Political analyst Mr. Hani Almasri argues that Fatah’s eighth conference comes at a moment that is “qualitatively different” not only from previous conferences, but from the broader trajectory of both the movement and the Palestinian political system over the past decades. According to him, the conference is not being held during relative stability or within an open political horizon; rather, it takes place amid what he describes as a “comprehensive deadlock.”
Almasri notes that the collapse of the settlement project has left no genuine prospect for reviving a political process in the near future. At the same time, the resistance option has reached “an impasse,” deepened by divisions between those who condemn resistance and those who suspend it, and by ongoing debate over the usefulness of armed struggle at this stage. This situation is compounded by sharp internal division between two authorities and an intense debate following what he calls a period marked by “war of extermination, displacement, annexation, and apartheid,” alongside uncertainty about the national project required for the coming phase and the alliances needed to counter escalating attempts to liquidate the Palestinian cause.
He further points to the growing weakness and erosion of legitimacy within Palestinian institutions, attributing this to the absence of regular elections, national consensus, and tangible achievements. In this context, the struggle over succession unfolds within what he describes as a “leadership vacuum and deep crisis,” affecting both the political system and the national movement as a whole. The widening gap between leadership and grassroots, the stagnation of factions, and the absence of new political formations reflect what he calls a loss of direction, warning that continued attempts to undermine unified representation could open the door to alternative forces or forms of external guardianship.
Almasri stresses that “an organizational conference that produces neither strategies nor a leadership capable of implementation will do little more than reproduce the status quo.” For this reason, he insists that the conference should not be seen as a routine procedural milestone but rather as a decisive turning point that could lead to one of three outcomes: continued stagnation, the beginning of renewal, or what he metaphorically calls “the final chapter” in the journey of a movement that once led the Palestinian people and their contemporary revolution under extremely difficult circumstances.
He recalls that Fatah achieved major milestones, particularly until 1988, before entering a phase of decline marked by the Oslo Accords (1993) and the recognition of Israel’s right to exist, coupled with the abandonment of resistance without reciprocal Israeli recognition of Palestinian rights. He also links this trajectory to internal division and to international initiatives, including what he describes as the Trump plan, which he characterizes as embedding “colonial-style oversight” that undermines Palestinian rights and interests.
One of Almasri’s most striking observations is that Fatah, which once raised the slogans of liberation, return, and armed struggle, now finds itself focused primarily on preserving authority itself. After abandoning the liberation project in favor of statehood through negotiations and concessions, the movement now appears, “in practice and reality”, to have shifted toward safeguarding the authority and its leadership, even as those institutions face destruction in Gaza and systematic weakening in the West Bank.
This shift, he argues, raises a fundamental question: “Is Fatah still a national liberation movement leading an open struggle, or has it become a party administering the population under occupation, with its highest ceiling limited self-rule?” According to Almasri, this question has never been resolved in previous conferences but instead has been repeatedly postponed, contributing to the current crisis. In the absence of meaningful debate over programs and strategies, competition for positions, such as membership in the Central Committee or Revolutionary Council, has tended to dominate, turning conferences into occasions for distributing posts rather than opportunities for evaluation and renewal.
Almasri insists that if the conference is to make a meaningful difference, it must undertake a comprehensive review of past experiences, beginning with acknowledging mistakes and building on achievements. Without a clear vision capable of addressing challenges and seizing opportunities, he warns, any conference will simply reproduce existing realities, possibly in an even more fragile form. He attributes the current situation to what he calls an “intellectual and programmatic crisis,” noting that the national project in its various forms has failed to achieve its goals, leading to a structural crisis that affects leadership itself.
He observes that a movement once built on flexible, grassroots revolutionary dynamism has gradually become constrained by bureaucracy and conservatism, at times transforming into an environment that pushes away capable activists. In his view, Fatah is no longer the broad framework reflecting Palestinian social diversity that it once was, but has instead become more closed, with declining roles for organizational bodies and diminishing participation from grassroots members, who are often asked to defend decisions they had no role in shaping.
For this reason, Almasri argues that merely replacing individuals in leadership positions will not suffice. Meaningful change requires comprehensive reform that reshapes the national project, redefines relations between leadership and grassroots, restores institutional authority over individual power, and replaces loyalty with accountability.
He also stresses that the conference cannot be separated from the broader national context, describing the Palestinian political system as suffering from weakness, stagnation, and a growing vacuum, alongside the risk of deepening division. In what he calls a striking paradox, Fatah remains “the backbone of the system,” yet at the same time constitutes one of the sources of its crisis. Any reform within the movement, he argues, could positively affect the entire political system, while continued stagnation could deepen the crisis and potentially lead to collapse, opening space for hostile alternatives.
At the regional and international levels, Almasri notes that the conference is being held during a transitional period marked by the decline of an old global order and the uncertain emergence of a new one. Within this volatile environment, the Palestinian cause has fluctuated in international priorities, while the Palestinian Authority itself stands on the brink, either collapsing, transforming into what he calls an “agent authority” serving the occupation, or fragmenting into competing local administrations. These risks, he says, demand resilience and a unified national plan capable of confronting threats and leveraging opportunities.
Despite the gravity of the moment, Almasri expresses skepticism about the likelihood of dramatic change. He argues that the circumstances surrounding the conference, including what he describes as a sudden top-down decision to convene it under external pressure, suggest that it may remain confined to the existing political path. Measures such as creating the post of vice president, adopting a temporary constitution, conducting selective elections under politically exclusionary conditions, revising curricula, halting media incitement, and reframing issues related to prisoners and martyrs as social rather than national matters are cited as indicators of this trajectory.
He also highlights practical concerns, including limited preparation time, the extraordinary conditions in Gaza that might have justified postponement, the absence of regional conferences to elect delegates, and the expansion of conference membership to approximately 2,600 individuals, many of them government employees. Taken together, he argues, these factors suggest that the conference may focus primarily on reshaping leadership within the existing framework rather than redefining its direction.
Ultimately, Almasri concludes that the central question is not who will win the internal elections. Rather, the real test lies elsewhere: “Will the movement succeed in restoring its meaning and role as a liberation movement at a critical historical moment, or will it remain content with administering the population under occupation?”
In his view, that question, not the composition of leadership bodies, will determine how the outcomes of the conference are judged in the long run