What Elkin didn’t say about a PA collapse

For once I find myself agreeing with Minister Ze’ev Elkin, at least in part. There is indeed a serious danger that the Palestinian Authority will collapse, as the Immigrant Absorption and Jerusalem minister told The Times of Israeli Monday. And the current terror wave is indeed apparently just a promo for a bigger storm that also threatens to lead to the collapse of the PA. But Minister Elken elegantly sidestepped three basic issues: Israel’s role in the current state of affairs, the ability to prevent the collapse, and, above all, what alternative is Elkin is offering to the PA?

So let’s assume for a moment that the PA collapses or is disbanded. Not, heaven forbid, because the Israeli government isn’t interested in entering talks towards a two-state solution and is undermining the PA’s position. Rather, as Elkin casts it, as a result of some kind of natural evolutionary process. Because anarchy will supposedly set in after Abu Mazen’s departure, a situation, Elkin said, that needed to be addressed with antibiotics not headache tablets. What “antibiotics” is Elkin talking about? Who are the “new players” that he said need to be identified? Does Elkin listen to what the defense establishment is telling him? Or is he perhaps envisioning Hamas as a party with whom to hold future negotiations?

There are no “new players” today, and there is no “antibiotic” for a terminal patient. There is perhaps one effective solution in the event of a PA collapse, but Elkin, in his wisdom, avoids saying it out loud: re-occupying the territory. Yes, an Israeli military takeover of West Bank cities with the re-imposition of military rule, just as things were prior to the Oslo accords. But that’s not something Elkin wants to say. He would rather throw dust in his supporters’ eyes and imply that there are other wonder drugs we have somehow not yet heard of, and that he chooses not to say out loud. No one in the Likud, including Elkin, wants to talk about an Israeli return to the Palestinian cities.

And now, after we’ve agreed with Elkin, it’s time also for some points of contention.
The potential collapse or disbanding of the PA is not some preordained act of God. It’s a result of diplomatic gridlock. And as long as the Israeli government doesn’t sincerely engage in negotiations, the future of the PA is indeed bleak. But the government of Israel has the ability to change this, not, perhaps, with its current coalition composition, but it is still possible. Further, and perhaps this is also something Elkin prefers not to say out loud, “today’s terror” — and this is what the professionals are saying — can fade, it can die down, if Israel’s government puts forward a blueprint for a diplomatic process.

But, as I said, Elkin “forgot” to mention this. And here’s another thing that everyone in the defense establishment and government may not agree on: The day after Abu Mazen’s departure. There is, of course, a likelihood of violent eruptions and chaos. But there’s another view of how things would shake out and it is this: Fatah, as a political body, will aim above all to survive. Therefore, just as it happened after Arafat died in November 2004, when the situation on the ground was even shakier than it is today, Fatah will ultimately manage to agree upon and unite around a successor to Abas. That may not be a simple or easy process, but as with Israeli politicians, Palestinian politicians prefer, as the cliche goes, to hang together rather than hang separately.