عربي English Türkçe اردو فارسى
Logo
Latest News
Features

Has Washington Started Exploring Gaza’s Future?

Massive destruction is seen after an Israeli strike on Gaza. (AP)
Massive destruction is seen after an Israeli strike on Gaza. (AP)
TT
TT

Has Washington Started Exploring Gaza’s Future?

Massive destruction is seen after an Israeli strike on Gaza. (AP)
Massive destruction is seen after an Israeli strike on Gaza. (AP)

As US Secretary of State Antony Blinken made his third visit to the region since the Gaza war began on October 7, it seemed that his goal went beyond talking about a short-term humanitarian ceasefire and involved shaping new political, military, and regional realities.

Observers closely following the situation believe that any initiative not taking the two-state solution into account is unlikely to be successful.

During a congressional hearing this week, Blinken, who started a visit in Israel on Friday, emphasized the importance of discussing Gaza’s future.

Western and US media reported on various plans to involve the UN in overseeing Gaza's administration and to establish an international alliance for its security.

Reports suggest that Blinken and his deputies are in discussions with their regional counterparts about plans for governing Gaza after Israel concludes its war against it.

Barbara Leaf, Blinken’s Middle East affairs assistant, has undertaken this task despite the absence of a concrete plan as of yet. One temporary option being considered is the formation of a multinational force from the region.

Dividing Gaza

As the “ceasefire resolution” remains elusive, the Israeli army has said it managed to divide Gaza into two parts, pushing most of the northern residents to the south.

Although Israel has declared its reluctance to occupy the northern part of Gaza, it is evident that the conditions for Palestinians returning there are under its control.

Moreover, a long and challenging process awaits Palestinians for reconstruction.

Paul Salem, the head of the Middle East Institute (MEI) in Washington, points out that the war’s outcome is still uncertain.

However, Salem said it is likely to lead to a division of Gaza into two parts, one controlled by Israel and the other by Hamas.

“I believe this is a realistic scenario, and the question becomes who will take over the part occupied by Israel?”

“I don't think, given the current situation, the Palestinian Authority or any Arab or international entity can bear the responsibility of replacing an administration practically under Israeli supervision with Israeli occupation,” said Salem.

Ghaith Al-Omari, a senior fellow and expert at The Washington Institute, noted that the international administration of the territory is still just an idea and not an official proposal, facing numerous challenges.

“For Arab countries, intervening in Palestinian affairs poses political risks. This doesn't mean the proposal is impossible, but it's a complex suggestion that requires significant diplomatic groundwork,” explained Al-Omari.

“The Palestinian Authority is currently extremely weak and has lost credibility to the point where it cannot play any role in Gaza,” he added.

“Therefore, the international administration will also have the task of rehabilitating the Palestinian Authority, which is why Secretary Blinken mentioned a reinvigorated Palestinian Authority,” explained Al-Omari.

Eyes on the West Bank

Israeli-Palestinian confrontations are not limited to Gaza. What is happening in the West Bank may have even more significant political implications, affecting not only its future, but also the Palestinian Authority and Jordan.

There are renewed calls for the displacement of Palestinians in the West Bank to Jordan and Palestinians in the Gaza Strip to Egypt, which both vehemently reject this displacement.

The actions taken by Israel in West Bank areas are no less than a parallel war to what is happening in Gaza, with their effects being equivalent to the erasure of the Palestinian Authority itself, which is supposed to be “reinvigorated.”

Nabil Amr, a leader in the Fatah movement, asserted that the conflict between Palestinians and Israel will only end with the disappearance of the occupation.

“Before this war, Israel withdrew from Gaza, and the issue now revolves around Jerusalem and the West Bank,” Amr told Asharq Al-Awsat.

He added that Israel is clinging to the occupation, while Palestinians are determined to end it.

“We hope that these recurrent wars will be put to an end until the world moves towards a two-state solution, not just as a slogan, but as an implementation on the ground,” said Amr.

Most Viewed

 
 
Features

After Pressing an Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire, the Biden Administration Shifts Its Message

An Israeli mobile artillery unit fires a shell from northern Israel towards Lebanon, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2024. (AP)
An Israeli mobile artillery unit fires a shell from northern Israel towards Lebanon, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2024. (AP)
TT
TT

After Pressing an Israel-Hezbollah Ceasefire, the Biden Administration Shifts Its Message

An Israeli mobile artillery unit fires a shell from northern Israel towards Lebanon, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2024. (AP)
An Israeli mobile artillery unit fires a shell from northern Israel towards Lebanon, Wednesday, Oct. 2, 2024. (AP)

The Biden administration says there is a significant difference between Israeli actions that have expanded its war against the Iranian-backed armed groups Hamas and Hezbollah and Iran’s retaliatory missile attack against Israel, which it condemned as escalatory.

In carefully calibrated remarks, officials across the administration are defending the surge in attacks by Israel against Hezbollah leaders in Lebanon, while still pressing for peace and vowing retribution after Iran fired about 200 ballistic missiles at Israel on Tuesday.

President Joe Biden praised the US and Israel militaries for defeating the barrage and warned, “Make no mistake, the United States is fully, fully supportive of Israel.”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken called the Iranian missile attack “totally unacceptable, and the entire world should condemn it.”

There was little criticism that Israel may have provoked Iran's assault. "Obviously, this is a significant escalation by Iran,” national security adviser Jake Sullivan said.

Just a week after calling urgently for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah to avoid the possibility of all-out war in the Middle East, the administration has shifted its message as Israel presses ahead with ground incursions in Lebanon following a massive airstrike Friday in Beirut that killed Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Iranian Revolutionary Guard Gen. Abbas Nilforushan.

US officials stress that they have repeatedly come out in support of Israel’s right to defend itself and that any change in their language only reflects evolving conditions on the ground. And, officials say the administration’s goal — a ceasefire — has remained constant.

The US has been quick to praise and defend Israel for a series of recent strikes killing Hezbollah leaders. In contrast to its repeated criticism of Israel's war in Gaza that has killed civilians, the US has taken a different tack on strikes that targeted Nasrallah and others but also may have killed innocent people.

At the Pentagon, Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder made it clear that while the US is still “laser focused” on preventing a wider conflict in the Middle East, he carved out broad leeway for Israel to keep going after Hezbollah to protect itself.

“We understand and support Israel’s right to defend itself against Hezbollah,” Ryder said. “We understand that part of that is dismantling some of the attack infrastructure that Hezbollah has built along the border.”

He said the US is going to consult with Israel as it conducts limited operations against Hezbollah positions along the border “that can be used to threaten Israeli citizens.” The goal, he said, is to allow citizens on both sides of the border to return to their homes.

Part of the ongoing discussions that the US will have with Israel, Ryder said, will focus on making sure there’s an understanding about potential “mission creep” that could lead to tensions to escalate even further.

State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said Tuesday that Israel’s targeting of senior Hamas and Hezbollah leaders as well as its initiation of ground incursions into Lebanon are justified because they were done in self-defense.

“If you look at the actions that they have taken, they were bringing terrorists to justice, terrorists who have launched attacks on Israeli civilians,” Miller said.

By contrast, he said that Iran’s response was dangerous and escalatory because it was done in support of Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which are US-designated terrorist organizations that Iran funds and supports.

“What you saw (was) Iran launching a state-on-state attack to protect and defend the terrorist groups that it built, nurtured and controlled,” Miller said. “So there is a difference between the actions.”

The full-throated defense of Israel, however, may come with risks. So far, there is little evidence that the Biden administration's push for a ceasefire and warnings of broadening the conflict have had much impact on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

In commentary Monday, Jon Alterman, director of the Middle East program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, said that US influence on Netanyahu seems to be waning and that he “seems to have blown by US cautions about starting a regional war.”

The White House must “worry that a sustained inability to make diplomatic progress weakens US influence in the Middle East and around the world,” Alterman said, adding that “Netanyahu’s assurance that the United States will stand by Israel in any circumstance emboldens Israel to take more risks than it otherwise would.”