as essential for effectively confronting the Israeli occupation and securing a viable Palestinian state.
• What is the historical context of the division between Fatah and Hamas? the division stemmed from disagreements over strategy and power following the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections and escalated with the 2007 Battle of Gaza.
• What impact does the gaza crisis have on reconciliation efforts? The crisis is both a challenge and a potential catalyst for reconciliation, depending on whether it pushes leaders towards cooperation or further division.

What are your thoughts on the prospects for lasting peace in the region? Share your insights and engage in constructive dialogue in the comments below.

How did the Suez Crisis of 1956 directly contribute to the creation of the ‘Uniting for Peace’ resolution?

Palestinian Politics and the UN’s ‘Uniting for Peace’ Strategy: A Historical Viewpoint to Present-Day Dynamics

The Genesis of ‘Uniting for Peace’ and the 1956 Suez Crisis

The ‘Uniting for Peace’ resolution (UN General Assembly Resolution 997) emerged in 1956, born out of the failures of the UN Security Council to act decisively during the suez Crisis. This crisis, involving Israel, the UK, and France, highlighted a critical flaw: the veto power held by permanent members of the Security Council could paralyze action even in situations demanding urgent international intervention.

* Context: Egypt nationalized the Suez Canal, prompting military responses from Israel, the UK, and France.

* Security Council Impasse: The US and the Soviet Union, wielding veto power, held opposing views, blocking effective Security Council resolutions.

* The Resolution’s Core: ‘Uniting for Peace’ allowed the UN General Assembly to convene in emergency sessions when the Security Council was deadlocked due to a veto, recommending collective measures – including military force – to maintain or restore international peace and security. This was a important, though controversial, expansion of the General Assembly’s authority.

* Early Palestinian Involvement: While not the direct catalyst,the Suez Crisis occurred amidst growing Palestinian nationalism and displacement following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War (Nakba). The crisis underscored the vulnerability of Arab states and the limitations of existing international mechanisms to address Palestinian grievances.

Applying ‘Uniting for Peace’ to the Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: Early Attempts & Limitations

The initial request of ‘Uniting for Peace’ to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict proved complex. The resolution wasn’t designed specifically for protracted conflicts involving national self-determination, but rather for acute international crises.

The 1967 Six-Day War and its Aftermath

Following Israel’s victory in the 1967 Six-Day War and the subsequent occupation of Palestinian territories (West Bank, Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, Golan Heights, and Sinai Peninsula), the UN General Assembly repeatedly invoked ‘Uniting for Peace’.

1. Resolutions & Recommendations: Numerous resolutions were passed, condemning the occupation, calling for Israel’s withdrawal, and affirming the Palestinians’ right to self-determination. Thes resolutions, however, lacked binding enforcement mechanisms.
2. The Role of the PLO: The Palestine Liberation Association (PLO), recognized by many Arab states, sought recognition and observer status at the UN. This was initially resisted by Israel and its allies.
3. limited impact: Despite the flurry of resolutions, the occupation continued, and the political situation remained largely unchanged. ‘Uniting for Peace’ served primarily as a platform for moral condemnation rather than effective action.

The Shift in Dynamics: PLO Recognition and the oslo Accords (1990s)

The 1990s witnessed a significant shift. The First Intifada (1987-1993) brought the Palestinian issue back to the forefront of international attention. the Gulf War (1990-1991) also altered regional dynamics, creating an prospect for renewed peace efforts.

* PLO Recognition: the PLO’s condemnation of Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait paved the way for improved relations with the US and eventual recognition by Israel.

* Oslo Accords: the Oslo Accords (1993-1995) represented a breakthrough,establishing the Palestinian authority (PA) and outlining a framework for interim self-governance in parts of the occupied territories.

* ‘Uniting for Peace’ in a New Context: While the Oslo process was underway, ‘Uniting for Peace’ became less frequently invoked. The focus shifted to direct negotiations and implementation of the accords. Though, the resolution remained a potential fallback mechanism should the peace process falter.

The Post-Oslo Era: Stalled Peace Process and renewed Relevance (2000s – Present)

The collapse of the Oslo process, the second Intifada (2000-2005), and the ongoing expansion of Israeli settlements have led to a renewed sense of frustration and a resurgence in the relevance of ‘Uniting for Peace’.

* Gaza conflicts (2008-2009, 2012, 2014, 2021, 2023): The repeated military conflicts in Gaza, marked by significant civilian casualties, prompted calls for the Security Council to act. When the Security Council was blocked by US vetoes, the General assembly invoked ‘Uniting for Peace’ to pass resolutions condemning the violence and calling for a ceasefire.

* The International criminal Court (ICC): The ICC’s investigation into alleged war crimes in the Palestinian territories has added another layer of complexity. Israel and the US oppose the ICC’s jurisdiction, while Palestinians support it.

* US Vetoes & General Assembly action: The US has consistently used its veto power in the Security Council to shield Israel from censure. this has repeatedly triggered the invocation of ‘Uniting for Peace’ by Arab and Non-aligned Movement (NAM) countries.

* 2023-2024 Gaza War: The scale of the destruction and humanitarian crisis in Gaza following the October 7, 2023 attacks by Hamas and Israel