Will President Biden do it...a Palestinian state?

Big wars are the key to big transformations. What is happening in the Gaza Strip and other fronts outside it is, in one way or another, an example of a major war, between a regional state supported by the major power in the international system and many allies, facing armed organizations that believe in the absolute right to resist the occupation. Despite the power difference between the parties to the conflict equation, the war lasted for about 110 continuous days, making it a major war that must lead to major changes. The dilemma lies in determining the direction of these changes, and to what extent they will lead to a new Middle East in its interactions and paths.

Throughout the days of war and Israeli aggression, and despite the pressures coming from different directions for a ceasefire, and the opportunity to address the problems of exchanging prisoners and starting a new phase in Gaza in terms of securing the life requirements of the people, the nature of the new administration and reconstruction, and the political process that might follow between the Israelis and the Palestinians, the United States still believes that the time has not yet come for a complete ceasefire, but for various reasons, including what is internal affecting the course of the US presidential elections, and what is international and regional, especially the manifestations of the expansion of the conflict that portend uncalculated explosions, it has begun to talk about a comprehensive process that leads to major changes, combining the two-state solution as required by the Arabs, with the security of the Hebrew state on the one hand and its integration into the Arab and Middle Eastern surroundings through a specific normalization methodology on the other hand.

The phone conversation between President Biden and the Israeli Prime Minister four days ago, which the US President summarized in a significant sentence stating that the two-state solution in the presence of Netanyahu is not impossible, adding that there are types of countries that do not have armies, and before Blinken’s speech in “Davos” about the importance of the two-state solution to Israel's security, which suggests, although it is not entirely reliable, that the White House succeeded in changing the conviction of the Israeli Prime Minister, who rejected that idea in principle, by accepting a two-state solution, one of which has all the elements of military power, and the other has none of it, and thus is achieved. The promised security of Israel, which is taking root more and more according to the relatively new American indicators, through its integration regionally through a major process of normalization with the Arab countries, and it does not necessarily include everyone, but rather Arab symbols with great and influential political and moral weight are sufficient, opening the door to an expanded process for the reconstruction of Gaza. With Arab and European participation, without responsibility for those who caused the destruction and sabotage of the Strip and the tragedy of its people.

What is certain here is that President Biden faces major problems, especially the trends of the angry young university generations, which daily expose Israeli violations and delve into the tragedy of the people of Gaza via social media, as well as within his Democratic Party that rejects the policy of unconditional support for Israel. Both of these reasons prompted President Biden to focus on On a new, old equation, which includes Israel offering some concessions regarding the Palestinian state, in exchange for integration into the region. And then contain the repercussions of any decisions that may be issued by the International Court of Justice against the State of Israel, or by the International Criminal Court in the future against the Israeli war leaders.

The White House’s transformations came gradually. It began with pressure to change Israeli military “tactics” that lead to the killing of civilians with extreme indiscrimination. It led to thinking about getting out of the Gaza crisis by achieving goals beyond simply eliminating “Hamas” and its like, and building a geo-political situation different from what was previously. It has the region before the war, rebuilds new equations that achieve Israel's security, and contains the reasons for the regional reluctance, even partially, to accept it as a state like others in the region.

The biggest American bet is unrestricted normalization, even if it is gradual and based on a very unstable political hypothesis, which is that the prize for normalization will besiege the Israeli right, and will push symbols of moderation to prominence again. Which weakens any opposition to the two-state solution. The main weakness here lies in the fact that Israeli society has become right-wing to the core, extremely inclined to violence against everything Palestinian, laden with illusions of invincible power, unable to comprehend the humanitarian catastrophe that the Gaza Strip has reached, and immersed in a state of schizophrenia between possessing mighty military power that did not deter an armed resistance movement, limited in number and armament, and did not fall after all the attacks directed at it, imbued with an unprecedented desire for unlimited revenge to overcome the state of inability to achieve the declared goals. In addition to the complete absence of any rational, influential voice calling for a review of the causes of incapacity despite the power, and often, if it exists, only a limited handful will be found who might respond to it and appreciate what it calls for.

This unprecedented state of tendency towards violence among elites and society could not have reached this degree of collective illness except as a result of the American and European positions, politically, propaganda and media, and their support for what was described as Israel’s right to self-defense, and giving it a document of acquittal in advance of all human violations that occur in the Gaza Strip. In particular, the complete disregard for all aspects of human rights, the unjustified defense of the continuation of aggression and the rejection of a ceasefire, under the pretext that it may only benefit Hamas, and ignoring the other humanitarian dimensions of the Palestinian people, are all factors that contributed to the escalation in the degree of violence and revenge in Israeli behavior in Gaza. And in the West Bank together. Let us not forget the Israeli educational curricula, which breed racism and rejection of the Palestinian other in the hearts of Israelis since childhood, and which the West completely ignores.

The state of Israeli society is in dire need of something resembling a behavioral and moral revolution, a reversal of the obsession with unchecked revenge, to a state of rationality and political rationality that believes that the right to security is for all parties, with the Palestinians at the forefront, and that in turn needs time and effort if the United States does not grant it. It has the right to be given attention according to the strategy of changing national behavior, such as the one followed in the cases of Germany and Japan after World War II. It is impossible to see the White House’s ambition for a Palestinian state alongside the Hebrew entity present before the eyes.
In agreement with Asharq Al-Awsat