• Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Europe logoCarnegie lettermark logo
EUNATO
  • Donate
Palestinian Presidential Elections

Source: Getty

Article

Palestinian Presidential Elections

A presidential election in Palestine will not take place until Fatah and Hamas reach consensus—and Israel permits it—resulting in a deadlock with no clear path toward political reconciliation. In a question and answer guide, Nathan Brown offers an analysis of Palestinian law and the core disagreements between the Palestinian factions that cast doubt on President Mahmud Abbas’s political future.

Link Copied
By Nathan J. Brown
Published on Jul 15, 2008

Additional Links

Full Text PDF (English)Full Text PDF (Arabic)

A presidential election in Palestine will not take place until both Fatah and Hamas reach consensus—and Israel permits it—resulting in a deadlock with no clear path toward political reconciliation.  In a new question and answer guide, Nathan Brown offers an analysis of Palestinian law and the core disagreements between the Palestinian factions that cast new doubt on President Mahmud Abbas’s political future.

Hamas insists Abbas’s term expires in 2009, while Fatah points to 2010. While Abbas was elected in 2005 and the Palestinian Basic Law sets a four-year term for the presidency, parliament passed an election law in 2005 that calls for the parliament and president to be elected together. Parliament’s four year term expires in 2010.

Key Conclusions:

  • Elections cannot be held unless Palestinian government agencies cooperate. Hamas controls certain agencies in the Gaza Strip while Fatah controls them in the West Bank. 
  • Parliament is unlikely to pass legislation to clarify the issue. Hamas has a clear majority, but cannot muster a quorum as Israel holds many of its deputies. If parliament does pass legislation, Hamas lacks the votes to override the likely presidential veto.
  • There is little hope for judicial intervention in the dispute. The law creating a constitutional court itself remains in legal limbo, while Hamas will not accept a ruling from the High Court as legitimate.
  • Israeli attitudes towards Hamas’s participation in elections has hardened over the last two years. Holding elections without Israeli cooperation is difficult as they control east Jerusalem as well as some areas of the West Bank.
  • Hamas and Fatah argue different interpretations of what will happen when Abbas’s term expires. Hamas argues that the presidency passes on an interim basis to the parliamentary speaker, while Fatah holds that Abbas retains control until new elections are held.

About the Author

Nathan J. Brown

Nonresident Senior Fellow, Middle East Program

Nathan J. Brown, a professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University, is a distinguished scholar and author of nine books on Arab politics and governance, as well as editor of five books.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Looking Past the Wall on Palestine-Israel

      Nathan J. Brown

  • Commentary
    Rubble is Israel’s Doctrine, Not a Case of Improvisation

      Nathan J. Brown

Nathan J. Brown
Nonresident Senior Fellow, Middle East Program
Nathan J. Brown
Middle EastIsraelPalestinePolitical ReformDemocracy

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
    The Climate Blind Spot in Europe’s New Migration Pact

    The EU’s new migration policy is not suited to today’s realities. With climate change increasingly becoming a driver of displacement, Europe needs to rethink its deterrence-focused approach.

      • Shana Tabak headshot

      Shana Tabak

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Are Western Democracies Failing Free Speech?

    The battle over free speech has taken center stage since U.S. Vice President JD Vance accused Europe of censorship. From travel bans to social media regulation, especially around the Israel-Palestine conflict, are liberal democratic governments weaponizing free speech?

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    In the Middle East, Europeans Bow Down to the United States

    Europe seems to have accepted its sidelining in the Middle East. The EU must reassert its support for the international rules-based order and step up engagement.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Europe Should Not Let Nuclear Nonproliferation Die

    Amid uncertainty caused by the Iran war, the global drive for nonproliferation has stalled. With Europe diplomatically marginalized and countries reassessing their nuclear options, efforts to curb the spread of nuclear weapons risk becoming irrelevant.

      • Jane Darby Menton

      Jane Darby Menton

  • Europe flags citizens demonstration
    Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    EU Enlargement Forgets Europeans

    Preparing candidate countries for EU membership is no longer enough. As the enlargement process becomes a reality, the union must also prepare its own societies.

      Iliriana Gjoni

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.