The agreement serves the interests of all parties involved, but it still places the decision to initiate the process in the hands of Abbas, raising questions about his commitment to the endeavor
– At the tactical level, the agreement would challenge Israel’s attempts to assert control over Gaza following the war. Strategically, it represents a further step toward independence and freedom from Israeli occupation and colonization
– Anything short of an independent, sovereign, and capable Palestinian state would keep the whole region spinning in the same vicious circle and should be viewed as a mere delaying tactic that allows Israel to strengthen its colonization efforts
-The author is an assistant professor of international affairs, security, and defense at Qatar University, associate fellow at Ibn Khaldon Center for Humanities and Social Sciences, and a non-resident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s “Scowcroft ME Security Initiative” and Middle East Programs.
ISTANBUL
On July 23, China facilitated a “National Unity” agreement between Hamas, Fateh, and 12 other Palestinian factions. The agreement emerged after extensive negotiations in Beijing. This marks the second time China has brokered a significant agreement between conflicting parties in the Middle East, following its sponsorship of the Iran-Saudi Arabia normalization agreement in March 2023.
China hosts Palestinian factions to solution
Many Western platforms and commentators have downplayed China’s initiative, framing it in line with China’s position [1] from the Israeli war on Gaza as [2] “scoring points against the United States.” They question [3] the seriousness of China’s intentions and note the absence of a clear mechanism for ensuring the implementation of the agreement or guaranteeing compliance from the involved parties.
From a regional perspective, China is increasingly viewed [4] as a stabilizing force for peace [5] in contrast to the US-led Western powers, which are currently facing their worst public perception in recent history. Many in the region perceive the US and a few other Western countries as war-hungry and bloodthirsty nations, particularly in light of their support for Israel’s war against the Palestinians.
Hosting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a corrupt, radical Israeli politician who has been clinging to power for approximately 18 years — charged with [6] bribery, fraud and breach of trust, along with an International Criminal Court prosecutor’s request for an arrest warrant against him for crimes against humanity — reinforces this perception. Applauding a leader of a country that has been indicted for apartheid [7] practices against the Palestinians, in the US Congress 50 times [8] during 56 minutes speech of lies [9] evoked comparisons [10] between him and Hitler.
In recent years, several countries have attempted to bridge the divide between Palestinian factions and encourage reconciliation. Although multiple agreements have been reached, none have proven successful. Some observers believe that the current reconciliation efforts are more significant than any previous attempts. They argue that the crimes committed by Israel have united the Palestinians, particularly as some factions have come to understand that the Israeli conflict is not solely against one rival faction, but rather against the Palestinian people as a whole.
For example, while Israel claims to be fighting Hamas in Gaza, more Palestinian children have been killed [11] by the Israeli army and settlers in the West Bank over the past 9 months than in the last decades. In July alone, Israel seized and annexed [12] Palestinian lands, marking the largest grab of such lands in 30 years. Since the onset of the war on Gaza, Israel has accelerated settlement [13] construction in East Jerusalem. Additionally, the Israeli Knesset passed a resolution opposing [14] the two-state solution, making a policy that has been implicitly followed for decades official and public for the first time.
What does the agreement between the Palestinian factions mean?
All of this suggests that no Palestinian can argue now that Israel wanted, wants, or will ever want peace. Israeli society, including its elites, establishment, and military, is united in the war of extermination against the Palestinians. This serves as a powerful motivation for Palestinian factions to seek unity. Moreover, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas lacks popularity in Palestine. For a long time, Israel has viewed him and his party as a primary line of defense.
To shield himself from the internal repercussions of the Israeli conflict and the potential return of Donald Trump to the White House, Abbas felt compelled to agree to the terms of various agreements. As for Hamas’ calculations, it seeks to enhance its internal legitimacy and prevent any post-war scenarios that might favor Israel by pitting Palestinians against one another.
The agreement serves the interests of all parties involved, but it still places the decision to initiate the process in the hands of Abbas, raising questions about his commitment to the endeavor. Some observers believe that nothing substantial will change as a result of this agreement and express concerns about the lack of guarantees that Mahmoud Abbas will follow through on his promises. However, others view this agreement as a significant new phase in the struggle against Israeli occupation and the ongoing genocidal war.
How regional powers are positioned matters
At the tactical level, the agreement would challenge Israel’s attempts to assert control over Gaza following the war. Strategically, it represents a further step toward independence and freedom from Israeli occupation and colonization. However, some regional and international powers have other saying on that. Neither Israel nor Iran seeks a resolution to the Palestinian issue, as both continue to leverage it for influence and leadership. For Israel, maintaining the problem ensures unwavering support from the US, Germany, and a few other Western nations in the name of victimhood. For Iran, the Palestinian question serves as a gateway to rally Arab masses and thus assert dominance in the region.
The Arab governments are not unified in their perspectives concerning the day after war on Gaza. Given their divisions, weakness, incompetency, and dependence on the US, they find themselves caught between Iran’s efforts to gain influence and public support through the Palestinian cause, and Israel’s ongoing appeal for Western backing to continue its war against the Palestinians. This situation raises concerns for Arab governments, as it could provoke a backlash at home or undermine their legitimacy.
The solution is very well-known: anything short of an independent, sovereign, and capable Palestinian state would keep the whole region spinning in the same vicious circle and should be viewed as a mere delaying tactic that allows Israel to strengthen its colonization efforts — especially after the Knesset’s clear rejection of a two-state solution.
The ultimate challenge for a Palestinian state has always been the unmatched, unquestioned, and unlimited US political, economic, military, intelligence, and ideological support for Israel. There is little to suggest that this reality will change significantly in the near term in the light of the current regional and international dynamics. However, in light of the growing international public backlash, the continuous erosion of the international order, the open undermining of international organizations, the disruption of international law, and the manipulation of media to serve Israeli interests, the situation is becoming unsustainable for both Israel and the US.
Source: AA
