• Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Europe logoCarnegie lettermark logo
EUUkraine
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [],
  "type": "pressRelease",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "MEP",
  "programs": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Middle East",
    "Israel",
    "Palestine"
  ],
  "topics": []
}
REQUIRED IMAGE

REQUIRED IMAGE

Press Release

Peace process cannot move forward without Palestinian unity government

Efforts to move the Israeli–Palestinian peace process forward will fail if the U.S. continues to marginalize or ignore Hamas. A national unity government—which would require a slower approach to the peace process and depends on difficult concessions—is the only promising solution.

Link Copied
Published on Jun 3, 2009

WASHINGTON, June 3—Efforts to move the Israeli–Palestinian peace process forward will fail if the United States continues to marginalize or ignore Hamas. A national unity government—which would require a slower approach to the peace process than the Obama administration would like and depends on difficult concessions—is the only promising solution, explains a new commentary by Nathan Brown.

Key Conclusions:

  • The split between the Palestinian factions—Hamas in Gaza and Fatah in Ramallah—has no easy solution.
  • Elections will likely be an outcome of reconciliation, rather than the means to achieve it. Elections face almost insurmountable logistical and legal challenges, and even if Fatah and Hamas were to agree on the conditions, Israeli cooperation would be required.
  • There is little hope for removing Hamas from power in Gaza. Previous policies aimed at doing so—an economic blockade, U.S. security assistance to Fatah, and Israeli military action—have failed.
  • Neither Hamas nor Fatah are anxious for a national unity government. A sustained and coordinated effort by international actors—particularly the United States, Europe, and Egypt—is needed to break the stalemate.

Brown concludes:

“The new leadership in Washington is refreshingly bold in its tactics but far more conventional in its strategies. Its new approach (especially on settlements) has already attracted attention in the region. But thus far its public policy toward Gaza remains unrealistic: demanding that Hamas change and treating the movement as if it does not exist until it does so. It is difficult to envision how the Obama administration’s initiatives can gain full traction until it develops more realistic ideas on Gaza."

###


NOTES

  • Click here to read the full commentary
  • 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 to provide analysis and recommendations in both English and Arabic that are deeply informed by knowledge and views from the region.
  • The Carnegie Middle East Center based in Beirut, Lebanon, aims to better inform the process of political change in the Middle East.
  • Carnegie's Arab Reform Bulletin offers a monthly analysis of political and economic developments in Arab countries.
  • Press Contact: Jessica Jennings, 202/939-2265, jjennings@ceip.org
Middle EastIsraelPalestine

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.

More Work from Carnegie Europe

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europe on Iran: Gone with the Wind

    Europe’s reaction to the war in Iran has been disunited and meek, a far cry from its previously leading role in diplomacy with Tehran. To avoid being condemned to the sidelines while escalation continues, Brussels needs to stand up for international law.

      Pierre Vimont

  • Paper
    How EU Foreign Policy Turned Regional

    The EU’s engagement with the rest of the world has become increasingly uneven. To chase the ambition of a global Europe, the second von der Leyen commission must leverage funds and diplomatic tools to play a more cohesive role in shaping international affairs.

      • Francesco Siccardi

      Francesco Siccardi

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Are Europe’s New Asylum Policies a Betrayal of its Values?

    Hard-line approaches to asylum policy are increasingly common, with crackdowns proposed even by parties that traditionally hold liberal views on migration. Does this shift represent a break with Europe’s fundamental values?

      Thomas de Waal

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Should the EU Seek a Seat on Trump’s Gaza Board of Peace?

    Despite holding significant leverage, the EU remains sidelined in ongoing diplomacy around the Gaza peace plan. How can the union overcome internal divisions to take a more active role?

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Commentary
    Erdoğan and Trump: Affinity over Discord

    Erdoğan and Trump’s meeting served both leaders’ domestic and personal agendas. For Europe, it highlights how America’s transactional approach risks sidelining allies and empowering authoritarians.

      Marc Pierini

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
Carnegie Europe logo, white
Rue du Congrès, 151000 Brussels, Belgium
  • Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Gender Equality Plan
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.