On Saturday, a carefully orchestrated maneuver within the Palestinian Authority saw the appointment of Hussein al-Sheikh as “Deputy Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Vice President of the State of Palestine.”
This move, presented as a significant step toward transition, is little more than a calculated ruse by P.A. chairman Mahmoud Abbas to project an image of reform to the international community, particularly Western governments and donors. In reality, it is a superficial reshuffling of loyalists that entrenches Abbas’s control, sidesteps genuine democratic processes and maintains the status quo of his autocratic rule.
Khaled Abu-Toameh, a senior distinguished fellow at the Gatestone Institute and a fellow of the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs (JCFA), told JNS that al-Sheikh’s appointment is nothing short of “musical chairs” and should not be taken seriously.
“Why do we assume that this is a new school of thought? This is someone from the young guard representing the old guard,” he said. “I wouldn’t rush to celebrate.”
“The West is again falling for the same mistakes they made in the past,” he added.
The decision to appoint al-Sheikh, a 64-year-old confidant of Abbas, was framed as a formal elevation to the number two position in the P.A. leadership hierarchy. However, this was not a competitive or democratic process. The nomination originated from Abbas himself, who also chairs the PLO Executive Committee, and was swiftly approved by the 16-member committee, a body stacked with Abbas loyalists, including al-Sheikh, who has served as its secretary general since his appointment by Abbas years earlier. The Palestinian Central Council had previously created the position specifically for this purpose, further illustrating the choreographed nature of the appointment.
For those who understand how the corrupt P.A. works, al-Sheikh’s appointment was hardly surprising. He has long been regarded as Abbas’s unofficial deputy, wielding significant influence as a key negotiator with Israel and a gatekeeper of P.A. patronage networks. His formal elevation offers no substantive change in policy, governance, or leadership dynamics.
Abbas, 89 years old and in the 20th year of a four-year presidential term, faces mounting pressure both domestically and internationally. Domestically, Palestinians are increasingly disillusioned with the P.A.’s corruption, ineffectiveness and lack of democratic legitimacy—the majority would rather vote for Hamas. Internationally, Western donors, particularly the United States and European Union, which provide critical financial support to the P.A., have urged reforms and a clear succession plan to ensure stability in the post-Abbas era.
However, al-Sheikh is not a reformist or an independent figure; he is one of Abbas’s closest allies, deeply embedded in the P.A.’s patronage system. As head of the PLO’s General Authority for Civil Affairs, al-Sheikh has been a key interlocutor with Israel on security coordination and a central figure in distributing P.A. resources—a perfect position for corruption. His elevation rewards loyalty rather than competence or public support, signaling that the P.A.’s priorities remain self-preservation and control, not governance or accountability.
As Abu Toameh pointed out, al-Sheikh’s new title is superficial as Abbas retains ultimate authority as P.A. president and PLO chairman. Al-Sheikh’s role is subordinate and ceremonial unless Abbas chooses to delegate power—an unlikely prospect given his history of centralizing control.
The P.A. leadership remains a closed circle of loyalists recycled through various titles. Al-Sheikh’s elevation is merely the latest iteration, following a pattern whereby Abbas appoints trusted allies to prominent roles but then distances them. This tactic allows Abbas to maintain control while creating the illusion of change, a strategy he has employed for decades to deflect criticism and sustain international support.
The appointment was designed to assuage Western concerns about reform and succession. By naming a deputy, Abbas is pretending to signal that the P.A. is preparing for a post-Abbas era. Al-Sheikh is a familiar and acceptable figure to the United States and European Union, making him a convenient choice to project continuity. However, this is a façade: the appointment changes nothing about the P.A.’s anti-Israel policies.
According to Abu Toameh, the West should see through this charade and demand real change such as elections, accountability, and inclusive governance.
Unfortunately, it appears Western governments are once again falling for the Palestinians’ ruse.
Maurice Hirsch, head of legal strategies at Palestinian Media Watch and director of the Initiative for Palestinian Authority Accountability and Reform at the JCFA, called al-Sheikh “a Fatah crony,” noting he spent 11 years in prison and filled a number of different positions in Fatah.
The United States has “tried to avoid any substantial change, and they would prefer to stick their heads in the sand and pretend that al-Sheikh is the Palestinian reformer they are so desperately seeking,” said Hirsch.
He noted, however, that “on all of the core issues, al-Sheikh is no different from the other Palestinian leaders.”
According to Hirsch, al-Sheikh “will not abandon the Palestinian drive to destroy Israel and, probably most importantly considering his family background, will never be able to give up on the ‘right of return.’”
According to Hirsch, al-Sheikh’s new position “doesn’t necessarily guarantee anything, but it does place him, theoretically and practically, as Abbas’s deputy.”
Hirsch noted al-Sheikh’s background, telling JNS, “For many years he was one of the people who developed the P.A.’s relations with Israel, and in a quite extraordinary manner, while the P.A. changed governments like socks, al-Sheikh appears to have been one of the few constants, maintaining his ministerial position.”
What appears to have facilitated his rise to prominence, said Hirsch, is his alliance with Majed Faraj, the head of the P.A. Security Forces.
Now, with al-Sheikh ensconced in his new role, Hirsch said the question will be “not what the Palestinian street thinks—he doesn’t give a damn about them—but rather what the other people who lay claim to the throne—Mahmoud El-Aloul, Jibril Rajoub, Ruchi Fatouh, etc.—think, and whether they will let him ‘steal’ the position that they believe is ‘theirs,’ or whether they will fight him for it.”
“His strategic alliance with Faraj will certainly give him the advantage,” he added.
In conclusion, Abbas’s appointment of al-Sheikh is a carefully staged move to placate Western donors and project an image of orderly succession, while ensuring that nothing changes within the P.A.’s ossified power structure. By elevating a loyalist through an undemocratic process and cloaking the move in grandiose but meaningless titles, Abbas perpetuates his autocratic rule under the guise of reform.
Abu Toameh told JNS: “This is not the reform that Palestinians need. This is the same group of people playing musical chairs and presenting it to the world as reform and democracy and sharing power.”