Gaza: The Deal is Close, but Where Is the Serious Political Horizon?
Annahar, Lebanon, February 3
Annahar, Lebanon, February 3
Amid the widespread hope for an imminent cease-fire deal in Gaza and the initiation of prisoner exchange procedures between Israel and Palestinian factions, caution is warranted, as the completion of the agreement is not guaranteed. The complexities of the situation can lead to the collapse of the proposed agreements at the eleventh hour, as illustrated by the demands set forth by the Palestinian factions fighting under the leadership of the Hamas movement in Gaza. These demands include a comprehensive cessation of aggression, complete withdrawal of occupation forces, shelter for the displaced, reconstruction, lifting of the siege, and the exchange of prisoners. These conditions are not the endpoint of negotiations but rather a starting point, indicating that the negotiation process may encounter arduous and intricate stages. The international community’s pressure on both parties will be crucial due to the nature of these conditions and country conditions. Nevertheless, the absence of a serious political horizon is noted, with the conflict likely to persist in the absence of a genuine political process. According to Marwan Muasher, Jordan’s former foreign minister, the absence of a serious political solution will perpetuate violence for years to come, emphasizing the necessity of focused efforts to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict permanently. The disagreements between the United States and Israel are acknowledged, with concerns centering more on the continuation of the conflict until the defeat of the Hamas movement rather than the fundamental basis of the problem. Conversely, the absence of a comprehensive and genuine political horizon could prolong the conflict and violence. It is imperative to address the actual challenges and complexities underlying this conflict to pave the way for a meaningful resolution. As the deal facilitated by the Qatari mediator progresses, the involvement of the United States in pressuring Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to agree to a cease-fire is evident. The US administration seeks to de-escalate the ongoing violence in the Gaza Strip, notwithstanding the shared objective with Israel to combat the Hamas movement. The disagreement primarily pertains to the management of the conflict and the American stance on recognizing a demilitarized Palestinian state contingent upon certain border, power, and jurisdictional restrictions. The seriousness of the British project and the American threat to recognize a Palestinian state remains a recurring question, prompting speculation about whether it aims to conclude the conflict over time or serves as a genuine pursuit of peace. Therefore, in light of the existing circumstances, the future seems uncertain, highlighting the need for a concerted effort to address the deep-rooted issues within the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. —Ali Hamade (translated by Asaf Zilberfarb)
