AhlulBayt News Agency: An expert on West Asia also remarked on the difficult circumstances in Israel, stating, "In the military context, Israelis have no novel arguments and are encountering the solid resistance of Palestine."
The media gathering titled " Paris Talks on the Gaza War" took place at the Andisheh Sazan-e Noor Institute for Strategic Studies. During this event, Dr. Saadullah Zarei deliberated on the latest advancements in the Gaza conflict, alongside the continuing ceasefire talks in Paris.
The reason for the prolonged Gaza war
During the session, Dr. Zarei discussed the factors contributing to the ongoing Gaza conflict spanning the last 5 months. He noted, "It has been 5 months since the onset of the Gaza war, with Israel persisting in its oppressive actions in the region. Israel's aim to tightly control Gaza as the sole independent Palestinian territory, thus removing it from Palestinian governance, has prolonged the conflict. Yet, achieving this goal proves challenging for Israel. Another factor is the brave and unprecedented resilience shown by the people of Gaza. Enduring 150 days of relentless bombardment, resulting in over 30,000 casualties in a 360 square kilometer area, marks an unprecedented chapter in history. Reflecting on millennia of history, such a scenario remains unparalleled. The steadfastness of Gazans is a key element in the protracted conflict, one that Israelis are determined to subdue."
Israel is currently at an impasse
The expert on West Asian affairs also commented on Israel's challenging position, noting, "Within Israel's military domain, there's a lack of fresh perspective as they confront Palestine's unwavering resilience. Even if the conflict were to continue for another 5 months, it appears unlikely that the dynamics of the war would change. The resistance persists, with Gaza's population standing firm in their beliefs and goals, making it difficult to predict the war's conclusion. Since late February, 16 days ago, “Paris Talks 2” have commenced, following “Paris Talks 1.” These negotiations involve four parties: Egypt, Qatar, the United States, and the Zionist regime. Curiously, security authorities hold the negotiation file, prompting inquiries into why political discussions are under security jurisdiction."
What are the demands of the Palestinians?
According to Dr. Zarei, the Paris negotiations commenced in late February and have persisted until Sunday. The prevailing trend suggests that due to the insistence of the Zionist regime on eliminating Hamas from the Palestinian political and military landscape, these talks have hit a standstill, failing to advance. On the other hand, Palestinians underscore three core principles: Firstly, a comprehensive cessation of hostilities, backed by both public opinion and governments, with 26 out of 27 European Union members advocating for an immediate and complete cessation of hostilities. This underscores that the call for peace is a universal demand among Palestinians. Secondly, Hamas demands the withdrawal of Israeli military forces from Gaza, a standard principle in all war negotiations, emphasizing the departure of occupying forces. Thirdly, the lifting of the siege, a global concern, poses a challenge for Netanyahu as global public opinion prioritizes resolving the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Meanwhile, Netanyahu's insistence that Hamas should disclose the names of Israeli captives, citing a lack of information on Hamas members, aims to complete Israel's database and leverage the captives' information to secure commitments from Hamas and gain an advantage. However, this demand is deemed insolent, even within Israel's cabinet, posing an additional hurdle to a ceasefire. Israel remains solely fixated on US support.
Contradictory behavior of America
Dr. Zarei also mentioned America's backing of Israel, highlighting that in their recent action, Americans vetoed the third Security Council resolution proposed by Algeria, which called for a ceasefire. Despite receiving approval from 13 members, only the UK and the US abstained. America justified its veto by claiming that issuing this resolution would obstruct the Paris ceasefire talks, despite the resolution itself advocating for a ceasefire. Had America genuinely sought a ceasefire, it could have supported this resolution. Interestingly, this resolution was vetoed on February 20th, and on February 24th, the American representative stated that there was no foreseeable end to the war. This implies that on February 20th, citing the resolution's potential impact on the Paris negotiations, they cast a negative vote, only to express uncertainty about the outcome of the Paris talks five days later. Such conduct not only aligns America with Israel but also lacks meaningful consistency. These American stances only underscore America's direct involvement in the Gaza massacre, while Washington's concern about the Gaza war appears superficial and insincere.
Security negotiations instead of political negotiations
The current negotiations concerning the Gaza conflict in Paris lack clear objectives and perspectives and do not adhere to a logical framework. The involvement of intelligence agencies and the presence of key figures like CIA Director, Mossad Director David Barnea, and the Egyptian General Intelligence Directorate Abbas Kamel, indicate the security-oriented nature of these talks. The participation of the Qatari Prime Minister holds limited significance. Thus, the emphasis on security in the Paris negotiations suggests an attempt to safeguard Israel's interests. The negotiation process reveals the intent of the United States and Israel to assert dominance. Hamas' demands for the repatriation of refugees to northern Gaza, prisoner release, and occupier withdrawal are fundamental principles recognized as reasonable by Egyptian and Qatari authorities. Nevertheless, Israel and the United States refuse to accept these principles and persist with the violence. Consequently, Israel retains impunity for atrocities in Gaza due to support from the United States.
Tel Aviv's Concerns Regarding the Sacred Month of Ramadan
Dr. Zarei expanded on the influence of Ramadan on Gaza's developments, emphasizing its unique significance. He noted that part of the rationale behind initiating Paris Talks 2 lies in Ramadan's sensitivity, as Israel closely monitors the situation in the West Bank, fearing uncontrollable escalation. Historically, Ramadan has posed challenges for Zionists due to increased Palestinian presence in sacred sites like Al-Aqsa Mosque and Al-Khalil. For Israelis, Ramadan evokes fear as Palestinian activities become less controlled. While the war is expected to persist during Ramadan, it will likely disadvantage Israel. Escalation in the West Bank is anticipated during Ramadan, with Americans foreseeing difficult times for Israelis.
An alternative route to conflict
The expert on regional affairs also addressed the internal divisions within Tel Aviv, indicating that Israeli officials, particularly those overseeing the war effort, have come to the conclusion that no significant progress will occur after 5 months, exacerbating internal discord within Tel Aviv. Benny Gantz's recent visit to the United States further fueled Netanyahu's frustration, with the Prime Minister feeling sidelined by developments outside of his control. Previously, certain American officials had advised President Biden to establish formal ties with Netanyahu's administration and engage with critics of Netanyahu's handling of the Gaza conflict, a matter underscored by Gantz's trip. It appears that discussions are also taking place regarding an alternative approach, potentially focused on managing the conflict rather than seeking an outright cessation of hostilities. This suggests that, given the lack of consensus with the current Israeli cabinet, the United States may explore alternative strategies involving Netanyahu's opponents. While this dynamic may not directly impact Palestinians, it holds significant implications for Israel's war management strategy and could lead to shifts in the ongoing conflict, especially considering Israel's reliance on US support. Any reduction in US military aid or support signals a potential shift in America's stance toward the conflict. This factor will influence Israeli decision-making regarding the war. Meanwhile, the Gaza conflict poses a dilemma for Biden, with its potential negative repercussions on his future electoral prospects affecting the White House's stance on continuing the conflict. Nevertheless, while this negative impact might prompt reconsideration, substantive changes in America's support for Israel have yet to materialize.