Institute Experts Urge Biden Administration to Clarify to Palestinian Authority Implications of Hamas Participation in Elections
Clear communication ahead of vote could avert major problems later
The following statement on U.S. policy toward Palestinian Authority elections has been endorsed by Washington Institute experts on the Middle East peace process:
Elections are an important building block of democratic government, and the Biden administration should welcome moves toward the conduct of elections within the Palestinian Authority. However, should the PA decide to conduct elections with the participation of Hamas, this could have significant implications for the ability of the United States to engage constructively with the PA and to advance the cause of Palestinian-Israeli peace. While it is ultimately up to the PA to decide on whether, when, and how it will conduct elections, the United States has its own values, policies, and laws that will determine its willingness and even ability to engage with the PA after these elections. To avoid misunderstandings or miscalculations, the United States should clearly, and at a high level, convey to PA leaders its position on these issues.
In 2006, the PA held elections in which Hamas and its affiliates were allowed to participate without meeting the specific conditions outlined in the Oslo Accords or even renouncing violence. In the end, Hamas and affiliated candidates won the election. As a result, the United States—true to its values—refused to engage the PA until its government met basic conditions including renouncing violence, publicly recognizing Israel, and committing to previous agreements and understandings with the United States and Israel. These requirements mirrored conditions adopted by the international community through the Quartet and were enshrined in the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006. Hamas refused to meet these conditions and, as a result, many aspects of U.S.-PA relations, including aid, had to be curtailed to the detriment of both U.S. policy objectives and the PA itself.
The upcoming PA elections have the potential to produce another outcome that would be a step backward for U.S.-Palestinian relations, given that it appears that Hamas and its affiliates will once again be participating in these elections. At a fundamental level, elections that produce a PA whose ministers and officials include people unwilling to renounce violence, recognize Israel, and abide by past agreements are incompatible with the ultimate objective of a two-state solution. More immediately, such an outcome would complicate the achievement of the objectives set out by the Biden administration. The administration has wisely embarked on a policy of reengaging the PA, including the eventual resumption of aid and focusing on concrete progress on the ground to the benefit of Palestinians and Israel. These policies could be jeopardized since—as a matter of law and policy—the United States cannot engage a PA that does not commit to these conditions.
It is not America’s place to tell the PA whether or not it should hold elections; that is the PA’s decision. But the United States does have a responsibility to make clear to the PA now—before the elections—how the PA’s decision on election participation could impede U.S.-Palestinian relations. To ensure clarity, the United States should:
- Clarify to the PA, at a sufficiently high level, that U.S. law and policy will preclude the development of relations, including the provision of aid, with a PA government that includes Hamas or Hamas-affiliated officials unless those officials clearly and unambiguously affirm their commitment to the conditions outlined above.
- Consult with Israel to ensure that its interests are accounted for and to produce compatible U.S. and Israeli positions.
- Consult with Arab allies, particularly peace partners Jordan and Egypt, but also other Arab stakeholders, including Saudi Arabia as well as Arab countries with whom Israel has peaceful relations.
In 2006, the United States was surprised by the outcome of the PA elections, and the PA for its part did not anticipate the U.S. reaction. This time, with history as a guide, it is important that the PA know that the United States will refuse to engage with a government that fails to require its officials to renounce violence and commit to peaceful resolution of conflict. The principle of ballots or bullets—not ballots and bullets—is a cornerstone of our foreign policy. Washington should not run the risk that the PA fails to appreciate the potential implications of its actions. Clear communication of well-established U.S. law and policy now may help avoid in 2021 a repeat of 2006.
Ghaith al-Omari
Senior Fellow
Katherine Bauer
Blumenstein-Katz Family Fellow
Matthew Levitt
Fromer-Wexler Fellow
Director, Jeanette and Eli Reinhard Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence
David Makovsky
Ziegler Distinguished Fellow
Director, Koret Project on Arab-Israel Relations
Irwin Levy Family Program on the U.S.-Israel Strategic Relationship
David Pollock
Bernstein Fellow
Director, Project Fikra
Dennis Ross
William Davidson Distinguished Fellow
Counselor
Irwin Levy Family Program on the U.S.-Israel Strategic Relationship
Robert Satloff
Executive Director
Howard P. Berkowitz Chair in U.S. Middle East Policy
David Schenker
Senior Fellow