Crossroads in Gaza and the Region

Crossroads in Gaza and the Region

Against the backdrop of multiple failed hostage deal outlines, violent confrontations between Israeli settlers and soldiers with Palestinians in the West Bank, a continuously catastrophic situation on the ground in Gaza, and the spiraling brinksmanship between Iran and Israel, the prevailing feeling is that of a war in relative statis. In the short term, all fronts – Gaza, the Israel-Lebanon border, and the West Bank – are poised on the potential brink of an even greater escalation. The current issues that will determine the immediate direction of the war are the new hostage deal offer and a potential invasion of Rafah. As Thomas Friedman of the New York Times wrote last week, an Israeli full-scale invasion of Rafah without international support and a continuous lack of a coherent exit strategy could have terminal implications for Prime Minister Netanyahu’s desired foreign policy legacy of Saudi-Israeli normalization. Friedman writes: “The road to Riyadh has a much bigger payoff at the end than the road to Rafah, which will be a dead end in every sense of the term.” While international players strive to prevent a regional conflagration, reputational costs and radical actors all threaten to push the conflict into an even more extreme level of crisis.

This month’s Two State Index will examine:

International sanctions and recognition of Palestinian statehood;
Palestinian leadership preparing for the "day after" in Gaza;
The significance of regional tensions and alliances following the Iran-Israel confrontation.

As a result of parameter changes analyzed below, the Two-State Index decreased from 5.17 to 5.11 (-1.2%) this month.

Sanctions and Statehood:

World powers are applying ever-increasing pressure upon the Israeli government to change its approach to the war and in the conflict more generally. The European Union has officially moved to sanction a number of violent settlers and settlement entities, indicating that dissident voices from within the EU are also concerned about the situation in the West Bank. Spain, Ireland, and Belgium have called for review of different aspects of the EU’s close trade partnership with Israel (the EU is Israel’s biggest trading partner globally). In addition to consideration and application of sanctions, the EU is also weighing carrots towards peace: Sven Koopmans, the EU Special Representative for the Middle East Peace Process, issued a statement at the UNSC this month calling for a “preparatory peace conference” to concretely lay out the international community’s support for a two-state solution and “invite the parties” to delineate their needs in order to arrive at peace.

Rumors of ICC arrest warrants for Israeli senior officials have added to diplomatic pressures and Israeli concerns. Prof. Tamar Hostovsky Brandes, an expert on international law, states that in the event of ICC arrest warrants against Israeli leaders, “The significance is extremely severe, and not just for the individuals targeted. This step creates serious consequences for any state to carry out basic diplomatic functions.”

The US Administration has expanded its list of violent settlers targeted by sanctions. American Secretary of State Blinken indicated this month that sanctions were also being considered against Netzah Yehuda, an IDF unit which has developed a reputation for extreme human rights violations against Palestinians in the West Bank. Israeli political leaders across the spectrum, from PM Netanyahu to MK Yair Lapid, expressed public disapprobation and intention to push back against the move. While the step has been shelved for now, the open discussion by top US administration officials about sanctioning an IDF unit is unprecedented and further indication that Israel’s closest allies question the Israeli government’s internal accountability, ability and desire to control violence in the territories. All of this took place against the backdrop of a deadly settler assault on multiple villages, in a revenge attack for the murder of an Israeli 14-year-old this month. The scale of the chaos, which would have made headlines prior to the outbreak of the war, was swallowed in the news cycle of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and the confrontation between Israel and Iran. Still, key global actors are signifying major policy departures regarding the continued status quo - and the increasingly fatal lawlessness - characterizing the West Bank territories. As Dr. Hostovsky-Brandes points out, “All of these moves together, especially those of the US, indicate that Israel has not provided sufficient indication that it is doing enough to deal with claims of violations. This puts the US in a position of constantly putting pressure on Israel to do more.”

This month, the US exercised its veto at the UN Security Council against a resolution to admit Palestine as a state member of the UN. Twelve out of fifteen UNSC members supported the measure, with two abstentions and only the United States voting against.

Palestinian analyst Ibrahim Dalalsheh notes that there may be deep repercussions for the recognition issue:

“The American veto in the UNSC against the Palestinian request is likely to badly affect the Palestinian-American relationship. The U.S. could lose its leverage on the Palestinian Authority on important issues like the reforms. The PA will also continue its efforts to have more recognition for the statehood on 67 borders, particularly in Europe, causing more friction with the US.”

Top EU diplomat Josep Borrell has announced that at least five member states are preparing to recognize Palestinian statehood in the coming month. While he did not specify, the five likely include Spain, Ireland, Malta, Slovenia and Belgium (which is still carrying out internal discussions on the matter). Both Barbados and Jamaica have formally recognized the state of Palestine, and Palestinian diplomats have indicated that more countries will follow. At the World Economic Forum meeting in Riyadh at the end of the month, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas called for global recognition of Palestinian statehood in order to realize the Palestinian right to self-determination as a critical step towards enabling Palestinians “to sit down with Israel and negotiate on the borders.” This framing counters the American administration’s argument that Palestinian statehood should be realized and recognized as a result of a negotiation process, and not prior.

Dr. Hostovsky-Brandes notes that while the legal implications of recognition of Palestinian statehood are complex, the significance in terms of discourse and international trends cannot be dismissed:

“It’s very clear that the gap in international discourse with respect to Palestinian statehood and internal Israeli discourse regarding Palestinian statehood is growing much wider. Israeli discourse after October 7^th is almost united in the belief that Palestinian statehood is unthinkable, whereas international discourse increasingly sees it as almost inevitable. One of the challenges is to bridge the gap, otherwise it will be incredibly hard to move forward with any process.”

Despite anger over the United States’ UNSC resolution veto, President Abbas appealed directly to the American administration during his speech in Riyadh. He asserted that “the United States is the only country that can prevent Israel” from an invasion of Rafah, and called upon the US to act accordingly.

The American administration has made its opposition to a Rafah operation clear. Middle East affairs expert Ksenia Svetlova notes that the diplomatic repercussions of such an operation would affect more than Israel-American relations: “Because of the massive buildup to this operation, even if it proves to be limited in scale, it would have an enormous impact. The Egyptians specifically expressed their concerns.” While she does not believe that the fundamental peace treaty with Cairo would be at stake, Svetlova warns about “unpredictable and dangerous” diplomatic consequences with Egypt as well as Morocco and Jordan, a frozen normalization process with the Saudis, and further deterioration of Israel’s relationship with the Palestinian Authority.

Saudi statements at the World Economic Forum also highlighted the centrality of Palestinian statehood to further regional normalization. Svetlova estimates that Saudi intentions towards normalization, as well as commitment to making progress on the Palestinian issue, are strong:

“They are not eager to put themselves in the seat of mediator and take the heat if the process fails, but they are very serious about it. They understand that not only Israel, but they themselves are threatened from the inside by radical elements in their society. So the only positive outcome for them is a change of leadership in Israel that will allow Palestinian statehood to once again have a political horizon.”

Meanwhile, within the United States, pro-Palestinian student protests calling for a ceasefire have swept through prominent university campuses around the country, reflecting an ongoing (and increasingly heated) internal debate about American involvement in the Middle East, freedom of speech, and the kinds of acts and discourse that constitute anti-Semitism.

The United States engagement within the international actors’ parameter moves from 9.0 to 8.0 this month. International decisions & norms also drops from 9.0 to 8.0.

Fatah Presence in Gaza

Although the Israeli government has avoided any clear policy statement or vision regarding long-term administration of the Gaza Strip, let alone addressing the broader issue of Palestinian sovereignty, Palestinian leaders are taking steps to begin shaping the “day after” the war. At the beginning of the month, Hamas announced that it had killed Palestinian Authority operatives who had “infiltrated” the Strip disguised as aid workers and accused of coordination with Israel. The PA denied the claims and asserted that these men were part of a security detail to defend humanitarian deliveries. Israeli daily “Israel Hayom” confirmed that the introduction of PA elements into the complex aid distribution calculus was made in coordination with the Israeli government. This adds to the internal contradictions of an Israeli governing coalition that has been publicly overtly hostile to the idea of Fatah taking over the Gaza Strip, alongside comments from Defense Minister Yoav Gallant asserting that Palestinian Authority rule of the Strip would be the “least bad option.”

Palestinian analyst Mohammed Daraghmeh notes that the arrest and killings of PA personnel is significant for understanding current and future governance of Gaza: “The Palestinian Authority’s failed attempts to deploy some security personnel in Gaza show that Hamas is still in control in the Gaza Strip despite seven months of devastating war. It also shows that the only option for Palestinians to run Gaza the day after the war is through national unity. Neither Fatah nor Hamas can do the job solely on its own.”

A Fatah and Hamas delegation convened in China towards the end of the month for reconciliation talks. According to Daraghmeh, this meeting by itself “is not expected to produce reconciliation, but might help them gain more understanding of their complicated reality,” and should be understood in the context of the ongoing war, the American UNSC veto, and developments with Iran.

Many Palestinian analysts perceive some form of a unity government as the most likely way forward at the end of the war. While the Israeli government (and Israeli public opinion more broadly) forcefully oppose the possibility of leaving Hamas in positions of administrative or military power in Gaza, the lack of an articulated, viable alternative has created a vacuum that is being filled in the short term by Israeli military occupation of the Gaza Strip.

As a result of repeated failure of hostage deal negotiations, Israeli-Palestinian bilateral negotiations decreases to 2.0 (from 2.5) this month.

The Palestinian Issue Fuels Iran-Israel Confrontation

Following the signing of the Abraham Accords, many regional analysts have emphasized the efficacy of common interests (in particular, a common enemy) in creating a basis for a new, pragmatic, and more unified Middle East. Right-wing politicians in Israel have frequently highlighted the new diplomatic ties with the UAE, Bahrain and other states to argue that reaching a political settlement with the Palestinians is unnecessary, if not downright irrelevant. The confrontation between Israel and Iran this month showed both the power of those common interests as well as the stark limitations of any regional arrangements that ignore the Palestinian issue.

Jordanian and Saudi defensive action against Iranian drones crossing their territory showed the incalculable value of peace and normalization processes to Israeli security. Ksenia Svetlova notes,

“It’s quite clear that the regional connections prove resilient. They do not crumble in times of crisis. There were a lot of suspicions over the last three to four years that if there would be an Intifada in the West Bank or some other escalation, the Arab states would just take back normalization.”

However, Svetlova adds that “there are clear limitations to these regional events without progress on the Palestinian track. We see tensions within Arab capitals due to the unresolved nature of this conflict. These regimes are dealing with an Arab street that is very engaged and very young.”

In parallel to testing Israel’s ties with friendly Arab states, the brinksmanship between Iran and Israel also demonstrated the power of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to ignite the entire Middle East, and the world powers allied to them, in a regional if not global war. The flaws in the argument that the Palestinian issue could be put aside in favor of regional normalization have never been more apparent.

The Two-State Index (TSI) is part of the Two-State Coalition (TSC) that is brought to you by the Geneva Initiative, a Palestinian-Israeli organization working to promote a negotiated peace agreement in the spirit of the two-state vision. The TSI is part of the Two-State Coalition project, produced by an Israeli-Palestinian team, and reflects a unique bilateral perspective.

Think we missed something this month? Send us tips and comments here.

Advertisement

This message was sent byTwo-State Index, H.L. Education for Peace, Geneva Initiative, 33 Jabotinsky rd., Ramat-Gan 525108, Israel, 03-693-8780
You may notify us, any time, for no charge, of your refusal to receive advertisements by sending a refusal message to the address [email protected]
or by pressing the "unsubscribe" link at the bottom of the message.