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 Associate Professor in the Anthropology Department at the University of Western Ontario, where she has taught since 2001, and Adjunct Faculty at the Centre for Global Studies at Huron University College. She holds a PhD from the University of Toronto, where her doctoral research focused on memory and identity among Palestinian refugees in camps in Jordan in the context of the Oslo Accords. She has also conducted field research in camps for Western Saharan refugees in Algeria, and her comparative work on the two cases has been published in the Journal of Palestine Studies. She previously held positions as Visiting Fellow and Associate Researcher at the Refugee Studies Centre at the University of Oxford, and worked at CERMOC in Amman on a research project on Palestinian refugees and UNRWA.

Latest Analysis

 Civil Society
After Hamas’s recent announcement that it will hand over governing authority in Gaza to the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), urgent questions about who will shape Gaza's future and on whose terms have reemerged. These questions are particularly salient given that the NCAG’s framework reflects the same technocratic and externally imposed logic that has come to characterize the dominant international proposal for Gaza's reconstruction: one that treats it as a technical exercise in disaster management, sidelining Palestinian sovereignty, return, and self-determination. In contrast, this roundtable asks what it means to understand Gaza as an Indigenous region rather than simply a besieged strip or humanitarian space. Nour Joudah and Dena Qaddumi explore how Indigenous frameworks reshape prevailing understandings of urbanism, reconstruction, and governance; why reconstruction must begin with Palestinian agency and reclamation rather than externally designed colonial master plans; and how rebuilding is already taking place through everyday forms of Indigenous endurance, social organization, and spatial resistance under conditions of ongoing genocide.
Nour Joudah,Dena Qaddumi· Jul 23, 2026
 Politics
The advisory opinions issued by the International Court of Justice on Palestine reveal both the possibilities and the limits of international law, which has come under intense scrutiny amid the Israeli regime’s ongoing genocide in Gaza and broader settler-colonial project across Palestine. Acknowledging the persistent gap between legal principle and political enforcement, this policy brief examines how these opinions can be leveraged to strengthen legal and diplomatic accountability at both the international and domestic levels. It argues that the opinions provide an opportunity to move legal discourse on Palestine beyond the dominant UN framework of statehood within the 1967 borders and to reassert the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination within a broader liberation-oriented framework aimed at ending settler colonialism and advancing justice for Palestinians as a whole.
Al-Shabaka Dana Farraj
Dana Farraj· Jul 1, 2026
 Politics
The US-Israeli war on Iran and Lebanon, as well as the ongoing genocide in Palestine, are reshaping the political landscape of the region. Alliances are being recalibrated, and old assumptions about US power are being tested. The war has also underscored how deeply the global economy remains tied to fossil fuels and to the strategic importance of the Gulf within international energy and trade networks. In this roundtable, Palestinian analysts Diana Buttu and Adam Hanieh examine what this moment reveals about the changing architecture of US imperial power, the regional order now taking shape, and the implications for the struggle for Palestinian liberation.
Diana Buttu,Adam Hanieh· Jun 10, 2026