Al Sabaileh: Hamas disarmament a key issue in peace-enforcing attempt in Gaza
The Jordanian scholar spoke to AsiaNews about the critical issues that have emerged after the "easier" step of getting the “living hostages” back to Israel. In fact, Hamas refuses to surrender its weapons, and the establishment of an international force to monitor the truce is stalled. Overcoming the “pattern of regional conflicts and tensions” is needed to create a “future of peace on a cultural, as well as economic basis.”
Milan (AsiaNews) – The recent tensions in Gaza, with gunfights followed by heavy attacks by the Israeli army, are “normal” because "we have passed the easiest phase, that of the return of the hostages alive;” now the current problem is how to get to phase 2, especially the issue related to the disarmament of Hamas, this according to Prof Amer Al Sabaileh.
The expert in geopolitics, Middle Eastern affairs, international security, and peace process policy in crisis areas is a contributor to several newspapers, including The Jordan Times. He spoke to AsiaNews about the latest developments in Gaza.
In his view, Hamas has shown "little sign that it intends to disarm; on the contrary, it has created a tricky situation in terms of internal security and the return of the bodies of dead hostages."
In doing so, "it has exploited this transition between the first and second phases" in US President Donald Trump's peace plan to “impose its presence as a preeminent force in the Palestinian scene.”
The “pressure” exerted by Washington allowed the hostages to come home alive, but, he warns, “we have a serious problem for the second part, which will never be resolved politically until Hamas agrees to disarmament of its own accord.”
The issue of Hamas’s weapons, linked to the recent wave of violence in Gaza with its additional death toll – more than a hundred, according to sources in Gaza, many of them civilians, including children – remains central to the future.
A survey by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR), conducted between 22 and 25 October, with approximately 1,200 Palestinians, 760 in the West Bank and 440 in Gaza, shows that a large majority (about 70 per cent) are opposed to disarmament.
There is one substantial and significant difference: the opposition is stronger in the Occupied Territories, where it reaches 80 per cent, while in the Gaza Strip, where the population is under Hamas control, a smaller majority (55 per cent) opposes it.
Also noteworthy is Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's decision to appoint Vice President Hussein al-Sheikh as “acting president” in case of vacancy.
Speaking about the fragile truce in Gaza and the diplomatic activism of the United States and Gulf states in recent weeks, the Jordanian scholar noted “the pressure exerted by Qatar, especially after the [Israeli] attack, which caused Hamas to move differently."
"The issue of the living hostages was the easiest," Amer Al Sabaileh explained; "now the most challenging aspect is convincing [Hamas] leaders to disarm or leave Gaza.
“This won't happen easily, so the Israelis will remain on the ground, operating (as they have in recent days), according to their security needs, like in Lebanon, where they claim for themselves the right to carry out operations, attacks, and targeted eliminations.”
Hamas's disarmament is also accompanied by the issue of the international force to be deployed in Gaza, whose composition and timing remain vague, as well as a point of tension with Israel, which has vetoed the offer by several countries, starting with Turkey.
In this regard, the expert said that "we are not yet in a peacekeeping phase, but rather an attempt at 'peace-enforcing,' but it is not excluded, as Trump has already said, that he might authorise Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to finish the job.”
“We are at a stage where we face two scenarios: Israel intervening militarily when it feels the need, and the emergence of Palestinian militias fighting against Hamas themselves. This is a critical moment, and the lack of peace-enforcing will create ever greater internal confusion."
Regarding the countries that could be part of this force, Al Sabaileh believes “that all the nations that have a peace pact with Israel could be part of it," although the Jewish state wants "neither Turkey nor Qatar" due to a "lack of trust”.
In this sense, it is premature to consider a force along the lines of UNIFIL in Lebanon, because today the primary objective is to ensure the conflict does not erupt again while tolerating low-intensity clashes or the activity of militias fighting among themselves.
The issue of greater involvement of other countries in the crisis has not been solved. This is another of Trump's objectives, as he looks to countries "with a Muslim majority, even non-Arab, like Indonesia, which is the largest Sunni-majority nation, or Azerbaijan for Shias.”
This could touch the Abraham Accords, in which the Gulf States continue to play a key role. "Normalisation could also be important for reconstruction, future trade and economic relations, and geographical cooperation,” he said.
One example is the India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor (IMEC), which “runs right through the Gulf states, especially Saudi Arabia, which, unlike the United Arab Emirates (UAE), does not yet have a peace process with Israel.”
For this reason, “this could still be important not only to end the war and break away from a pattern of regional conflicts and tensions, but also to create a future of peace on a cultural, as well as economic basis."
To achieve this goal, or create the conditions for it to happen, the scholar supports the position lately expressed on several occasions by Cardinal Pierbattista Pizzaballa, Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, according to whom new leaders are needed on both sides.
“We are about to enter a new phase," Sabaileh says, "in which we need new rhetoric, a new narrative, new visions, and above all, new mindsets and new leaders.
“So far, many have simply wasted time and failed to impose peace, which cannot be merely a theoretical concept, but must be established through hard work, and through great effort.
“Many have lacked the courage and now belong to a phase that has ended.” In their place, "new faces must emerge; otherwise, we will not be able to take steps toward developing regional relations and usher in a new phase that puts an end to the notions of militias, weapons, and war.”
.png)
17/05/2021 10:29
