Palestinian Institutions Must be Rebuilt for Peace Process to Move Forward
The Middle East peace process will fail unless Palestinian political institutions are rebuilt. The rebuilding of viable political structures to represent and serve the Palestinians is the only way to move beyond the current political stalemate and the failed effort to build a Palestinian state.
Link Copied
Published on Feb 19, 2008
WASHINGTON, Feb 15—The Middle East peace process will fail unless Palestinian political institutions are rebuilt, argues a new paper from the Carnegie Endowment. The rebuilding of viable political structures to represent and serve the Palestinians is the only way to move beyond the current political stalemate and the failed effort to build a Palestinian state.
In The Road Out of Gaza, Palestinian expert Nathan J. Brown discusses the economic and political disarray not only in Gaza and the West Bank but within Hamas and Fatah as well, and argues that the international efforts to rebuild Palestine are in reality counterproductive. Brown suggests a long-term international strategy based on restoring Palestinian institutions, encouraging a Fatah–Hamas agreement, and emphasizing regional diplomacy.
Key Conclusions:
An agreement must be reached between Hamas and Fatah—there is little chance for a military victory by either side. For this to be accomplished, Hamas must relax its hold on Gaza but be allowed to return to the cabinet.
Constitutional rule based on the terms of Basic Law must be restored and legitimate elections held. Hamas will then either have to deliver on its campaign promises of change or face voters in the parliamentary elections due in 2010.
Regional diplomacy must be emphasized. While Hamas does not listen to the United States and Israel, it does respond to Egypt and Saudi Arabia, who have their own concerns over Hamas’ rise.
Restoration of Palestinian institutions requires a degree of calm on the Israel–Palestinian front. Israel will need to be convinced that the cease-fire offers both short and long term benefits. Israeli leaders are oddly far more open to this idea than U.S. leaders.
“The risks of a strategy of ensnaring Hamas in traps laid by public opinion (expressed in part through elections), Arab diplomacy, and Palestinian political procedures are very real. But the path seems far more likely to pay off—both in security and diplomatic terms—than the current strategy of total isolation, abstract diplomacy, aid, and intermittent military operations,” concludes Brown.
Nathan J. Brown is director of the Institute for Middle East Studies at George Washington University, a nonresident senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment, and a distinguished scholar and author of four well-received books on Arab politics.
The Carnegie Middle East Program combines in-depth local knowledge with incisive comparative analysis to examine economic, socio-political, and strategic interests in the Arab world. Through detailed country studies and the exploration of key cross-cutting themes, the Carnegie Middle East Program, in coordination with the Carnegie Middle East Center, provides analysis and recommendations in both English and Arabic that are deeply informed by knowledge and views from the region. The Carnegie Middle East Program has special expertise in political reform and Islamist participation in pluralistic politics throughout the region.
The Carnegie Middle East Center is a public policy think tank and research center based in Beirut , Lebanon. Bringing together senior researchers from the region, the Carnegie Middle East Center aims to better inform the process of political change in the Middle East and deepen understanding of the issues the region and its people face.
The Arab Reform Bulletin addresses political reform in the Middle East. Sent monthly, it offers analysis from U.S.-based and Middle Eastern political experts, as well as news synopses and annotated resource guides. The Arab Reform Bulletin is published in English and Arabic.
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
Malaysia’s chairmanship sought to fend off short-term challenges while laying the groundwork for minimizing ASEAN’s longer-term exposure to external stresses.
In July 2025, Vietnam and China held their first joint army drill, a modest but symbolic move reflecting Hanoi’s strategic hedging amid U.S.–China rivalry.
The Thai-Cambodian conflict highlights the limits to China's peacemaker ambition and the significance of this role on Southeast Asia’s balance of power.
