Mahmoud Abbas’s decision to appoint Raed Abu al-Humus as overseer of the security payment system highlights the persistence of long-standing challenges within the Palestinian Authority (PA).
Key Takeaways
- Mahmoud Abbas appointed Raed Abu al-Humus, a convicted terrorist, to manage the PA’s payment system for security prisoners.
- The Palestinian Authority is under international scrutiny for continuing terror payments despite claims of reform.
- Global partners question Abbas’s commitment to meaningful reforms following the removal of the “martyrs’ fund.”
- The ongoing funding for families of terrorists remains a significant point of contention affecting the PA’s global relations.
Abbas’s Decision Under Scrutiny
Mahmoud Abbas’s appointment of Raed Abu al-Humus has raised international eyebrows. Al-Humus, a convicted terrorist, now heads the restructured system replacing another controversial figure, Qadura Fares. While Abbas announced reforms by closing the “martyrs’ fund,” assurances from Palestinian officials that payments to families of those involved in terrorism persist, keep critics skeptical. This controversial move tests the patience of international donors concerned about their aid supporting terror.
Despite promises of reform, the global community doubts Abbas’s intentions. His decree seemingly aligns with demands from the United States and Israel to end the incentivization of violence. However, many in Palestine view these payments as compensations for sacrifices made in the struggle against Israel. The PA, established under the Oslo Accords in 1993, has prioritized funding such terrorism-related compensations over peace offers, further complicating its relations with international allies.
International and Regional Reactions
The dismissal of Qadura Fares without explanation, and subsequent criticisms from Hamas, who termed it as “oppression and exclusion,” add to the domestic and international discontent. Hamas accuses Abbas of succumbing to “Zionist and American dictates,” straining relations further. Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority faces allegations of being a “pay-for-slay” clearinghouse, an accusation that heavily undermines peace efforts.
“The problem is the Palestinian Authority believes that terrorists are the most honored people, and they still believe they’re the most honored people. They are not saying they’ve decided it’s wrong to reward terrorists. They are saying that this [reform] is something we were forced to do because we’re in a financial crisis. That’s why there’s no meaning to this, and that’s why there’s no reason for any optimism,” said Itamar Marcus, the director of Palestinian Media Watch.
Abbas has reaffirmed his controversial support, stating, “Even if we only have one cent left, it will go to the prisoners and martyrs.” This prioritization of terrorism-linked payments over genuine reforms symbolizes a continued stance that defies international pressure for policy changes. Abbas’s unpopularity among Palestinians exacerbates the situation, with the populace viewing his administration as corrupt and autocratic.
Impact on Global Support and PA’s Future
With the PA using diplomatic and accounting maneuvers to continue funding families of “martyrs” and terrorists, its international standing remains precarious. This has led to U.S.-imposed sanctions under the Taylor Force Act that suspended American aid to the PA. Simultaneously, Israeli law targets terrorism payments by deducting these from tax revenues transferred to the PA. Despite these measures, many released prisoners still enjoy numerous benefits, effectively nullifying the intended impacts of the reforms.
“We repeat and emphasize that we are proud of the sacrifice of the martyrs. They must receive everything as in the past, for they are more precious than all of us put together,” Abbas said.
As the number of eligible “martyrs” and prisoners swell amid ongoing conflict, the issue becomes more profound. The PA’s history of financing terrorism in the guise of social responsibilities continues to drag it into financial and diplomatic challenges. Current events hint at no significant amelioration, as key officials involved in these payments remain unchanged. Without concrete action, the possibility of genuine reform seems distant, threatening the PA’s future.
