Washington- More than a week after US President Joe Biden presented a plan requiring a ceasefire and the release of the remaining detainees inside the Gaza Strip, neither Israel nor the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) officially and categorically announced their position on this plan.
In order to shed light on the discussions and debates taking place in Washington, Israel and the Gaza Strip, especially with the presentation of the Biden plan coinciding with the threat of Israeli Security Minister Benny Gantz to withdraw from the current government of Benjamin Netanyahu, and the latter’s expected visit to deliver a speech in Congress, Tel Aviv Tribune Net interviewed Hussein Ibish, a researcher and expert in Middle East affairs, and America’s policy towards the region, at the Arab Gulf States Institute in Washington.
Researcher Ibish has long experience in the file of the Arab-Israeli conflict, as he previously worked within the “American Action Committee on Palestine,” and also served as director of communications for the American-Arab Committee against Discrimination. He holds a doctorate from the University of Massachusetts-Amherst.
And the text of the dialogue:
-
What do you think of the Biden administration’s moves to conclude a deal between Hamas and Israel for a ceasefire and the release of detainees?
First, Biden has become increasingly frustrated with Israel and the continuing war in Gaza in recent weeks. He is trying to give Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a chance to reach an agreement, despite the opposition of the most extreme Israeli politicians in his government, under the pretext that “the Americans put pressure and made me agree to the deal.”
At the same time, Biden is trying to pressure Netanyahu, and others in Israel, by conveying his message to the larger circle in it, which supports a deal to rescue the “hostages” over prioritizing further war and destroying Hamas.
In addition to the above, Biden also gave Netanyahu the opportunity to blame the more extreme members of his government for any Israeli hesitation or intransigence regarding the deal, but the latter did not accept any of this, and explicitly rejected Biden’s proposal by saying that he was only interested in the first phase of the three-stage plan. Netanyahu only wants a 42-day ceasefire during which many of the remaining hostages are released, but nothing more.
-
What is Biden’s interest in pushing the parties to sign a deal that stops the fighting and releases the detainees?
Biden needs to end the war for domestic political reasons, because in an election year he does not want to be burdened with more killing in Gaza that seems excessive and unnecessary, and in which Washington is participating, due to US support for the Israeli war effort, especially in the first few months of the operation.
But the United States also needs to end the war in order to try to return to the important project of bringing together its two main partners in the Middle East – Israel and Saudi Arabia – in an actual alliance to thwart Iran in the near term and, in the long term, to limit the possibility of the spread of Chinese influence in the region. The Middle East, especially the Gulf region.
-
What does Biden think of Netanyahu’s positions on the deal?
Unfortunately for Biden, Netanyahu clearly believes that the best way to stay out of prison on the corruption charges for which he is currently being tried is to remain in office, and the best way to do that is to continue the war indefinitely.
Biden said in his recent interview with Time magazine that it is reasonable for people to conclude that Netanyahu wants the war to continue indefinitely. This is the core of the growing rift not only between Biden and Netanyahu, but between the United States and Israel, which extends to the possibility of a major Israeli invasion of Lebanon later this year or next, and above all, the question of establishing a Palestinian state, which Washington considers indispensable. But Israel rejects it absolutely and completely.
Netanyahu is not the only one who takes these hard-line positions, and while his rivals are supposed to be more “moderate,” such as Minister Benny Gantz, he also rules out the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Therefore, the “special relationship” between the United States and Israel is under enormous pressure, the worst since the mid-1950s when Eisenhower forced the Israelis, with Moscow’s support, to withdraw from the Sinai Peninsula and expose the tripartite plot against Egypt involving Israeli collusion with France and Britain. You have to go back to that degree of tension in order to find any analogue to the current crisis.
-
In light of the difference in opinions between them, what do you think of Netanyahu accepting an invitation to deliver a speech before Congress on July 24?
Netanyahu is once again trying to bypass a Democratic president and speak directly to Republicans and other Americans with a rare speech in Congress, in virtual support of a Republican candidate. This is another blatant interference in the US internal political process and scene, but this is normal for Netanyahu.
In fact, Netanyahu is a completely different politician, as he is an actual member of the Republican Party. In particular, he clearly feels that the re-election of Donald Trump would be a huge advantage for him in the short term in keeping the war going in Gaza, which he clearly wants to do, and in the long term perhaps in annexing the West Bank, or perhaps associated with the mass expulsion of Palestinians from many areas. From the main areas.
In fact, Trump’s January 2020 “Peace to Prosperity” plan (attributed to Jared Kushner, but actually prepared by other Jewish extremists in the Trump administration) called for Israel to annex 30% more of the West Bank than it had already devoured. , including the Jordan Valley, which will completely surround any potential Palestinian entity inside Israel.
For all these reasons and more, including the need to use Israel’s relations with the United States as part of his plan to remain in power and stay out of prison, Netanyahu hopes to help Trump, as well as repair his personal relations with him after this relationship was severely damaged following Netanyahu’s congratulations to Biden on his victory shortly after Announcing the results of the 2020 elections, which Trump personally considered a “horrible insult and betrayal” by Netanyahu.
-
Why did Biden agree to announce an “Israeli plan” instead of presenting an “American plan”?
Clearly, this was in order to try to pressure Israeli leaders into accepting a plan that they could not reject as an “Israeli plan,” as well as to give Israel credit if an agreement was reached.
But it was clear even when Biden said that this was an American plan, not an Israeli one, and he talked about the Israeli leaders in the current government who want the war to continue indefinitely, and when we assumed that he was talking about Netanyahu’s more extreme colleagues in the Cabinet, he was actually talking about Netanyahu. Himself.
Biden had hoped that Netanyahu would make a rational decision, on behalf of Israel, to support the proposal, take credit, and blame any problems on the extremists in his government. But Netanyahu did not accept any of that at all.
-
From your side, how do you explain the Hamas movement’s position on Biden’s plan?
Hamas leaders showed a degree of intelligence in their response, and they did not say yes or no, and this differs from Netanyahu’s contradictory response. Hamas realized the gap between Biden’s clear statement that “it is time to end this war” and Netanyahu’s response that “this is not the time to end the war at all.”
So Hamas’ response was that they were open to an agreement of this kind, “as long as Israel agreed to end the war,” knowing that Netanyahu had already said that he certainly would not do so. It is clear that the movement’s position aims to play on the divisions between Washington and Israel and drive another wedge between them.
-
What are the calculations of the Hamas movement regarding its decision regarding the agreement?
As for the agreement itself, Hamas leaders in Gaza insisted from the beginning and justified their actual enthusiasm for the war they consciously engineered by saying that they had succeeded in returning the Palestinian issue to the international agenda. This is true, but simply putting the issue back on the table does not actually achieve anything for the Palestinians. It only opens the possibility for this to happen. However, Israel’s position makes this completely impossible, so even the gains that Hamas may have created are not available. For the Palestinians in fact.
-
How does Hamas think about its future in the Gaza Strip?
Hamas leaders in Gaza are happy with the way the war is going. They said from the beginning that they intended to engineer a state of “permanent war” with Israel, which could only mean long-term resistance operations against the Israeli occupation forces in Gaza.
It is clear that Hamas leaders in Gaza knew that Israel would target their forces and battalions with full force, and this is what is happening now. But, apparently, the goal all along was to create conditions for long-term military operations against the Israeli occupation forces. Recent history shows that effective rebellion against occupation can be waged effectively under the most difficult and relentless circumstances, as long as the rebels are willing to die.
It appears that Hamas has many cadres willing to sacrifice their lives, but they will also need training, as they did on October 7 of last year.
It is clear that Hamas’s intention is to say to all Palestinians, on the basis of this rebellion that it aspires to, that we are the national movement, because we alone fight the occupation every day in order to control Palestinian land here in Gaza.
We kill and die for Palestine, while the Palestinian Authority acts as a shield for the occupation in the West Bank, and the PLO sits at an empty negotiating table where the Israelis never come, and where nothing good ever happens if they sit.
-
Finally, what do you think of Defense Minister Benny Gantz’s threat to dissolve the Knesset after issuing an ultimatum demanding that Netanyahu announce the post-war plan for Gaza by June 8?
Benny Gantz is in no position to back away from helping Netanyahu stay. Netanyahu’s majority will survive as long as he sticks with his openly racist Jewish friends. I don’t know what Gantz’s plan is, but as things stand, he does not have the ability to bring down Netanyahu’s coalition simply by leaving it.
He may be trying to increase pressure on the prime minister by narrowing his options and increasing his reliance on unpopular fringe figures, who may tarnish his administration in the eyes of much of the public. Or perhaps he is preparing for the next elections, although that will happen in about two years unless the coalition falls for other reasons.
I’m not sure he’ll follow through on his threat, although given everything he’s said, he’ll probably feel he has to withdraw, but I don’t see how that would particularly benefit him. It certainly would not do much harm to Netanyahu, other than reducing public confidence in the war cabinet, which is already very low. It seems to me that the most likely scenario involves Netanyahu and the current government continuing for the foreseeable future, and certainly for the next few months.
The upcoming US elections may change the equation in Israel, which would help explain why Netanyahu wants to come and address Congress, and through them, the American public.
