- ‘Welcome to the edge of freedom’: Biden’s boots touch down in DMZ
- Obama: Hole U.S. ‘digging out of’ requires billions more in unemployment benefits
- Obama’s regulatory agenda will cost U.S. economy $143B next year: report
- Patriot Act author on James Clapper: Fire, prosecute him
- Russia P.M. Medvedev: No amnesty for political prisoners
- Michigan GOP Senate hopeful reminds government is the ‘servant’
- Christmas, by Congress: Members mull a 15-cent tax on trees
- U.S. unemployment falls to five-year low of 7 percent; 203K jobs added
- World mourns Nelson Mandela and celebrates his life; burial set for Dec. 15
- Bill O’Reilly reminds: Nelson Mandela ‘was a communist’
MOWBRAY: Caution sign for Palestinian pact
Fatah linkup with terror-prone Hamas could end U.S. funds
While most of the Arab world has zigged, the Palestinian establishment has zagged. As “Arab streets” rise up and many of their governments are teetering or have fallen, the two rival Palestinian factions - the terrorist organization Hamas and the “moderate” Fatah party - are attempting a unity government that would ensure continued power for the society’s favored few.
Fatah’s leader, Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas, may have started a unity process to stave off possible grass-roots uprisings, or perhaps he wanted to unite all of Palestinian society in advance of a possible United Nations resolution in September that would unilaterally declare Palestinian statehood. Regardless, he apparently was not terribly concerned about the U.S. reaction.
Given how long it has taken President Obama to act decisively in more pressing situations in Egypt and Libya, no one is expecting the White House to act quickly to derail the internal Palestinian pact.
But that won’t stop Congress from swinging into action.
Even with Congress in recess last week, top Democratic Reps. Nita M. Lowey and Gary L. Ackerman, both from New York, wasted no time in condemning any partnership with Hamas and vowing congressional action.
The least of the PA’s concerns would be losing direct funding, which is only a fraction of overall U.S. support.
Although current law allows the president a national security waiver to release funds to a Hamas-partnered government, Mr. Obama would face a rebellion within his own party from hawkish members and most of the Jewish members, many of whom hold very senior positions. It is difficult to conceive of Mr. Obama picking a high-profile fight with his own party heading into a re-election effort in which he can’t afford to squander votes.
One of the first casualties beyond direct funding would seem to be the U.S. training of Palestinian security forces, led by Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton. Those forces are being trained, in essence, to fight Hamas - a goal that would be rendered moot.
The biggest chunk of “indirect” aid to the Palestinians comes through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which has been helping the Palestinians build physical and civilian infrastructure. USAID has been much more active in the West Bank than in Gaza since Hamas rose to power, mostly to strengthen the “moderate” Fatah party relative to Hamas and to help prepare for statehood.
With Hamas possibly linking arms with Fatah, that rationale no longer holds. At the very least, Congress is likely to tighten restrictions on USAID even further to prevent any strengthening of Hamas or its affiliates.
“It’s important for the Palestinians to understand that the entirety of their U.S. foreign aid is at risk,” warns Rep. Steven R. Rothman, New Jersey Democrat, who sits on the foreign aid spending panel and is responsible for drafting many of the restrictions designed to prevent funding of entities affiliated with Hamas or other terrorist groups. “But first we need to step back and take a look at what this unity government means and how long it lasts.”
Whether or not a unity government actually happens - one proposed in 2009 fell apart and the “successful” unity in 2007 ended four months later in a bloody Hamas coup in Gaza - Congress is certain to put all Palestinian funding under a microscope.
Because this has happened before, there already are structures in place to deal with a Hamas-partnered government. The reaction this time around, however, likely will be much harsher than in 2007, noted a Republican Hill staffer, “because that followed an election that we supported and Hamas won.” This time around, no such justification exists.
Congress also could look closer to home to apply pressure. The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) mission in Washington, which opened in 1994, enjoyed an upgrade in status last summer - essentially a step toward formal diplomatic relations - a major political victory.
Now it could be closed.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
Get Breaking Alerts
- Bill OReilly reminds: Nelson Mandela was a communist
- Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement
- Obama: Hole U.S. 'digging out of' requires billions more in unemployment benefits
- Snow storm sucker punch: U.S. hit by winter wave
- Syria mess may spawn 'Islamic emirate' world must deal with, says Iraq's top diplomat
- U.S. pilot scares off Iranians with 'Top Gun'-worthy stunt: 'You really ought to go home'
- Hack attack: 2 million Facebook, Twitter passwords stolen
- U.S. debt jumps a record $328 billion tops $17 trillion for first time
- GORDON: Purging America's military
- Obamacare's bold vision turns murky: Health reform downsized, promises broken