What Does It Mean to Say “Either a Deal or a Region War”?

 August 19, 2024

By Nasser Kandil

• Since the call for the Doha negotiations, throughout the talks, and beyond, a particular phrase has been repeatedly cited. This phrase was highlighted yesterday as the leading story on Arab news channels and was reiterated by both the Defense Minister of the occupying entity and a U.S. State Department official.
• Hamas asserts that the current American proposal is merely a revised version of President Joe Biden’s plan, tailored to meet Benjamin Netanyahu’s demands. This includes retracting commitments to end the war, reversing the complete withdrawal of the occupation from the Gaza Strip, and revisiting the prisoner exchange plan. Accepting this proposal, according to Hamas, would effectively allow the occupying force – having failed in the war – to claim victory by escalating the war with even greater ferocity while regaining most of the prisoners. The occupation would continue its efforts until it achieves its objectives: displacing Gaza’s residents, crushing their resistance, and advancing the occupation’s historic project, including the Ben-Gurion Canal, the strategic gas platform, and the entertainment city that would be open to global investment. Meanwhile, two million Palestinians would face displacement similar to that endured by their ancestors in 1948 and 1967, condemned to another century of exile.
• The question is why the Palestinian side must choose between a deal laden with Netanyahu’s conditions and a regional war. Why should they fear a regional war, which would mean an explosion of tensions in the region among the parties currently confronting Gaza – namely, the occupying army and its American military arsenal, versus the Resistance Axis forces, particularly Iran, Hezbollah, Yemen, and Iraq?
• In reality, Palestinians contend that it is the occupying entity, not the resistance, that should be forced to accept a deal to avoid a regional war. To prevent such a war, the occupying entity needs to agree to terms that are acceptable to the resistance, understanding that the existing power balance does not permit them to impose their own conditions. Intermediaries should convey this message directly to the leaders of the occupying entity, emphasising the choice between a deal and a regional war, rather than merely presenting it to the Palestinians. The issue is that the U.S. fails to deliver this message, opting instead to deploy its forces to reassure the occupying entity of its protection. Meanwhile, Arab mediators lack the courage to champion the Palestinian cause and instead pressure the Palestinians, rather than offering them support.
• A regional war has never been a negative option for the Palestinians, as it would bring new forces into the struggle against the occupying entity. The Palstinians had hoped such forces would include Arab states but instead, they find that the primary actor today is Iran. Despite this fact some still question why Palestinians continue to maintain their relationship with Iran.