N※N

Palestinian Leadership Struggles to Assert Influence in Gaza

  //politics-government.news-articles.net/content/ .. rship-struggles-to-assert-influence-in-gaza.html
  Published in Politics and Government on Saturday, November 15th 2025 at 15:46 GMT by Washington Examiner

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-11-15 225 x 224 / 9042 Bytes

2025-11-15 224 x 224 / 9350 Bytes

2025-11-15 234 x 216 / 4952 Bytes

2025-11-15 224 x 224 / 7909 Bytes

Palestinian Leadership in Gaza: A Struggle for Influence and Representation

In the volatile political landscape that separates the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, a new chapter has begun to unfold in the struggle for Palestinian unity and representation. The central issue—how to project Palestinian leadership across both territories—has become increasingly fraught as the Palestinian Authority (PA) in Ramallah grapples with the reality that it is largely marginal in Gaza, where Hamas rules with a firm, albeit contested, grip on power. The Washington Examiner’s in‑depth feature, “Palestinian leader struggles for a role in Gaza,” provides a window into this tension, detailing the challenges, the history, and the possible paths forward for a divided Palestinian polity.

A Brief Historical Context

The split between the PA and Hamas has its roots in the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections, when Hamas won a majority in the Palestinian Legislative Council. The international community’s insistence on recognizing only the PA and its insistence on a two‑state solution put pressure on the Hamas‑run Gaza Strip to submit to the PA’s authority. In 2007, however, Hamas expelled PA security forces from Gaza, effectively ending the coexistence that had lasted for almost a decade.

Since that split, the PA has been dominated by the Fatah party, headed by President Mahmoud Abbas, who has been at the helm since 2005. The PA’s international recognition has meant that it receives most of the foreign aid directed at Palestinians, but that aid has been largely channeled to West‑Bank ministries and institutions. Gaza, by contrast, has seen a more complex mix of financial flows, with Hamas receiving significant money from Iran, Qatar, and other sources, as well as a large portion of international donor money that has been redirected to the Strip via NGOs.

The Core Issue: Representation and Legitimacy

The article points out that the PA’s lack of direct governance in Gaza has left it with limited tools to influence policies or to negotiate on behalf of Palestinians in that region. For instance, the PA has no direct control over the security forces that patrol Gaza's borders, nor does it have a say over Hamas’s domestic governance. This disconnect creates a perception among Gazans that the PA is out of touch and that it cannot represent their interests—especially when it comes to negotiations with Israel.

Meanwhile, Hamas, which controls Gaza’s internal affairs, also lacks the same level of international legitimacy that the PA enjoys. The PA’s diplomatic clout, its membership in the Arab League, and its recognition by the European Union give it leverage in diplomatic channels that Hamas cannot match. Thus, the PA is in a position where it can influence international discourse but cannot affect day‑to‑day realities in Gaza; Hamas can govern on the ground but is often excluded from official diplomatic negotiations.

The Washington Examiner article highlights that these two realities create a “dead‑lock” for Palestinians as a whole. When the international community insists on negotiating with the PA, Gaza’s political voice is muted. When Hamas insists on being the sole negotiating partner, the PA—and the West Bank—feels sidelined. The two sides also vie for donor money, leading to a competition that can, at times, undermine the effectiveness of humanitarian and development efforts.

The Role of Key Palestinian Actors

The feature also delves into the current figures at the helm of the PA and Hamas. Mahmoud Abbas, who has been in office for nearly two decades, faces mounting pressure to rejuvenate the PA’s appeal among younger Palestinians. His aging leadership and perceived inability to bring tangible results have alienated many of his constituents, especially in the West Bank’s East Jerusalem. On the Gaza side, the “political bureau” of Hamas—composed of senior leaders—holds ultimate decision‑making authority. Within that bureau, figures such as Ismail Haniyeh, who leads the political wing of Hamas, have sought to present themselves as the face of Palestinian aspirations, albeit with a heavy emphasis on resistance narratives.

Another layer to the conflict is the role of the Palestinian National Council (PNC), the legislative body that is supposed to bring together the West Bank and Gaza under a unified parliament. While the PNC has held a few meetings since the split, the last meeting in 2014 did not include any members from Gaza due to security concerns. The Washington Examiner notes that the PNC’s failure to bridge the divide has contributed to a sense of fragmentation among Palestinians, making it more difficult for any single leader to claim authority over the entire Palestinian people.

The Diplomatic and Aid Dimensions

One of the most striking aspects the article brings up is the way in which international aid and diplomacy intersect with internal Palestinian politics. The PA, being recognized as the official representative of the Palestinian people, channels most of its aid through UN agencies and European donors. Gaza, on the other hand, receives aid via a complicated web of NGOs and sometimes directly from donor governments, with the PA’s involvement largely limited to a small advisory role.

This dual aid structure creates a paradox: Gaza receives more money on a per‑capita basis than the West Bank, yet the PA’s lack of authority means it cannot coordinate relief and development programs effectively. The Washington Examiner also highlights that this has led to a situation where, in the eyes of many Palestinians, the PA has become more of a bureaucratic entity than a genuine representative body. The article cites the 2019 “humanitarian‑aid gap” that grew when aid for Gaza became tied to UNRWA funding, which has traditionally been under PA oversight. Because the PA has limited jurisdiction in Gaza, UN agencies and NGOs often have to operate independently, which can create inconsistencies in program delivery.

Possible Pathways Forward

The article does not shy away from potential solutions. It discusses proposals to reintegrate the Palestinian political system through a new Palestinian unity government, a suggestion that would involve both Fatah and Hamas sharing power. Others advocate for a purely negotiated settlement where Hamas is allowed to participate in formal diplomatic channels, possibly by adopting a “peace‑and‑resistance” platform that would align more closely with the PA’s diplomatic language. Yet there is a recognition that each of these options carries significant risks and would require a massive shift in political will from both sides.

The Washington Examiner points out that some leaders within Hamas have expressed willingness to enter a “new political framework” that includes the PA, but the PA’s leadership remains skeptical of such an arrangement. For instance, Abbas’s stance is that any such unity government must be built on the foundations of Palestinian sovereignty and the right of return, whereas Hamas’s political wing insists on the legitimacy of the resistance narrative as the core of any political deal.

Conclusion

Palestinian leadership in Gaza remains a complex, multifaceted problem rooted in history, ideology, and geopolitics. The Washington Examiner’s article lays out a clear portrait of a nation split between two political systems that are inextricably linked to their respective relationships with the international community. The PA’s lack of authority in Gaza, combined with Hamas’s limited diplomatic recognition, creates a stalemate that affects everything from humanitarian aid to international negotiations.

While there are clear proposals for reconciliation—whether through unity governments, shared diplomatic representation, or a re‑imagined political partnership—any move toward a cohesive Palestinian leadership will require not just policy shifts but a cultural change in how each faction views the other. Until such a change occurs, the struggle for a legitimate, unified Palestinian voice in Gaza will continue to be a central theme in the broader Israeli‑Palestinian conflict.