The 2005 Palestinian Elections: New Era for Middle East Peace?

Jan. 26, 2005

The election of Mahmoud Abbas Jan. 9 as president of the Palestinian Authority - succeeding the late Yasser Arafat with 62 percent of the vote - marks what many hope will be a new era of peace for both the Palestinian people and the Middle East.

During meetings with President Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen, and Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter-leader of the Carter Center-National Democratic Institute election observation delegation-urged both leaders to utilize the post-election momentum in pursuit of a peace agreement.

On Jan. 26, Israeli and Palestinian officials met in Jerusalem - ending Israel's two-week ban on diplomatic contacts - and resumed discussions on a possible peace summit between the two countries. Earlier, President Abbas announced a provisional cease-fire agreement with Hamas, following Israel's agreement to end targeted killings of senior members of Palestinian militant groups-a key demand of the Palestinian Authority.

In addition to President Carter, delegation leaders included Christine Todd Whitman, former governor of New Jersey, and Carl Bildt, former prime minister of Sweden. The 80-member multinational delegation included elected officials, electoral and human rights experts, regional specialists, and political and civic leaders from 15 countries in North America, Europe, Africa, and Asia. NDI and The Carter Center previously organized a delegation co-led by President Carter for the 1996 elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council and president of the Palestinian Authority.

The Camp David Accords, a peace agreement between Egyptian President Anwar al-Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin, were a major achievement of the Carter administration. President Carter's dedication to promoting peace in the Middle East continues today through the work of The Carter Center, monitoring elections, promoting human rights, and conflict resolution.

In the following Q&A, Carter Center experts Matthew Hodes, director of the Conflict Resolution Program, and David Carroll, acting director of the Democracy Program - both members of the Carter Center-NDI observer delegation to the Jan. 9, 2005, Palestinian presidential elections - discuss the election process, its outcome, and the wider implications for Middle East peace.

What was the role of observers in the Palestinian elections, and why was their presence important?

Carroll: In the Palestinian elections, as in many other elections, Carter Center observers played an important role by demonstrating the interest and support of the international community and by providing an independent assessment of the character of the electoral process. The presence of impartial and respected observer groups helps build confidence that the process is conducted transparently and without interference. In the West Bank and Gaza, observer reports by The Carter Center and others confirmed the election went smoothly and without significant problems, in spite of the difficult conditions arising from occupation and ongoing conflict. Overall, Carter Center observers concluded the Palestinian people were able to express their political will without serious hindrance.

By focusing not only on the electoral process, but also on the broader context of electoral and political institutions, international observers underscore the importance of developing strong democratic Institutions that are responsive to the will of the people.

Read More:
The Palestinian Elections and The Carter Center

• President Carter's Trip Report
  
• Preliminary Statement of the NDI and Carter Center International Election Observer Delegation to the Jan. 9, 2005, Palestinian Presidential Election, Jan. 10, 2005
  
• Learn about the Carter Center's ongoing work in the Palestinian Authority

What is the significance of this election to the prospect of Palestinian self-governance?

Carroll: Yasser Arafat's death provided an opportunity for a new era of democratic leadership and governance for the Palestinian people. While the 1996 elections, which The Carter Center observed, were a milestone in moving toward democracy, the 2005 election took place in a dramatically different context. The field of candidates was competitive, and the elections provided Palestinians with an opportunity to select new leaders who they intend to hold accountable on a range of concerns. The successful presidential election sets the stage for the important upcoming elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council in July and for additional municipal elections scheduled to take place this year. If completed successfully, this cycle of elections will yield new political leadership, reflecting broad participation among Palestinians and with full potential for independent self-government.

What does this election mean to democracy in the region?

Carroll: Many people see the Jan. 9 presidential election as an opportunity for a new leader to recommit to the peace process and make real progress in negotiations with Israel. In addition, however, the election sets an important example for the Arab world; it shows Arab peoples and leaders that citizens' yearnings for democracy can and should be met, and that democratic renewal strengthens political legitimacy. Further, like the recent elections in Indonesia, the Palestinian election is a reminder that Islam and democracy are not incompatible.

What was President Carter's role in mediating the terms of voting in Jerusalem?

Carroll: During the morning of the election, it became apparent that the voting lists used in the six post offices in East Jerusalem bore no correlation to the voters who were seeking to vote. In one location, by 11 a.m., not one voter of some 45 who had shown up appeared on the voter list. These six post office sites were selected as a result of a political compromise between the Palestinians and the Israelis. There are many Palestinians living in East Jerusalem who wished to vote. For the Israelis, having the voting take place at post offices allowed them to consider the votes as similar to casting 'absentee ballots.' These post office polling sites were of particular concern to us because there were problems in such sites in 1996, and earlier this year the Israelis shut down registration there.

Hodes: At one post office we visited with President Carter, tensions were rising as people were becoming very upset because they were not being allowed to vote.

President Carter decided to go to Ramallah and take the matter up with the Central Election Commission. He recommended that all registered voters who were supposed to vote in East Jerusalem should be able to in any of the six designated post offices.

The Palestinians were interested in the proposal, but since Israeli postal officials were responsible for administering the vote at these locations, they had to negotiate the terms for doing so with the Israeli government. This process took hours, and President Carter called Prime Minister Sharon's senior advisor, Dov Weisglass, several times while we were sitting in Ramallah.

Carroll: Ultimately, the Palestinians and Israelis agreed that voters who could show they were Jerusalem residents and who had proper registration documents could vote even if they were not on a particular voter list, as long as they provided their names to foreign observers selected by the Palestinians. While this arrangement forced us to move beyond our traditional role as observers, the arrangement calmed down a tense situation and allowed more voters who had registered according to the rules to vote.

Has the election signaled renewed optimism in the process to achieve peace between the Israelis and Palestinians?

Hodes: Arafat's death and the swift transition to new leadership have definitely revived Palestinian optimism about a future peace process. Polling data suggests a majority of Palestinians are optimistic in this regard, a one-third increase over data obtained before Arafat's death. The election means to Palestinians that the newly elected president is no longer the living symbol of their aspirations, as Arafat was. He is now an elected politician whose success will be measured by what he delivers to his constituents. They are anxious to see what he can do.

What has been the impact of recent violence on the peace process?

Hodes: Violence since the election has only served to galvanize the new president, Mahmoud Abbas, to move quickly to try and consolidate his security services and show his seriousness in trying to combat violence. He is already trying to talk to groups that have used violence like Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade to reach agreements on long-term cease-fires that may provide the necessary room to pursue a revival of the peace process, a renewed effort to implement the U.S.-backed "Road Map" and ultimately, move promptly to final status negotiations.