Speeches of the Participants

The War on Gaza and the Future of the Palestinian Issue

Amidst the immense suffering of the Palestinian people in Gaza and their steadfastness in their land, despite its horror due to attempts to eradicate or displace them... Gaza is born from fire, as Mahmoud Darwish says, and its people are victims of war crimes and crimes against humanity... even genocide, any actions falling under the Genocide Convention, as deemed by the International Court of Justice to be worthy of ratification, which prompted the provisional and precautionary measures included in its decision, as we witness... simultaneous with the widespread and unprecedented violence unleashed on Gaza... Palestinians in the West Bank are subjected to escalating attacks by settlers who enjoy the support of Israeli military and security apparatuses, whether through turning a blind eye, complicity, or direct support.

Despite the severity of the war on the Palestinian people, it has become clear, up to now, that the displacement of Gazans is not feasible despite all the horrors, due to the resilience of Gazans to remain in their land in light of the massacres of previous displacement etched in their memory and the bitterness of refuge. However, the destruction, reaching unprecedented levels, in terms of human casualties and infrastructure demolition, continues unabated, aiming to render the Gaza Strip uninhabitable.

On the other hand, moral and political pressures remain insufficient to halt the aggression and enforce a ceasefire... Yet, we hear much talk about the future... beyond Gaza and the political process to be launched after the war ends... with ambiguous or mysterious discourse surrounding the two-state solution, which echoes here and there... it seems that the focus on a shade of normalization between Israel and Arab states is prioritized by the United States over halting the war and earnestly pursuing the mentioned solution, leading us to fear that the new promise of a Palestinian state or the fulfillment of old promises that have not materialized will not last long or become a pretext for the mentioned normalization.

Today, we are not faced with believing promises and expecting them to be fulfilled, but rather with a test of the reality of Arab and international positions, and perhaps the gateway to that is exerting actual pressure on Israel to compel it to cease fire and remain a priority, even gaining more urgency and importance, for building Palestinian national unity and achieving comprehensive representation legitimacy. Although the conflict over Palestine is no longer just a low-intensity dispute receiving secondary attention from influential Arab and Western countries, and the issue has regained its vitality in the heart of Arab and international reality, actual solidarity is capable of changing this reality partially, but popular sympathy in non-Arab and Western countries, which is evident, does not embarrass governments or pressure them adequately.

It is not hidden from anyone that the demand for a ceasefire is expanding within the public opinion worldwide, but it has not yet reached the point of decisively influencing government policies, and the concern among the free people of the world does not stop at demanding a ceasefire but has manifested in forms of genuine popular support for the Palestinian people in their ordeal and resistance to occupation and settlement.

However, the fluctuation in the tide of war, until now, calls for thinking beyond the repetition of familiar discourse about Israel's influence in the United States and other Western countries, and the aggression on Gaza poses new challenges at all levels of the Palestinian issue, moral, legal, and political. The war has revealed in a clearer way in the minds of many the reality of colonial settlement in the displacement of the colonized and the continuation of efforts to eliminate their existence, as well as the ruthless practice of power politics without mercy as a result of the shock and superiority-seeking dialectic.

We have seen the Israeli society as a unified tribe, and as in major crises, its unity is nervously exclusive, marginalizing any dissenting opinion, and the instinct of revenge and vindication dominated, insisting on punishing the indigenous population indiscriminately for what happened on October 7th, as the settler mentality has never accepted the existence of anyone remaining in their land, any remnants of historical Palestine, and it required tolerance from the newcomer towards the existence of the original, a behavior naturally unacceptable to the occupier, responding to any show of strength by the indigenous population with collective punishments, starting with demolishing the house of anyone involved in armed operations against the occupation and punishing the village or city from which the resistance fighters emerged, or closing entire occupied areas, culminating in the destruction of the Gaza Strip and making it uninhabitable.

Primarily, the occupation relies on violence, and any hesitation in its exercise leads to arousing fears within the settler society, compelling the state to use violence exponentially, thus mobilizing all energies in favor of the battle as a response to an existential threat, which includes the entire existence, and the comprehensive mobilization produces a kind of totalitarian regime that turns citizens into mere fighters.

The retaliation and revenge are not practiced to satisfy the pride of the occupiers and their sense of superiority, but rather to teach the Palestinians and their allies an unforgettable lesson, so the major harm to Palestinian civilians is not incidental or collateral but one of the main objectives of the war, inevitably leading to genocide by its international definition, where all practices become permissible, including elaboration in lying and demonizing the other, and the deliberate use of Nazi Holocaust analogies that occurred in different places and times and another civilization, let us remember that Israeli soldiers heard, while on their way to Gaza, saying they feel like they are entering a camp like Auschwitz to fight the Nazis, so they insulted not only their victims but also the victims of the Nazis.

On another level, enriched by the relationship between Arab countries and the Palestinian issue, the war on Gaza affirmed what the Beirut siege in 1982, the Ramallah siege in 2004, the 2006 war on Lebanon, and the successive wars on Gaza have previously revealed, that the Palestinian issue is the issue of every Arab state individually, affecting some states more than others, but regardless of that, it is the issue of all Arabs collectively, as the Arab public opinion is in solidarity with Palestine and rejects any normalization with Israel, perhaps this solidarity among the peoples is a ferment for the future, as it became after the 2009 war on Gaza, but it itself does not immediately change the behavior of governments resulting from a network of relations linking each regime individually in regional and international relations, and sometimes they are forced to follow the popular sympathy with the Palestinians.

It is useful to look at the difference between humanitarian solidarity movements with the people of Gaza in some Western countries, which are escalating and not receding, and the obstinate forces of anger that rise and then subside due to fear of the consequences of participating in persistent popular protests. In some countries, strong protests seem almost prohibited, as some Arab countries are still not ready to review their positions and consider the sentiments of their peoples, as there are countries unwilling to abandon the idea of separate peace with Israel without a just solution to the Palestinian issue.

As for the relationship between Israel and the allied powers in the West, especially the United States, the war on Gaza has shown that it is based on interests, but it is not limited to them, and we have witnessed the behavior of major media institutions dealing with double standards not only with political issues but even with humanitarian matters such as the suffering of Palestinians and Israelis, and it will be haunted by the shame of overlooking the crime for a long time, and the continuation of the genocide war imposed on it has spread more balanced news recently.

The quote states that major powers have diverse interests and inclinations in the region, and that Israel is considered a stable ally and a deterrent military force. However, Arab governments, if they respond to the will of their people, even if it's for internal reasons unrelated to Palestine, will collide with Israel's vision for the region's future. At that point, Israel's friendship might become a burden on the major powers in the region. If Arab states could agree on a common Arab stance in dealing with the United States on the Palestinian issue and other regional issues instead of competing among themselves, they would be able to limit Israeli regional and international influence.

Today, the events of October 7th and the Israeli genocidal war on Gaza have brought the Palestinian issue to the forefront of regional and international agendas. However, Israel is racing against time to prevent the continuation of that return. Israel continues its war on Gaza despite the growing realization within the US government of the futility of continued destruction, as there is nothing left to destroy, and the possibility of Israel exhausting its sympathy reserves. The occupying state cannot continue a long war without significant reliance on American support, which increases the United States' ability to pressure Israel. However, it refrains from doing so and settles for timid advice and criticism.

Based on all this, we find ourselves facing an unbearable situation regarding the future of the Palestinian cause. Israel and its allies will try to impose new political arrangements, starting with managing Gaza in a way that distances the Palestinian people from exercising their national rights even more than the Oslo Accords did. If this new arrangement is imposed, time will pass just as it did since those agreements, with new transitional stages and settlements that leave no trace of the possibility of the emergence of a Palestinian state. Israeli elections will be followed by American elections and power struggles without sovereignty.

The second possibility is that the international and regional system does not ignore the heavy price paid by the Palestinian people in Gaza and the hell they endured. The sacrifices of the Palestinian people should not be in vain but should lead to the formation of a unified Palestinian leadership, including factions of resistance and independent nationalists, within the framework of the PLO. This leadership should insist on a just solution, seek support from Arab countries, and rely on a large morale reserve that cannot be bypassed regionally and internationally.

The most effective thing we can all do, each from our own position and based on the values we believe in, is national and humanitarian solidarity to alleviate the suffering of the people in Gaza, work to counter Israeli genocidal war propaganda and its falsehoods, and pressure central Palestinian political forces to unify under a united leadership within the PLO. This would prevent all these sacrifices from being wasted by investing them in passing arrangements for what is now called the "day after" without a just solution to the Palestinian issue, ensuring that such crimes are not repeated.