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...

Latest Analysis

 Politics
Since October 2023, Israel’s assault on Gaza has produced one of the most catastrophic humanitarian crises in recent history—an unfolding genocide enabled by world powers and continuing unabated despite the sweeping global solidarity it has sparked. Alongside relentless bombardment and mass displacement, the Israeli regime is waging a deliberate campaign of starvation. In response to this Israeli-manufactured catastrophe, several European states have begun recognizing or signaling their intent to recognize the State of Palestine. Most recently, France announced its intention to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September. The UK has stated it will follow suit unless Israel abides by a ceasefire and recommits to a two-state solution. The recent wave of symbolic recognitions that began in 2024 now appears to be the only step many European powers are willing to take in the face of genocide, following nearly two years of moral, material, and diplomatic support for the Israeli regime as well as near-total impunity. This roundtable conversation with Al Shabaka policy analysts Diana Buttu, Inès Abdel Razek, and Al Shabaka’s co-director, Yara Hawari, asks: Why now? What political or strategic interests are driving this wave of recognition? And what does it mean to recognize a Palestinian state, on paper, while leaving intact the structures of occupation, apartheid, and the genocidal regime that sustains them?
 Politics
In March, Israel shattered the ceasefire in Gaza by resuming its bombing campaign at full force and enforcing a total blockade on humanitarian aid—ushering in a new phase of the ongoing genocide. In response to mounting international criticism, the Israeli regime introduced a tightly controlled aid scheme designed not to alleviate suffering, but to obscure its use of starvation as a weapon of collective punishment. Through the so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), Israel has transformed humanitarian aid into a tool of control, coercion, and forced displacement. Israeli forces have additionally blocked UN and other aid agencies from accessing over 400 distribution points they once operated throughout Gaza. They consequently forced two million Palestinians to rely on just four GHF sites, most near its southern border in what appears to be a deliberate effort to push mass displacement toward Egypt. Investigations have also revealed how US-based private contractors are actively profiting from the GHF’s deadly operations. In this policy lab, Yara Asi and Alex Feagans join host Tariq Kenney-Shawa to discuss how the GHF fits into Israel’s genocidal strategy—and to expose the network of individuals and companies profiting from what has been a death trap masquerading as humanitarian assistance.
 Politics
​​The October 7, 2023, Al-Aqsa Flood operation aimed to revive Palestinian armed resistance and reassert the cause in Arab and global consciousness after years of marginalization. It dealt a major blow to Israel’s deterrence, rupturing its image as a secure colonial outpost entrusted with protecting Western strategic interests. It also exposed cracks in its militarized social contract that rests on the regime’s ability to protect its settler population. While the operation imposed new political realities on the Israeli regime, it has come at a staggering cost to Palestinian life: Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza has unleashed one of the worst humanitarian crises in recent memory. Yet the anticipated wave of Arab solidarity following the operation failed to materialize or translate into concrete policy shifts. Instead, the moment laid bare the entrenched ties between Arab regimes and Israel’s settler-colonial project that are rooted in mutual interests, regime preservation, and a shared antagonism toward Palestinian resistance. This commentary argues that these alliances—sustained by repression and strategic-economic cooperation and reinforced by Western complicity—transformed a potential turning point for isolating the Israeli regime into an opening for intensified colonial expansion and regional dominance.
Al-Shabaka Tariq Dana
Tariq Dana· Jul 22, 2025
Skip to content