New Cabinet?
by: Ghassan Khatib**
Finally, on August 5, PA president Arafat announced the details of his long-awaited cabinet reshuffle. The immediate impression gained is that this reshuffle does not represent any significant positive change at all, but is an indicator instead of negative change and unusual political and administrative weakness within the Palestinian Authority.
One of the most striking features of the reshuffle is that it has deepened the Fateh “color” of the cabinet at the expense of non-Fateh and independent representatives “ 'Abdel Jawwad Saleh, Bashir Barghouti and Samir Ghousheh. This marks the continuation of an emerging trend in the Palestinian political system of domination by the ruling party “ Fateh “ and reflects as well the growing isolation of this Authority and the ruling party within both Palestinian society and the political spectrum.
Another very obvious feature of this cabinet reshuffle is that it does not respond in any way to the underlying reasons for the Palestinian Legislative Council's calls for ministerial changes. One year ago, the Council released a report known as the “corruption report”, in which many cabinet members were accused “ by name “ of corruption and/or inefficiency and poor performance. The Council's strongly worded recommendation was that the president should dissolve his cabinet and replace it with credible, qualified ministers. Arafat has finally responded, but the change does not remove from the cabinet the names accused by the legislature of corruption or inefficiency, neither does it bring in any new ministers with greater credibility or efficiency. So it is hard to assume, if the previous cabinet suffered from corruption and poor performance, that this new cabinet will be any different.
The reshuffle also disappointed some analysts, including this writer, who were hoping that it might be used by Arafat to serve a higher political aim, introducing strong, credible elements into the cabinet in order to send a message to the Israelis and the Americans that the stalemate in the peace process could bring about a stronger Palestinian political position. Such expectations have been disappointed.
The old game of neutralizing critics through absorption continues: Rafiq Natsheh, Hikmat Zeid, and Nabil 'Amr, all critical and sometimes outspoken Fateh LC members, are examples of this strategy, which is aimed at reducing the criticisms in the Council and Council pressure on the Executive Authority.
Finally, despite the amount of time it took to formulate the new cabinet, Arafat failed to find ministers for Waqf affairs or information, left the education ministry without a minister, and “ probably to avoid annoying anyone “ instead of removing ministers who lost their cabinet positions, he allowed them to retain their status through the designation “minister of state”, a post which can serve no practical purpose except to ensure loyalty and salaries.
** Director of Jerusalem Media & Communication Centre, Lecturer at Bir Zeit University, and member of the delegation to the Madrid Middle East Peace Conference and Washington bilateral negotiations.