Political Analysis
Gaza Strip…The Forthcoming Clash of Wills
Israel and the United States have shown no intention of allowing the Gaza Strip (GS) to recover or heal. Instead, they appear committed to continuing confrontation through alternative means. While this may not involve an immediate declaration of another full-scale war, their pursuit of subjugating the Palestinian people and suppressing their resistance remains unrelenting.
The agreement reached marks only the
initial phase of Trump’s Gaza plan, where both parties exchanged
limited interests: ending hostilities, exchanging prisoners, preventing
displacement, allowing humanitarian aid into GS, initiating reconstruction, and
facilitating Israeli redeployment. However, most of the twenty
provisions in the plan have neither been agreed upon nor formally negotiated.
Each clause demands arduous, prolonged negotiations, with a high
likelihood of failure.
The most sensitive issues—such as the disarmament of the resistance, the proposed
international oversight mechanism (“Board of Peace”), the formation and
authority of a technocratic government, and the deployment of a security
force—are deeply tied to Palestinian sovereignty and national consensus. These
matters extend beyond Hamas or armed factions, touching on the
Palestinians’ right to self-determination and control over border crossings.
Israeli Behavior
The resistance remains committed to
national principles and internal Palestinian unity. It refuses to disarm,
relinquish sovereignty, or accept partial Israeli withdrawal. Meanwhile, Israel
is expected to continue pushing its unilateral interpretation of the Trump
plan, likely leading to a political deadlock.
This impasse could lead to two
scenarios:
1. Renewed military operations aimed at
dismantling the resistance, reoccupying GS, and imposing Israeli terms.
2. Tactical repositioning within GS,
using coercive leverage: tying services,
reconstruction, and governance to Palestinian compliance.
Current trends suggest Israel is
favoring the second path, employing pressure tactics such as:
- Maintaining the land, sea, and air blockade, restricting movement and
essential supplies.
- Obstructing reconstruction efforts.
- Targeted assassinations of Hamas and
resistance leaders.
- Undermining civil society under the pretext of
Hamas affiliation, including ambulance services, municipal functions, and
infrastructure.
- Supporting militias and collaborators to sow
internal discord.
- Conducting limited incursions modeled on West Bank
operations.
- Coordinating media defamation campaigns with Western and regional normalization partners.
Palestinian Conduct
This is a pivotal historical moment
for Palestinian solidarity, for transcending internal
divisions, and for rising to a level befitting the sacrifices, suffering, and
endurance of the Palestinian people. It honors the demonstrated resilience of
the resistance and the global standing that the Palestine
issue has regained, as well as the opportunities it has created. It
is a moment of cohesion and national unity, for Trump’s plan, and the Zionist project behind it,
does not target Hamas or the resistance alone… Rather, it seeks
to erase Palestine and its cause, to even undermine the Palestinian Authority (PA), to terminate the
“dream” of a state, and to bury the Oslo Accords despite all their flaws.
There are points of convergence
between Fatah, Hamas, and all Palestinian forces that can
serve as a foundation for challenging the “Trumpian” Israeli project:
1. Rejection of international tutelage,
including refusal to recognize the “Board of Peace” and to engage with it in
any capacity.
2. Rejection of forming a technocratic
government under Israeli–US dictates, ensuring that no externally
imposed government is recognized or cooperated with, and insisting that its
formation remain entirely a matter of internal Palestinian deliberation.
3. Insistence on the resistance’s arms
being a Palestinian matter, intrinsically linked to the end of Israeli
occupation, and refusal to reward Israel for its crimes by confiscating these
arms, which would only encourage the continuation of its aggression and
occupation.
4. Rejection of the arrival of any
external security force performing occupation-like tasks by proxy, and
definition of any tasks for such forces, should circumstances necessitate their
presence. Their mandate would be limited to technical, temporary, border-related
functions aimed at facilitating Israel’s withdrawal, carried out solely with
Palestinian consensus, and without any interference in the daily lives or
internal affairs of Palestinians.
5. Insistence on the evacuation of
Israeli control from the crossings, and on Palestinian consensus regarding
their management.
6. Insistence on the complete Israeli
withdrawal from the GS.
7. Utilization of Arab, Muslim, and
supportive countries worldwide to regain initiative and implement international resolutions enjoying consensus,
including Israel’s withdrawal, the Palestinian people’s right to
self-determination, the establishment of a fully sovereign Palestinian state,
the right of return, and the lifting of the blockade.
This approach thereby nullifies the concept of the trusteeship council (Board
of Peace) from its foundation, particularly given that 156 countries worldwide recognize the State of
Palestine.
Even a minimal expression of national
unity would suffice to overturn any authoritarian or security measures imposed
upon the Palestinian people, asserting their collective will and undermining
both Trump’s plan and Israel’s envisioned future for GS.
Clash of Wills
The forthcoming phase is expected to
witness a clash of wills in GS—as well as in Jerusalem, the West Bank (WB), and the broader region. The
Israeli-US axis will seek to exert maximum pressure and leverage. Nevertheless,
Palestinian cohesion and steadfastness are essential to counter these efforts;
should they falter, there is a risk that Israel could achieve a decisive
victory, potentially advancing the closure of the Palestine issue.
While Israel possesses considerable
sources of strength, it cannot fully carry through its coercion of GS, as it is
itself constrained by military, economic, and human exhaustion, as well
as by global isolation. At the same time, Israel is
keen not to squander the opportunity afforded by the Trump plan to rehabilitate
and “cleanse” its image, integrate into the region, and reopen engagement with
the international arena. Consequently, its capacity to maintain pressure
remains limited, particularly when it recognizes that its objectives are
largely unattainable.
-------------------
Read also:
Political
Analysis: An Invasion of Gaza or a Truce Agreement?!
Political
Analysis: A Reading of Israel’s Mentality of Erasure and Aggressive Behavior
