Gaza Agreement: American, Israeli, Arab Ambush By Walid Abd El, Hai.

Gaza Agreement: American, Israeli, Arab Ambush

By Walid Abd El, Hai.

Translated from Arabic by Ibrahim Ebeid,

Although the verbatim text of the agreement adopted by the Trump Peace Council has not been announced in its new version, or the post-negotiation version, it is necessary to be aware of what has been circulated for the following:

1- The history of the Arab-Israeli conflict since 1947 has not known an agreement that Israel has implemented honestly, which necessitates looking into the terms of the current agreement for gaps for certain Israeli evasion. I am sure that Israel will only implement what it has, but what it has to do is interpret it, delay it, and link it to other situations, and then bet on forgetting it. Israel will not see the agreement in its humanitarian, political, or economic aspects; it is only concerned with the “security” aspects, and each clause must be interpreted in a way that serves Israeli security.

2. Parties to the Agreement:
3. The resistance: It is in a very weak position due to the siege and Arab abandonment, population pressure, living conditions, the infiltration and crowding of the Oslo Authority in some aspects, and the Israeli occupation of seventy percent of the Gaza Strip, not to mention the psychological and health pressure that makes things more difficult, and which is accompanied by Egyptian complications for various official motives or “some popularity”.

Israel and the United States: They are two parties that have a strategic understanding, and their leaders are in a pressing situation, especially internally, as both are on a date with parliamentary elections, and the chances of each of them are fluctuating, whether Trump or Netanyahu, so they will work to achieve achievements in Gaza that enhance their chances, which the Palestinian side must pay attention to and try to “invest within the limits of possibility” so that neither Trump nor Netanyahu reap the fruits.

If we exclude Turkey, which can be said to have independence in decision-making (regardless of any reservations about its policies), the two Arab parties have no more role than conveying messages on the one hand, and American investment in them by employing Qatari money and the Egyptian neighbor to pressure the resistance to accept American and Israeli demands.

3- Expected problems during the short-term phase:

1. Collecting (not disarming) the weapons of the resistance: It is necessary for the Palestinian side in the text to adhere to the concept of “collecting weapons” rather than the concept of “disarming”, as the collection of weapons is a law that does not include any meaning to end the existence of the political organization or its ability to return to carrying weapons in the future, and it means handing over weapons to a third party and storing them. As for the legal concept of disarmament, it means the handing over and dismantling of warehouses, the dismantling of military installations, the termination of military units and chains of command, and the integration of individuals into new bodies that are not related to the first organizations, which means that the organization will no longer be an independent armed force, and another concept may be put forward which is called DDR (Disaramament, Demobilization and Reintegration), which means transforming organizations into civilian bodies completely by dissolving the organization once and for all and dispersing it in different civilian facilities.

 Since the security dimension is the hump of Israeli and American demands, gathering the weapons of the resistance (or disarming them, as Israel will insist) will be their first goal, which means turning the resistance into scout teams in the literal sense of the word in the first stage. Here, we will find a confrontation between the two parties in the following aspects:

1- Synchronicity: The Palestinians demand an Israeli withdrawal in exchange for the collection of weapons, and here the dispute will revolve around who hangs the bell, as Israel will insist that the collection (disarming) be preceded by any military withdrawal from Gaza, and the resistance demands that the two acts (weapons and withdrawal) coincide, and here Israel will insist on the collection (disarming) first, and then it will try to make the size of the collection (types of weapons, manufacturing factories, and tunnel maps) far exceed the areas of withdrawals from which it “intends to withdraw”, which requires the resistance to insist that The stages of the withdrawal are negotiated, with the area of each stage of withdrawal determined and the date of its completion, and the delay in any date, whatever the reasons, as a reason for the return of the supervising body of weapons to the resistance stockpiles if Israel does not implement each stage on time, and to stipulate this in the executive procedures and the implementation agenda.

It is necessary to start negotiations on the basis that Israel is the one who starts withdrawing in the first stage, and it reaches 20% of what it occupies. A period is set after that to collect and store only individual weapons. The next phase begins for medium weapons, with 30% of the occupied areas withdrawn, followed by 50% (the remainder) in exchange for collecting heavy weapons.

2- The ceasefire: I am sure that Israel will not abide by this; it will declare its commitment, but it will continue to “hunt” leaders that Israel perceives to be dangerous, and will try to continue attacking any targets it feels are of a secret security nature.

3- Aid and reconstruction operations: Israel will certainly insist on participating in the inspection of any materials that enter for aid, and will try to prevent as much material as possible (preventing cement under the pretext that it will be used to repair tunnels or some warehouses), prohibiting pipes under the pretext that they may be converted into rockets or mortars, and preventing milk under the pretext of using it for chemical laboratories (as America did with Iraq… etc.), it will also impede the entry of some medicines or chemicals under the pretext of exploiting them for military purposes, and it will monitor some electronic devices… etc.

4- The Civil Administration: Israel will certainly impose the establishment of security coordination between Israel and the Palestinian Civil Administration in the Gaza Strip (repeating the Oslo Authority’s model), and will work to prevent anyone who belongs to any of the resistance organizations from assuming important positions in the Civil Administration.

5- The deployment of an international stabilization force to maintain security in the transitional period, and here it must be recalled that all the international forces known in the Arab-Zionist conflict (during the truce period, in Sinai, the Golan, and southern Lebanon) did not provide a successful model for controlling Israeli behavior. The number of complaints submitted by these bodies against Israel is almost innumerable.

If we add to all the above that Trump and Netanyahu “practice lying without the blink of an eye,” and this is not a personal attack. Still, rather the results of investigations by official American and Israeli bodies, political and media study centers, and reports by psychologists, a president like Trump – as testified by 13 official and independent American institutions – lies an average of 21 lies a day, it is necessary to deal with him based on a specific rule that he is a “liar”, and Netanyahu, starting in 1992, warns every year or two that Iran is months away or One year after the nuclear bomb. In the 34 years he has been repeating this claim, the IAEA has not supported any of these claims, even though the agency has been biased in most of its reports against Iran.

Finally, as I warned that the U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding will not move forward, and that the region is about to descend into chaos, I warn that Israel will not abandon the “Greater Israel” project.