Palestinians were not surprised by Saturday's resignation of their Prime Minister, Mr Mahmoud Abbas.
They had been expecting him to step down since militant groups ended their six-week-old hudna, or truce, following the Israeli assassination of a moderate Hamas political leader, Mr Ismail Abu Shanab, on August 21st.
The hudna, proclaimed on June 29th, was the only effort undertaken by Mr Abbas ("Abu Mazen") which succeeded. Fearing civil war could be sparked by any attempt to crack down on militant groups carrying out attacks on Israelis, Mr Abbas convinced them to accept a three-month cessation.
During this period Israel was meant to pull its troops out of Palestian self-rule areas, lift closures and blockades of Palestinian towns and cities, transfer tax revenues to the Palestine Authority and allow the Palestinians to resume normal economic activities.
According to the Israeli peace group, Gush Shalom, Israel failed to implement seven of its obligations under the "road map", partially carried out two and took no action on one.
Meanwhile, Israel continued to arrest suspected Palestinian militants and kill Palestinian political figures.
The assassination of Mr Muhammad Sidr, the head of Islamic Jihad's military wing in Hebron on August 14th, prompted the bombing of a Jerusalem bus on the 19th which killed 22 Israelis.
The bus attack was followed by the killing of Mr Abu Shanab. Israel's attempt on the life of a Hamas spiritual leader, Shaikh Ahmad Yassin, on Saturday can be expected to elicit another bloody response.
When Hamas and Islamic Jihad called off the hudna, Mr Abbas had nothing to show after spending four months in office.
He failed to effect significant reform of the Palestinian Authority, improve the living conditions of ordinary Palestinians, win the release of a credible number of the 6,500 Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails and move forward on the "road map" plan for the emergence of a Palestinian state by the end of 2005.
When he was sworn in on May 1st, most Palestinians were prepared to give Mr Abbas a chance although he was not a well-known or trusted figure.
But 17 days after becoming prime minister, he alienated his public when he called for an end to the armed struggle against the Israeli occupation during the summit with Mr Bush and Mr Sharon.
Palestinians considered this a "betrayal" of their cause and believed Mr Abbas was working for the US and Israel rather than the interests of his own people. Pollsters gave him only a 2-4 per cent approval rating.
While his lack of popularity and credibility contributed greatly to his decision to resign, a protracted row with Mr Arafat over control of the Palestinian security apparatus seems to have made him take the final decision.
Since taking up the post of prime minister, Mr Abbas had argued that he should be in charge of the multiple Palestinian security services. Mr Arafat had ceded control to the prime minister of several lesser agencies but maintained his grip on the main organisations as well as the chairmanship of the National Security Council.
As the Central Committee of Fateh, the mainstream Palestinian national movement founded by Mr Arafat and Mr Abbas in the late 1950s, met yesterday, three figures were being mentioned as possible replacements. The first was Mr Ahmed Qurei, the speaker of parliament and according to later reports Mr Arafat's choice; the second, Mr Salam Fayyadh, the finance minister; and the third, Mr Munib al-Masri, a wealthy banker. Mr Qurei, another longtime Arafat loyalist, is, according to one well-placed source, "well known and far more popular than Mr Abbas", while Mr Fayyadh, a former official at the World Bank, is seen as "America's man and unacceptable to the Palestinians".
Mr Masri was Mr Arafat's favourite for the prime ministerial post back in March when, under US and Israeli pressure, he appointed Mr Abbas, who could yet be reappointed.
Whoever emerges as prime minister, Mr Arafat will remain the ultimate decision-taker and source of legitimacy as the elected president of the Palestinians. There is no expectation that there would be a policy shift if a new cabinet is formed.
