Albinaa’ Newspaper August 17, 2024
Nasser Kandil
Certainly, no important American, Qatari, or Egyptian official leaked to us what went on in Doha, nor are we among those who claim having sources of reliable information allowing its transmission to readers, and we do not act like some media members who claim that they knew what went on in a phone call between two Presidents, as if they were a third party listening in on the conversation. However, let’s try together to gather what has been announced about the 2-day round of negotiations in Doha, and put together a puzzle which approximates reality.
Starting with the ending statement of the Doha negotiations, which we should always remember, took place in the absence of Hamas’ negotiating team, implying that they were negotiations between the mediators and the entity’s negotiating team, and when we say mediators, we should remember that they are the American, the Qatari, and the Egyptian. Because the statement inviting for negotiations signed by the American President , along with the Egyptian President, and Qatar’s Emir, talked about a cease fire and the release of hostages, and not about ending the war and the release of prisoners, which was contained in the proposal which had been offered to Hamas by the mediators, the implication is that it is the American who writes and the Arabs who merely sign. When the ending statement says that “The talks in Doha were serious and constructive and took place in a positive atmosphere,” adding that “Washington offered, with Egyptian and Qatari support, a suggestion which narrows the gaps and is in line with what Biden had proposed and was agreed on by the Security Council,” clarifying that “The American proposal builds on the point agreed on last week and fills the remaining gaps,” what is meant is that the American-Israeli talks occurred in a positive atmosphere, and the American proposal narrowing gaps is to narrow the gaps between the text presented by President Joe Biden and the remarks presented by Benyamin Netanyahu, which in turn implies the presence of a proposal which modifies Biden’s initiative to make it closer to Netanyahu’s demands. When the ending statement says that the proposal was built on points agreed on the past week, to which Hamas was not party, what is meant is the American-Israeli agreement.
If we take into consideration the comments from Netanyahu’s office about the outcome of the negotiations, of the hope that the pressures on Hamas will result on her agreement to a certain formulation, we know that this is the formulation the negotiations arrived at, and that the Arab mediators were tasked by the American to exert pressure on Hamas, or in other words that the proposed formulation is an American retreat from Biden’s proposal in favor of Netanyahu’s demands. When Al Jazeera media channel quotes a responsible Qatari official that the American proposal differs from the text proposed to and agreed on by Hamas on July 2nd, we understand Hamas’ response, relayed by a Hamas leadership source that “After the mediators informed us of the outcome of the negotiations in Doha, we became certain anew that the occupation does not want an agreement, and that the occupation continues evading and undermining, and holds on to adding new conditions to obstruct the agreement, and that the new American proposal is responsive to the occupation’s conditions and identifies with them, and we confirm our commitment to what we had agreed to on July 2nd, which is based on Biden’s declaration and the Security Council’s resolution.”
When an announcement is made at the end of the negotiations about their adjournment and a planned meeting between mediators before the end of next week, it means a respite to allow the Arab mediators to exert pressures on Hamas, which Netanyahu talked about, and to exert similar pressures on Iran and Hezbollah to postpone their consideration of a response to the Israeli aggressions which targeted Beirut’s southern suburb and Tehran’s northern one, under the slogan that delaying the response will contribute to reaching an agreement to end the war on Gaza and the massacres against her people. This is the meaning of the news bulletin distributed by the Qatari Foreign Ministry that “ Qatar’s Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, Mohamad Bin Abdel Rahman, discussed in a contact with Iran’s Acting Foreign Minister, Ali Bagheri Kani, the mediation efforts to end the war in Gaza,” and the meaning of Egypt’s Foreign Minister’s visit to Beirut and his statement that “Egypt supports the implementation of Resolution 1701 and confirms the importance of its implementation by all parties and not only by Lebanon,” emphasizing that “ We are in ongoing contacts to avoid Lebanon the implications of any escalation.”
Here we understand Hamas’ declaration that she is concerned with nothing except a plan for the execution of what was proposed to her and she accepted on July 2nd, and her statement that there is no guarantee that the rounds will not be repeated in the same fashion with each time a new modification in Netanyahu’s favor agreed on by Washington, and on its basis making a change to Biden’s proposal, and assigning to the Arab mediators the task of pressuring Hamas, and asking from Iran and Hezbollah the postponement of their response, and if Hamas disagrees, having Washington blame Hamas of losing the golden opportunity of a generous resolution accepted by Tel Aviv, just like it did before, after Hamas had accepted the mediators’ offer on May 6, and if Hamas accepts, causing the loss of all the sacrifices of Gaza’s people, and in both cases buying time and watering down Iran and Al Mukawama forces’ right to respond.
Washington, along with the Arab mediators, do not dare to say that creating an acceptable atmosphere for negotiations calls for, at a minimum, ending war acts and opening the way for humanitarian aid to Gaza to end the war of starvation. The answer: Imad 4.
