THE WORLD IN WORDS

What is stopping the achievement of an agreement in the Middle East?

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken ended his ninth visit to the Middle East with no business done. What prevents reaching a compromise?

6086 views 0 comment(s)
Photo: REUTERS
Photo: REUTERS
Disclaimer: The translations are mostly done through AI translator and might not be 100% accurate.

Blinken flew from Qatar to the United States relatively abruptly and in a bad mood. Despite the efforts of Egypt and Qatar, the Palestinian movement Hamas did not accept a transitional compromise that would have stopped military operations and released the hostages. Before the trip, Blinken reiterated: "Our message is simple and it is clear and urgent: there must be an agreement in the next few days and we will do everything we can to get it there."

Already after Israel's consent, Hamas circles could hear that the latest version of the agreement was "diametrically opposed" to the compromises initially made by the US, Egypt and Qatar, and that the meaning of the agreement was "turned in Israel's favor." But, even after Blinken's departure, his collaborators remained in the Middle East, just as Egypt and Qatar announced that they would continue to work to reach an agreement as soon as possible.

What is the problem?

Although the content of the latest version has not been published, in principle it is an agreement proposed by US President Joe Biden back in May. It foresees three phases: first, the cessation of military operations for six weeks, when, secondly, the conditions for a permanent cessation of hostilities would be precisely determined. And the third phase would be the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip.

For Israel, the obligations of renouncing the use of military force during the six weeks were many: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu constantly talks about "complete victory" and "destroying Hamas", as well as "breaking the military and administrative capacity of Hamas in Gaza". It is difficult for the Israeli side to believe that this movement will not, sooner or later, start terrorist actions again and be a threat to Israel.

In order to prevent this, Israel wants to maintain control, not only on the border of the Gaza Strip and Egypt, in the so-called the Philadelphia corridor, but also between the north and south of the Gaza Strip, in the so-called Non-customs corridor. With this, he wants to prevent the smuggling of weapons and explosives, that is, the unhindered passage of Hamas fighters through the Gaza Strip.

On the other hand, Hamas representatives claim that the original agreement provided for a "complete withdrawal" of Israeli forces, not just from the densely populated areas that Israel is apparently ready to leave.

What makes Hamas accept the agreement?

It would be good to believe that the fact that, according to Palestinian information, so far there are more than 40.000 dead, more than 90.000 wounded, that countless Palestinians have been left homeless, that they have been destroyed, is reason enough for Hamas to accept a truce and release the hostages. infrastructure and supply of the population, that there is almost no medical system at all and that the ruins stretch as far as the eye can see.

Hostages, however, are the only guarantee of survival for Hamas. In any case, this group wants to present itself to the Palestinians as the movement that is ultimately the winner of this conflict and cannot afford to "lose face" by accepting Israeli checkpoints in the Gaza Strip even after the ceasefire.

When it comes to the border, or at least the Rafah crossing towards Egypt, some kind of solution could be found there. In fact, the Palestinian Authority, which governs the area of ​​West Jordan, offered to monitor that border crossing, but Israel also refused, just as it is completely unacceptable to Hamas. The European Union sent its EU BAM border monitoring mission there in 2005, but withdrew in 2007, when the Gaza Strip was taken over by Hamas. Maybe there could be a discussion about such or a similar mission.

What makes Israel accept the agreement?

A lot: first the hostages - although it is uncertain how many of the remaining 109 are still alive. But for Jewish believers, it is extremely important that at least their families receive the bodies in order to say goodbye to them in an appropriate way. Practically every day there are protests across Israel demanding that the prime minister do everything to bring these hostages home.

The Israeli army is not happy about the mission in the Gaza Strip either: it is not at all a battlefield where it is clear where the enemy is. And Israeli soldiers also die there. In addition, there is a real threat that the conflict will spread: in the north of Israel, towards the border with Lebanon, where the Hezbollah movement has spread, it is almost impossible to talk about any kind of "peace" anymore. Skirmishes are daily and there is a constant simmering danger of an even bigger and open military conflict with Lebanon.

And there is the threat from Iran: after the liquidation of Hezbollah leader Ismail Hania in Tehran and Fuad Shukr in Beirut, the move of Iran's religious leaders is still awaited. For now, the USA has sent significant military forces to that region, but Israel also has to ask itself: what will happen in the American elections, which are held in a little more than two months. Although Donald Trump has always presented himself as a great friend of Israel, it is difficult to know what his decision will be tomorrow.

As for the Israeli prime minister, it is absolutely clear that this is the end of his career - one way or another. All concessions to Hamas are resolutely rejected by its radical coalition partners, and there is not a small number of Israeli citizens who do not believe in some kind of coexistence with that terrorist organization. That is why Netanyahu wants to prevent Hamas from expanding its power and influence in the Gaza Strip. This prevention includes the option of a new military intervention after a temporary ceasefire.

(Deutsche Welle)

Bonus video:

(Opinions and views published in the "Columns" section are not necessarily the views of the "Vijesti" editorial office.)