Politics is not all about lofty statements and soundbites. Sometimes silence can be every bit as eloquent and effective. Had Hamas said nothing about the appointment of the new Palestinian prime minister, Rami Hamdallah, it would have allowed people to believe that it remained committed to the reconciliation with Fatah and the formation of a national unity government in advance of elections, that it might very well win again, as in 2006. Instead, it chose to deplore Hamdallah's appointment by Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas. While its reaction can be dismissed as political posturing, the fact that its condemnation of the new premier came so soon after his surprise appointment suggests that depressingly little consideration was given to the statement. It might well be asked: What's not to like about the new prime minister? Hamdallah's political rise has been achieved without soundbites of any kind nor indeed any sort of eloquence except what he used in front of his students at An-Najah University in Nablus on the West Bank. If Hamas had wished to criticize the new Palestinian premier, it could have chosen his total lack of experience and his almost non-existent profile among ordinary Palestinians. However, perhaps the Hamas leadership at least recognizes that it is this very lack of a political past that makes him such a good selection. Abbas knows that after decades of political domination, Fatah is seen as corrupt and ineffective. Indeed it was its low reputation and apparent interest in the fortunes of its own leaders rather than the wider Palestinian population that so boosted Hamas in the 2006 elections. Even now Fatah is viewed with suspicion. Had Abbas, therefore, appointed someone from within its ranks, the choice would have been open to widespread protest, not least from Hamas. The fact that he has chosen a political novice, clearly highly intelligent but a novice nonetheless, ought to have encouraged Hamas to welcome him, albeit cautiously, or at least hold its tongue and wait to see how the new man shaped up. Yet, in one respect, the fact that the leadership in Gaza has been so quick to protest his selection ought to make Hamdallah's task easier. For a start it will secure his suitability in the eyes of the Americans. It may even make it more difficult for the Israelis to once more slither away from some sort of renewed peace negotiations. It could also possibly strengthen Hamdallah's hand with Fatah and Abbas, whose notoriously stormy relationship with his previous premier, the economist Salam Fayyad, had impacted on the entire Palestinian administration. And perhaps the final advantage that his rapid rejection by Hamas gives to the new premier is that at some point, he could choose, if he wished, to play the wise and magnanimous statesman and extend the hand of friendship to the Gaza leadership despite the past criticisms that they heaped upon him. If he has the savvy and the political nerve to steer his own path, Hamdallah can turn to his political advantage his very lack of a public profile. His virtual, as one French commentator has put it, “anonymity” could be his strongest armor, certainly in the early days of his premiership. The other bonus he inherits is the general view that he faces an extremely difficult task. Excessively high expectations of someone assuming a political mantle can very quickly become a millstone. Hamdallah, therefore, starts with the extra ability of being able to surprise.
