Has US threat to force Qatar to expel Hamas out of Doha collapsed the Ceasefire negotiations?

Has US threat to force Qatar to expel Hamas out of Doha collapsed the Ceasefire negotiations?

    Sunday, March 31, 2024   No comments

Although the US has warned the leaders of Qatar as early as October that they will need to reconsider the presence of the leaders of Hamas in Doha, the US wanted to use their presence there to strike deals that it wanted. However, with the negotiations for a ceasefire going nowhere, the US administrations wanted to leverage Qatar hosting of Hamas leaders to force them to accept a proposal the Biden administration formulated. 

CNN reported recently that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken “delivered a stern message to Qatar earlier this month: Tell Hamas that they must deliver on a hostage and ceasefire deal that would halt the war in Gaza or risk getting kicked out of the Qatari capital of Doha.” That threat appears to have failed to achieve its goal and worse, it may have backfired.

First, Hamas leaders are now saying that there is no negotiation because their last counteroffer was not responded to by Israel in a way that will allow them to go on negotiating. Hamas and other Palestinian factions insist that there will be a deal only when a permanent ceasefire is approved and guaranteed by the mediators, when aid is delivered to all the people in Gaza, and when Israel forces leave Gaza, when people who lost their homes are sheltered. 

Second, Hamas and other Palestinian resistance leaders took the threat of being kicked out of Doha, the same way they way forced out Turkey, and offered a demonstration of what will happen if they are forced out of Doha: they will settle in Iran. Iran seems to be willing to not only host Hamas leaders, but to host them in a formal manner—something no other host nation has done for Hamas since their days in Syria pre-2012.

Just after the conclusion of the Persian new year celebrations, leaders of Hamas and Islamic Jihad were received by the highest officials of the Iranian government, including a couple meetings with the supreme leader. The message is clear: you can kick us out of Qatar and when you do, we will find home in a country that recognizes us as official representatives of the Palestinian peoples. That means, if Israel or the US wants to negotiate with Hamas, they will have to find someone else other than Qatar or Egypt to mediate. China and Russia willingness to receive Hamas leaders as official representatives of the Palestinian people make Iran's move less problematic.

Based on events on the ground, Hamas leaders having to leave another country to find refuge in Iran will only make Arab countries, like Qatar and Jordan look week. The daily denotations that are growing by the day in Jordan are a good indication of this trend.

Pro-Palestinian protesters in Jordan, March 30, 2024.

Norman Finkelstein: Israel is facing an existential crisis and South Africa offers a model for a one-state

Norman Finkelstein: Israel is facing an existential crisis and South Africa offers a model for a one-state

    Sunday, March 31, 2024   No comments

The American Jewish historian, Norman Finkelstein, argues that “Israel” is facing an existential crisis for the first time since its establishment, and suggests that South Africa offers a model for a one-state solution for one people of different backgrounds.

The American Jewish thinker and historian who opposes the Israeli occupation policy, Norman Finkelstein, said that “Israel” has obstructed all political solutions in its war on the Gaza Strip. In a symposium held with students at Princeton University, Finkelstein said: “At the current stage at least, we have reached the end of any kind of diplomacy to resolve the conflict,” adding that “talk about a two-state solution seems absolutely ridiculous, and there is no diplomatic solution.” appears in the horizon".

 He pointed out that "Israel is determined to impose a military victory and will not back down from that goal."  Finkelstein explained, “On the other hand, the Secretary-General of Hezbollah said it explicitly, that he will not accept a military defeat for Hamas, and that this will not happen,” adding that “these two goals are not reconcilable, either victorious or defeated.”

Finkelstein believed that "at the level of the Arab and Islamic worlds, a conclusion has been reached that living with Israel is impossible," adding that according to the Arab and Islamic worlds, it is "moronic and must go. For this reason, there is no political solution on the horizon in the short term."

 He pointed out that "Israel is facing, for the first time in its history, a crisis of existence and legitimacy," pointing out that "its main opponent in this regard is South Africa, the country that is confronting it at the International Court of Justice and presenting itself as a model for a one-state solution for one people."

 As for the United States, “the American Democratic Party is facing a crisis with its broad popular base that objects to Israel’s crimes, and the party’s leadership can no longer ignore that base,” according to Finkelstein.

 He continued by saying: "I was shocked and astonished by US Senator Chuck Schumer's speech last week. Senator Schumer has always been fanatical about Israel, and he was the one who called for the economic strangling of Gaza."

 The American writer pointed out that “Senator Schumer, along with New Jersey Senator Menendez, were at the forefront of those opposing the deal with Iran,” explaining that “he served as the official spokesman for the Israeli government in our country.”

 He considered that "Schumer's statements critical of Israel are beyond expectations."

Finkelstein's talk and comments were published on YouTube.

It must be noted that the two-state solution is promoted as the only solution, which is now becoming very hard to realize, when other examples from around the world point to other alternatives. One of these examples mentioned here is the South Africa example. For years the apartheid regime created systems that dehumanized the people of South Africa. The oppression was built in part on the false idea that Africans are incapable of building and running a democracy. All that was proved wrong: Africans overthrew the racist regime but did not purge South Africa of white people. The preserved South Africa as one country for all.

Other examples of single-state solutions to conflict zones are in the Middle East region and they were in part promoted and engineered by Western governments and their regional allies. The Lebanese example is just on the other side of the border: After 15 years of civil war, Christians and Muslims settled to live, still in tension, but in peace, thanks to a power-sharing system that allows Christians, Shia Muslims, and Sunni Muslims to create a calibrated power sharing system to preserve the national unity of Lebanon.

After the US invaded Iraq, the constitution and institutions that were produced under the authority of the occupying forces of the United States, produced a power sharing structure that allows the Kurdish people, the Sunni Muslims, and the Shia majority to live in relative peace. It is worth noting that the current president, then a senator, Biden, promoted the idea of breaking up Iraq—a tri-state solution if you will.

If the South African, Lebanese, and Iraq models of a single-state solution whereby different peoples, separated by religion or ethnicity, can coexist and govern through power sharing structures, why would a single-state solution that would allow Jews, Christians, and Muslims to live in peace through some sort of power-sharing formular be impractical? And how would a two-state solution solve the problem of the non-Jews, nearly 30% of the population who are Christian and Muslim, who would end up in Israel under any border configuration, should the two state-solution come into existence?

As the world community is forced to address this 75-year old conflict, there is much to be learned not only from the moral force that compelled South Africa to stand against genocide, but to offer a practical example of many peoples in one nation living in relative peace despite the cruelty of the past.

Demonstrations in Morocco are escalating and demanding an end to the siege, starvation, and killing of civlians in Gaza by Israel's armed forces

Demonstrations in Morocco are escalating and demanding an end to the siege, starvation, and killing of civlians in Gaza by Israel's armed forces

    Saturday, March 30, 2024   No comments

Demonstrations and marches in support of Gaza continue in dozens of Moroccan cities, as demonstrators demand an end to the siege, starvation, and killing practiced by the Israeli occupation against the residents of the Gaza Strip for nearly 6 months.

During the solidarity march called for by a number of local non-governmental bodies, including the Moroccan Authority for Supporting the Nation’s Issues, on Friday evening, the participants denounced the continued Israeli aggression against Gaza, which they described as “contrary to all human rights and international standards.”

According to a statement by the Moroccan Authority for Supporting the Nation's Issues, the demonstrators demanded that the government stop normalization with Israel once and for all, denouncing international silence and complicity, and Arab and Islamic failure to support Palestine.

The demonstrators considered that "Israel's challenge to all humanitarian laws and standards, in light of Western support for it," is unacceptable, and demanded that the residents of Gaza be protected and that "Israel" be prevented from displacing them from the Strip. They stressed that the Rabat march is considered a continuation of the activities in support of Gaza, in parallel with the occasion of commemorating “Land Day.”

The statement added that participants in the marches raised Palestinian flags and chanted solidarity slogans in support of Gaza, such as “The people want to liberate Palestine,” “Palestine is a trust... and normalization is treason,” “We are going to Jerusalem... martyrs in the millions,” and “Despite the bombing and siege. “Free Gaza will not collapse” and others.

They called for immediate and urgent intervention and pressure to stop the war, open the crossings, and lift the siege on the Palestinians.

It should be noted that calls are continuing to organize new protests in various regions in the context of support and support for Palestine, the resistance and Gaza, in the context of the protest activities witnessed by the Moroccan street since the beginning of the Al-Aqsa flood on October 7, 2023.

The statement of the “Moroccan Authority for Supporting the Nation’s Issues” pointed out that 100 demonstrations in support of Palestine were organized in 52 Moroccan cities, explaining that “more than 100 demonstrations were organized on Friday, in 52 cities, in support of Gaza, which presents honorable images of steadfastness and struggle,” according to the statement of the authority. .

The statement also indicated that marches and demonstrations spread across dozens of cities and regions in Morocco, most notably in Tangier, Sidi Yahya, Kenitra, El Jadida, Tetouan, Beni Mellal, Chefchaouen, Chaouen, Azrou, Casablanca and Agadir.

Today, Saturday, marks the anniversary of “Land Day,” when Israel occupied vast areas of Arab population’s lands in 1976.

Palestinians everywhere in the world commemorate “Land Day,” which falls on March 30 of each year, by launching several activities in solidarity and support for Palestine and the cause.

This year's anniversary comes amid the escalation of the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip since last October 7, and the escalation of the settlement attack in the West Bank.

It is noteworthy that tens of thousands of Moroccans demonstrated last February in the main roads of the capital, Rabat, in rejection of the Israeli genocide against the people of the Gaza Strip, demanding an end to the normalization of relations between Morocco and “Israel.”

The demonstrators raised banners in front of the Parliament building in the center of the capital, reading: “Stop the massacre,” “Normalization is treason,” and “No embassy, no ambassador.” They also set fire to the Israeli flag.

  

Another US government employeee resigning in protest of gaza War: "Why I’m resigning from the State Department"

Another US government employeee resigning in protest of gaza War: "Why I’m resigning from the State Department"

    Wednesday, March 27, 2024   No comments

Another US government employeee resigning in protest of gaza War: "Why I’m resigning from the State Department", the State Department employee, Annelle Sheline, PhD,  wrote on CNN.

For the past year, I worked for the office devoted to promoting human rights in the Middle East. I believe strongly in the mission and in the important work of that office. However, as a representative of a government that is directly enabling what the International Court of Justice has said could plausibly be a genocide in Gaza, such work has become almost impossible. Unable to serve an administration that enables such atrocities, I have decided to resign from my position at the Department of State.

...

President Joe Biden himself indirectly admits that Israel is not protecting Palestinian civilians from harm. Under pressure from some congressional Democrats, the administration issued a new policy to ensure that foreign military transfers don’t violate relevant domestic and international laws.

...

She also invoked another employee of US government, Aaron Bushnell, US Navy Pilot, who committed the most extreme act of protest, setting oneself on fire.

I am haunted by the final social media post of Aaron Bushnell, the 25-year-old US Air Force serviceman who self-immolated in front of the Israeli Embassy in Washington on February 25: “Many of us like to ask ourselves, ‘What would I do if I was alive during slavery? Or the Jim Crow South? Or apartheid? What would I do if my country was committing genocide?’ The answer is, you’re doing it. Right now.”

I can no longer continue what I was doing. I hope that my resignation can contribute to the many efforts to push the administration to withdraw support for Israel’s war, for the sake of the 2 million Palestinians whose lives are at risk and for the sake of America’s moral standing in the world.

In October, another State Department official in the bureau that oversees arms transfers, Josh Paul, resigned this week in protest of the Biden administration’s decision to continue sending weapons and ammunition to Israel as it lays siege to Gaza in its war with Hamas.

With US refrained from using its veto this time, 14 UNSC members adopted a resolution calling for a cease fire in Gaza

With US refrained from using its veto this time, 14 UNSC members adopted a resolution calling for a cease fire in Gaza

    Monday, March 25, 2024   No comments

None of the UNSC P5 member States used their NO vote; that is all it took.

For the first time, the UN Security Council adopted a resolution calling for a ceasefire in the Gaza Strip, more than 5 months after the Israeli war, as the United States - the main supporter of Tel Aviv - refrained from using its veto this time.

The resolution presented by non-permanent members of the Security Council calls for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, stressing the urgent need to increase aid and demanding the removal of all obstacles to its delivery.

Algeria's representative to the United Nations, Ammar Ben Jama, said that the adoption of the resolution is a message to the people of Gaza that the international community feels their pain and has not abandoned them.

He continued, saying, "We want Palestine to become a full and sovereign member of the United Nations."

The adoption of the resolution came after the Council failed to pass an amendment to the draft by adding the phrase “permanent ceasefire.”

UN Secretary-General António Guterres said a failure to implement the resolution would be “unforgivable.”

“The Security Council just approved a long-awaited resolution on Gaza, demanding an immediate ceasefire, and the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.

This resolution must be implemented. Failure would be unforgivable,” Guterres wrote on X.

Last Friday, Russia and China used their veto power to drop a US draft resolution calling for a ceasefire “in the framework of a deal to release the hostages,” a formulation that the Arab countries, Moscow, and Beijing described as “politicized and ambiguous.”

The United States has previously systematically opposed the term “ceasefire” in United Nations resolutions, and has obstructed 3 texts in this context, since the beginning of the war.

UN Security Council rejects US draft resolution on War in Gaza

UN Security Council rejects US draft resolution on War in Gaza

    Friday, March 22, 2024   No comments

 Algeria, the country that proposed an earlier UNSC resolution to stop the war on Gaza, rejected the US-drafted resolution. It was joined by both China and Russia, whose vetoes sunk the US resolution.

Amar Bendjama, Algeria’s ambassador to the UN, said the text was inadequate and failed to address the immense suffering endured by the Palestinians. “Those who believe that the Israeli occupying power will choose to uphold its international legal obligations are mistaken,” he told the council. “They must abandon this fiction.”

Last February, it objected to the use of the term “immediate” in the draft resolution submitted by Algeria.

Since blocking the Algerian draft resolution, which calls for an "immediate humanitarian ceasefire" in Gaza at the end of last February, US officials have been negotiating an alternative text that focuses on supporting diplomatic efforts on the ground for a six-week truce in exchange for the release of the hostages.

The Secretary-General of the United Nations, António Guterres, said that children, women and men are “living an endless nightmare,” stressing that there is no effective way to distribute aid without a ceasefire.

US rejection of three previous UNSC resolutions made some members skeptical and worried that US intentions have been thus far about shielding Israel and not about stopping the bloodshed. They want to see a clean resolution that orders an immediate cease fire and the unhindered delivery of food, water, medicine, and shelter to end the starvation of civilians in Gaza. Other issues can be addressed in separate resolutions.

China insists on an immediate and unconditional ceasefire not linked to the release of the captives

China's Permanent Representative to the Security Council, Zhang Jun, said: "We voted against the American draft resolution because it does not request an immediate ceasefire, even though the Secretary-General used Article 99 of the Charter for that purpose," adding that "the Council wasted a long time and did not request a ceasefire." Fire after."

The Chinese delegate believed that “the American draft resolution is ambiguous and does not meet the aspirations of the international community,” and that it is “unbalanced because it does not explicitly oppose the attack on Rafah,” and “it does not warn of the dire consequences that could result from such an attack.”

He continued: "The Council now has before it a clear draft resolution requesting an immediate ceasefire, and China supports it," expressing his hope "that it will gain the support of member states," because it "requests an end to the conflict and the immediate release of the hostages."

The Chinese delegate also indicated that “China rejects the accusations of America and Britain” related to its positions, considering that “if the United States is serious about a ceasefire, it should support this draft resolution.”

Zhang Jun, China's permanent representative to the UN, offered further explanation about China's voting position and relevant considerations after the vote.

Zhang said that more than 160 days have passed since the outbreak of the Gaza conflict. In the face of this human tragedy in which more than 32,000 innocent civilians have lost their lives and has left millions suffering from famine, the most urgent action to be taken by the Council is to promote an immediate, unconditional, and sustained ceasefire, which is the universal call of the international community. But the Council has dragged its feet and wasted too much time in this regard, Zhang said.

The envoy added that the US has always evaded and dodged the most essential issue, which is a ceasefire. The final text remains ambiguous and does not call for an immediate ceasefire, nor does it even provide an answer to the question of realizing a ceasefire in the short term. This is a clear deviation from the consensus of the Council members and falls far short of the expectations of the international community. 

"An immediate ceasefire is a fundamental prerequisite for saving lives, expanding humanitarian access, and preventing further conflict. The US draft, on the contrary, sets up preconditions for a ceasefire, which is no different from giving a green light to continued killings, and thus unacceptable," Zhang noted.

Moscow said that the American draft resolution does not call for a ceasefire in Gaza.. Talk about that is a hoax

The Russian Deputy Representative to the United Nations, Dmitry Polyansky, confirmed that the American draft resolution on the situation in the Gaza Strip does not include any call for a ceasefire.

Polyansky stated that the draft resolution "does not include any call for a ceasefire, as previous drafts did not include. Rather, only a philosophical statement appeared there about its importance, while linking it to the release of prisoners."

 The Russian diplomat believed that talk about the United States including a ceasefire in Gaza in the draft resolution for the first time is “just an American trick.”

In addition, “there is practically a green light for an Israeli military operation in Rafah, while attention should be focused mainly on praising the United States’ own efforts on the ground,” according to Polyansky.

He added, "This is not what humanitarian agencies need," stressing that "no philosophy will be useful in the absence of a direct demand for a ceasefire."

Polyansky pointed out, "We should not give in to Washington's attempts to present the hope as if it were a real thing, as the United States is still not interested in a real ceasefire, and is doing everything in its power not to prevent its closest ally in the Middle East from abusing the Palestinians."

History of the American veto to protect Israel

The United States’ position on UN Security Council resolutions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is consistent with its historical use of the veto to prevent any resolutions criticizing Israel, or calling for the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The United States, Israel's main backer, had previously used its veto power in the Security Council to prevent the international body from calling for an immediate ceasefire in the Palestinian territories.

Since 1945, one of the five permanent members of the Council - the United States, Russia, China, Britain and France - has used its veto to stop 36 draft Security Council resolutions related to Israel and Palestine before. Of these decisions, the United States objected to 34 decisions, while Russia and China objected to two of them.

Security Council resolutions after October 7

The US veto blocked the resolution issued on October 18, 2023, which had demanded a “humanitarian truce” and Israel’s cancellation of its evacuation order in northern Gaza.

The US representative to the United Nations said, “Resolutions are important... but the actions we take must be based on facts on the ground and support direct diplomacy that can save lives,” according to what Reuters reported.

On February 20, the United States used its veto power again to stop another draft resolution in the Security Council, blocking a demand for an immediate ceasefire on humanitarian grounds.

13 members of the Council voted in favor of the text drafted by Algeria, while Britain abstained from voting.

This is the third American veto against a draft resolution since the start of the fighting in Gaza.

The draft resolution drafted by Algeria and objected to by the United States did not link the ceasefire to the release of the hostages, but rather demanded this separately.

Washington has opposed the use of the word ceasefire in any UN action on the war between Israel and Hamas, but the American text uses language that President Joe Biden said he used last week in a phone conversation with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

This is the second time since October 7 that Washington has proposed issuing a Security Council resolution on Gaza. Russia and China had used their veto power to stop its first attempt.

In December, more than three-quarters of the 193-member UN General Assembly voted to demand an immediate ceasefire on humanitarian grounds. General Assembly resolutions are not binding, but they reflect a global consensus on critical matters—More than 150 countries thinking that the war in Gaza should be stopped immediately to address the starvation and killing of civilians leave the US position quite exposed. Only 10 countries voted against this UNGA resolution. The global consensus, if it continues to be opposed by the US alone, will eventually degrade US standing in the world.