Abbas’s Craven Response to the US UNRWA Cuts

In the wake of President Donald Trump’s decision to freeze a significant portion of the US’s contribution to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), many leaders and public figures opposed to the move have not decried it for the humanitarian devastation it will cause, but rather for its supposed provocation of Palestinian extremism. For instance, in a letter to Trump, US Democrats quoted former Israeli Army Spokesperson Peter Lerner, who stated that by “weakening UNWRA…Palestinians will be even more susceptible to more extremism and violence.” They also warned Trump that the reduction in funds “will harm American interests.”

While it’s unsurprising that Israeli officials and US politicians would describe a colonized people as violent and stress that UNRWA constrains Palestinian “extremism,” it’s disquieting that Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas expressed a similar opinion in his recent Security Council speech. Abbas warned that the US cuts would cause Palestinian refugees to become “terrorists” and/or flood Western countries – rhetoric that feeds into European xenophobism. Not once did Abbas reaffirm the right of return, replacing it instead with a reference to a “just resolution” – a euphemism for concession.  

UNRWA neither constrains nor incites Palestinian resistance. This is evidenced by the fact that the agency began operating in the 1950s, and the PLO only launched armed struggle in the mid-1960s. Palestinians resist whether they are registered with the agency or not – and much of Palestinian resistance is peaceful.

Abbas’s comment on the cuts demonstrates the PA’s use of Palestinian refugees as a rhetorical and political tool Share on X

Today, Abbas and the PA plead at the feet of an empire that encroaches on Palestinian national rights. The recent US recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and its decision to move its embassy there on Nakba (catastrophe) day is a prime example. Yet the PA clings to a non-existent two-state solution that Israel never intended to implement and that the US has all but wiped off the negotiations table. Abbas’s comment on the UNRWA cuts demonstrates the PA’s craven use of Palestinian refugees as a rhetorical and political tool to secure funding and continue this charade. Since it is clear that the PA will not advocate for Palestinian rights, Palestinians across the globe must work for a just solution themselves.

A Call for Palestinian Action

While the relationship between UNRWA and the refugees has often been uneasy, it is necessary until refugee rights are secured. Thus, employees and beneficiaries need to work with UNRWA to withstand the attacks on the agency and the refugee status.

In their advocacy to national governments, international bodies, and legal experts Palestinians and their allies should reaffirm that the UN has a responsibility to Palestinian refugees and UNRWA due to the fact that it was complicit in creating the refugee crisis by 1) passing the partition plan of 1947, which violated the principle of self-determination in the League of Nations Covenant of 1922, and 2) accepting Israel as a UN member in 1949, conditional on Israel’s implementation of the charter and UNGA resolutions, especially 181 (II) – the partition plan – and 194 (III) – the right of return. Israel failed to comply with any of these resolutions.

In addition, Palestinian civil society and representatives must advocate for repatriation as part of the struggle for self-determination, as well as for the protection of refugee camps. The camps signal international responsibility and are symbols of the national predicament and struggle to return.

Palestinians around the world should prepare to protest any future agreement between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Israel that retracts the full rights of refugees and the right of return. They must make clear that self-determination cannot be fulfilled when the “self” is not fully represented in determining the future. Until the PLO is fully representative of the Palestinian people, including refugees, it lacks the legitimacy to negotiate. 

Randa Farah is an Associate Professor at the University of Western Ontario, Anthropology Department. Dr. Farah has written on Palestinian popular memory and reconstructions of...
(2018, March 15)

Latest Analysis

 Politics
For two years, Israel has inflicted mass starvation, staggering death tolls, and relentless destruction on Gaza and its inhabitants. International efforts to recognize Israeli war crimes and halt the eradication of the Palestinian people continue to lag and fall short. On September 16, 2025, the UN Commission of Inquiry confirmed what Palestinians have identified since the outset: Israel is committing genocide. On September 29, US President Donald Trump unveiled a proposal that promises a ceasefire but subordinates Palestinians in Gaza to external governance, denies them self-determination, and entrenches Israeli control over the land. Framed as a peace initiative, the plan is in fact an attempt by the US to shield the Israeli regime from accountability, exemplifying Western complicity in the colonization of Palestine and the extermination of its people. In this context, Hamas’s agreement to release all Israeli captives signals its commitment to ending the ongoing violence, while simultaneously shifting the onus onto the Israeli regime and the Trump administration to clarify and operationalize their commitments to the ceasefire process. This Focus On gathers Al-Shabaka’s analyses from the past year, offering urgent context to understand the genocide and its regional impact. It traces the Israeli regime’s expansionist campaign across Gaza, the West Bank, and the wider region, exposing Western complicity not only in enabling its crimes but also in protecting it from justice. At the same time, it highlights initiatives that resist Israeli impunity while advancing accountability and genuine liberation.
 Politics
This policy memo shows how China’s “biased impartiality,” which privileges the Israeli regime, drives its strategic distancing from the genocide in Gaza. This position is not simply the result of US dominance over Israel-related affairs but a calculated decision to protect China’s long-term interests. By calling for Palestinian unity without exerting pressure on the Israeli government, Beijing shields its ties with the Zionist state under the guise of restraint. In addition, it deflects responsibility for stopping the genocide onto the UN Security Council, casting ceasefire, humanitarian access, and prisoner release as obligations for others in order to absolve itself of direct accountability.
Razan Shawamreh· Sep 16, 2025
 Politics
The erasure of Indigenous populations lies at the core of settler-colonial narratives. These narratives aim to deny existing geographies, communities, and histories to justify the displacement and replacement of one people by another. The Zionist project is no exception. Among Zionism’s founding myths is the claim that it “made the desert bloom” and that Tel Aviv, its crown jewel, arose from barren sand dunes—an uninhabitable void transformed by pioneering settlers. This framing obscures the fact that the colonial regime initially built Tel Aviv on the outskirts of Yaffa (Jaffa), a thriving Palestinian city with a rich cultural life and a booming orange trade. The “dunes” description projects emptiness and conceals the vibrant agricultural and social life that flourished in the area. By casting the land as uninhabitable until redeemed by settlers, this narrative helped justify dispossession and colonial expansion. This process intensified after 1948, when Tel Aviv absorbed the lands of ethnically cleansed Palestinian villages, including al-Sumayil, Salame, Shaykh Muwannis, and Abu Kabir, and ultimately extended into the city of Yaffa. This same settler-colonial discourse drives the ongoing genocidal war on Gaza, where destruction is reframed through the narrative of “uninhabitability.” Gaza is increasingly depicted as a lifeless ruin—a framing that is far from neutral. This commentary contends that “uninhabitable” is a politically charged term that masks culpability, reproduces colonial erasure, and shapes policy and public perception in ways that profoundly affect Palestinian lives and futures. It examines the origins, function, and implications of this discourse within the logic of settler colonialism, calling for a radical shift in language from narratives that obscure violence to those affirming Palestinian presence, history, and sovereignty.
Abdalrahman Kittana· Aug 27, 2025
Skip to content