Towards crystallizing a national democratic alternative

Although presenting scenarios after the aggression and the war of annihilation is part of the psychological warfare carried out by the occupation government and its partners in Washington and some European capitals, the Palestinians must prepare for the next day, based on the conviction that what comes after the Al-Aqsa flood is different from what came before it. 

The government of Benjamin Netanyahu will fall after the war and a new government coalition will be formed, and the Palestinian Authority will be changed to achieve Palestinian national interests, or it will be dissolved, collapsed, or renewed as US President Joe Biden demanded, or we will be faced with an authority that embodies the national consensus and a tool of the unified Liberation Organization, we will have a new Hamas movement, and all of this and its extent will be determined according to the results of the war.

The scenario of defeating Hamas and the resistance is being portrayed as if it is the only and inevitable scenario whenever the future of Gaza is being researched. It is directly linked to isolation from Hamas, or after eliminating it and its military and civilian infrastructure, removing it from power, and preventing it from returning to it.

In fact, any war is likely to reach several outcomes, ranging from the defeat of one party to the victory of one party, or reaching a formula of no victor and no loser, which is the scenario most likely to occur, as indicated by the various indicators and facts on the battlefield and their repercussions on the various parties and countries, regionally and internationally. It is a formula in which no party is defeated decisively, and both parties or various parties can claim victory. If this scenario is achieved, the weak party will have stood firm and achieved some kind of victory simply because it did not enable the strong party to achieve its goals.

It is difficult that there is a victory for Israel, which has not achieved any specific goal, despite the fact that 45 days have passed since the start of the war, and it began with a crushing defeat, or even with an earthquake that shook it from the depths, and more than 1,200 people were killed, many times more wounded, and 240 prisoners and detainees, in addition to economic, psychological damages. 

It is also difficult for the resistance to win in light of the gross imbalance of power, the American conspiracy and partnership in the war, and the 50,000 dead, wounded and missing people it has left behind so far, and in light of the comprehensive destruction of large and numerous areas in the Gaza Strip and the destruction of half of the buildings and infrastructure.

Post-war scenarios

The first scenario: erasing the Gaza Strip
This scenario is based on the destruction of the Gaza Strip through a war of extermination, open massacres, ethnic cleansing, collective punishment, and a stifling siege, and the displacement of the people of the Strip to Sinai, Egypt, or to several countries that extend, according to one scenario, to various countries of the world.

This scenario collided with official and popular Palestinian opposition, as was evident in the steadfastness of people in the Gaza Strip. So much so that more than 800,000 residents still live in the northern Gaza Strip, despite the destruction of half of the homes and more than half of the infrastructure. It also collided with Arab, Islamic, and international opposition, especially Egyptian-Jordanian opposition, which led to it being withdrawn from circulation, or more correctly, temporarily frozen.

However, the continuation of the war of extermination and its targeting of comprehensive destruction and elimination of life and infrastructure in the northern Gaza Strip; It indicates that displacement is still a goal that the occupation seeks to achieve. Gila Gamliel, the Israeli Minister of Intelligence for the Likud Party, after Bezalel Smotrich, the Minister of Finance, called for settling the people of Gaza in Arab and foreign countries, and financing this process with money that will be spent on reconstruction, on the basis that if the occupation succeeds in completing the occupation of the northern Gaza Strip, it will go To the south.

It is reported that about 43% of the dead have fallen in the south, as was actually announced. This means that the people of the south and those who took refuge there will be exposed, if the ground war extends there, to a new refuge that the occupation forces plan and prefer to take outside the Gaza Strip. This is by putting Egypt in front of a fait accompli and finding other alternatives, through displacement from the sea as the occupation plans, and this appeared in the contacts it made with many countries to encourage them to approve programs to facilitate and encourage the reception of the people of Gaza.

An extension of the ground war to the south is possible

Completion of the ground war and its extension to the south is very likely; Because the resistance exists in the center and the south, as it still exists in the north, and therefore without completely occupying the Gaza Strip and liquidating the resistance and its military and civil infrastructure, the Israeli victory they seek cannot be achieved. Without a decisive victory, it is not possible to restore Israel's deterrent power, nor to restore Israel's strategic position among its people, its partners, and its Western allies, especially in the United States of America. Therefore, the war is likely to continue to test and exhaust the possibility of achieving this goal until the losses of its continuation become greater than the profits that can be achieved.

If occupying the entire sector and staying there is not possible; given the continued resistance this would lead to, emphasis could be placed on establishing buffer zones to provide security and control over very vital territory.

The displacement scenario is unlikely. Because it is rejected by Palestinians, Arabs, and internationally, but it can be partially implemented after the aggression stops, through the migration of some capital, expertise, and competencies, especially from young people, at rates higher than the migration rates that occurred during the last two decades.

The second scenario: establishing a temporary civil administration

This scenario is based on the establishment of a temporary civil administration affiliated with the occupation authorities, with security remaining in the hands of the occupation forces until a new situation is created that does not allow for a repetition of what happened. That is, threatening the occupying state again.

Here, the occupation will face the likely possibility that Palestinians, whether from the Gaza Strip or elsewhere, will not accept being part of this temporary administration. Because whoever agrees will be an agent of the occupation, and his people will treat him on this basis. Which means that, according to this scenario, the occupation will be forced to occupy the Gaza Strip, remain there, and bear its consequences and responsibility for more than two million people for an indefinite period. This is something that the United States and the entire world oppose, in addition to strong Palestinian, Arab, and Islamic opposition. But it is something sought by extremist religious and nationalist Zionist circles, which have even begun to call for the restoration of settlement in the Gaza Strip.

The third scenario: placing the Gaza Strip under Arab or international guardianship

This scenario is rejected by Palestinians, Arabs, and internationally unless it is part of a political project based on establishing a Palestinian state, and this is what Israel rejects. No one in the world wants to provide cover for the occupation and bear responsibility in its place in a region hat has witnessed humanitarian disasters with enormous humanitarian and economic consequences and repercussions.

Fourth scenario: return of Palestinian Authority to the Gaza Strip

This scenario needs the approval of the Authority that has shown willingness if it is part of a political solution based on the two-state solution. Although this scenario is acceptable in the Arab world and internationally, it is rejected by the Israeli government, as stated by Netanyahu, who said more than once that power in its current state cannot return to the Gaza Strip, first because it was there and Hamas turned against it, and because it is a “terrorist Authority.” Its president did not condemn the Al-Aqsa flood, it incites against Israel, its ministers praised the Al-Aqsa flood, it teaches its children hatred of Israel, and it pays salaries to “terrorists” and their families.

This scenario is unlikely, as the return of the Authority within the formulas proposed by Israel would make the Authority turn into a puppet authority, and thus lose any legitimacy to represent the Palestinians.

New Palestinian leadership and an honorary position for President Abbas
Perhaps what was stated in Joe Biden's article, published in the Washington Post, about the necessity of assuming renewed authority in the Gaza Strip, is an attempt to meet Netanyahu's demands by changing or renewing the Authority. There is a lot of talk in Washington and European and Arab capitals about the necessity of finding a new Palestinian leadership, even if President Mahmoud Abbas assumes an honorary position and transfers his powers to a council of ministers in accordance with what happened with the late President Yasser Arafat, and in implementation of what is contained in the amended Basic Law, changing Authority and renewing its legitimacy is to hold elections so that they are effective and exceed deficit, corruption.

This scenario is possible, and has an opportunity, if not a great one, but there is a major obstacle before it, which is that the Netanyahu government is not ready to deal with a political solution based on the two-state solution. Therefore, there will be a need to topple Netanyahu and his ruling coalition by holding early Israeli elections in which the opposition parties will win.

The question is: If Benny Gantz becomes prime minister, as various polls indicate, to what extent can he respond to a political initiative in light of his extremism and the prevalence of extremism in Israel before October 7 and its increase after it?

Yes, he may be different from Netanyahu in terms of form, but he adopts the well-known Israeli no’s, which include: no return to the June 4 lines, no division of Jerusalem, no removal of settlements, no approval of the right of return, and no establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state on 1967 borders.

Fifth scenario: dissolution or collapse of Palestinian Authority

The occurrence of this scenario will lead to a kind of chaos and security chaos, and the return of direct occupation, albeit in new forms that could include the creation of local administrations that can be called authorities in implementation of the Seven Emirates Plan proposed years ago by the Zionist researcher Mordechai Kedar.

Although this scenario is unlikely, it cannot be completely ruled out in light of the political, economic and financial crisis that the Authority is witnessing, the competition over who will succeed Abbas, the lack of an agreed-upon mechanism for the transitional period, and in light of an extremist Israeli government that behaves like a wounded, charging bull, without balance, and with difficulty of achieving these scenarios this scenario keeps popping up.

The magic turned against the magician
Based on the above, presenting post-war scenarios, without there being a possible or comfortable scenario for the occupation, further complicated the already complex situation. The return of the occupation is not a solution, as it was there in the Gaza Strip and emerged as a result of several reasons, including: resistance, the necessity of getting rid of the rule of more than two million Palestinians, seizing control of the political initiative for fear of imposing unwanted Israeli initiatives, and focusing efforts on settling the West Bank, Judaizing it, and deepening the occupation there. 

Sixth scenario: Change of Authority and rebuilding of the PLO
This scenario is the Palestinian favorite, and it cannot have a great chance of success unless a national, democratic alternative is built that includes the broadest national and popular mobilization. It is very necessary because it puts the fate of the Palestinians in their hands and not in the hands of others, but it is capable of blocking all other hostile scenarios.

This scenario is the national option due to the inability to accept the Authority or Palestinian figures from and outside the Gaza Strip to lead the Strip for a transitional or permanent period on the back of an Israeli tank, and under direct or indirect occupation. The occupation forces’ control over security for an indefinite period is unanimously agreed upon in Israel. The fact that the authority lost its legitimacy before October 7, and seemed to be no more relevant after that for several reasons, including:

First, the failure of its political program and the failure to adopt an alternative program;

Secondly, it does not appeal to the people by holding elections that would renew its popular legitimacy.

Third, the division occurred and there was no national consensus nor political will to end the division and restore national unity, in addition to the fact that the PLO was frozen. This requires the formation of a transitional leadership that can be called a “national steering committee” whose primary mission is to lead the stage without bypassing the PLO institutions in whose name decisions must be issued, until a new national council is formed by elections wherever possible, and by national consensus on national and objective foundations and standards. There is also a disagreement over the return of Palestinian Authority in the corridors of the Israeli government, and even in the Israeli War Council, between those who support its return as it is, or after changing it, and those who reject that, and there is a greater disagreement within the ruling coalition over the continued existence of the Authority as it represents the Palestinian identity, and its existence as a single authority keeps the door to establishing a Palestinian state open.

The solution is to build a national, democratic alternative

The path to the Israeli and American scenarios can certainly be blocked by building a national democratic Palestinian alternative through the development of a broad coalition, and the president must sponsor the process of change and renewal, and thus end his political career in a national and honorable manner, or resign and make room for a new leadership that works to accomplish what he was unable to accomplish. From another angle, the process of change could  takes place through accumulated political and public pressure through a national front or a broad national meeting, and then by appealing to the people to hold elections when possible after stopping the aggression.

The ball is in the court of the various forces, movements, institutions, and national figures inside and outside the country, especially the Fatah and Hamas movements. Change can - and must, and is better - begin with the crystallization of a comprehensive vision based on all national rights, and currently focused on a central goal, which is ending the occupation and embodying the free, independent state of Palestine no matter how possible or impossible it is to achieve. This is because the battle currently underway is focused on the fate of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, provided that new strategies emerge, and a new authority and leadership will have the decision to make peace or resistance based on the requirements of the political program of struggle, which will be achieved by accumulating achievements and changing the balance of power on the ground, and working to invest them with political achievements. It is not a reproduction of the previous process; the process of negotiations for the sake of negotiations, and a process without peace aimed at covering up the facts established by the occupation, which made the Israeli solution the only possible and practically proposed solution.

A national salvation government whose reference is the leadership of the unified PLO

The desired vision could include the formation of a national salvation government whose reference will be the leadership of the unified PLO, and the only scenario is not for the factions to participate directly in it. Rather, it could be a government of technocrats to overcome the complex of rejecting the participation of “Hamas,” which will play a fundamental role by participating in its formation. This government is working to unify the institutions of the Authority, end the division, prepare to hold presidential and legislative elections as soon as possible, and organize an Arab and international process to rebuild the Gaza Strip.