Abu Badawiya: October 7 strengthened the imposition of steps and procedures to implement the two-state solution

Sweilem: We are facing a political tsunami after many countries changed their positions

Ayoub: What is happening is historic and represents a rift in the global front supporting Israel

Abu Al-Ezz: Israel is pushing for the explosion of the West Bank and the collapse of the Authority in order to destroy the two-state solution

The recent international recognition of the State of Palestine brings the political narrative around the Palestinian issue back to the forefront of issues in the world, after major powers tried to marginalize it for decades. This puts the international community before its historic responsibilities in doing justice to the Palestinians, and in the context of confronting the Israeli occupation government that constantly seeks to obscure the issue and the right. The Palestinians.

In an interview with “ے”, writers, analysts and experts in international relations and law believe that the recognition of Norway, Ireland and Spain is important for the way of dealing with the Palestinians in the future, as they are rightful and have their own state. This also opens the way for a rolling snowball for other countries to recognize the Palestinian state. It constitutes what can be described as a political “tsunami” whose dimensions have reached all parts of the globe.

Professor of International Law and International Relations at the Arab American University, Dr. Raed Abu Badawiyya, believes that the growing European positions on the idea of recognizing the State of Palestine came before the 7th of October, after the formation of the Netanyahu government and the political program it proposed, and therefore the recognitions came as an indirect result of the 7th of October, But the Europeans saw that Israeli positions had not changed over the past decades of negotiation, and October 7 came to reveal that the two-state solution must be imposed on the parties, after the failure of 30 years of peace process efforts.

He points out that recognition is part of other European tools, such as sanctions, to put pressure on Israel in order to impose a two-state solution, and that the Europeans no longer trust the Israeli side regarding its seriousness about peace, while October 7 came to revive the Palestinian issue, and reveal that the conflict is real and explosive, after Israel and America tried to liquidate the Palestinian issue.

According to Abu Badawiya, the Europeans, in conjunction with their efforts to stop the Israeli aggression, are working to solve the conflict radically and come up with a political solution, and even the Americans are interested in a political solution, but the United States is seeking to impose a regional political settlement, including the normalization of relations, and there is a common denominator between the American and European endeavors: The European position is ahead of the American position regarding resolving the conflict, by imposing pressure tools on Israel, also pointing out that the activation of international courts, popular demonstrations, and United Nations General Assembly resolutions are all important political tools that contributed to these recognitions.

For his part, writer and political researcher Dr. Abdul Majeed Sweilem: “The successive recognitions of the State of Palestine come at a sensitive and delicate time for the Palestinian people, especially after the historic achievements of the 7th of October, and the return of the conflict to the forefront, as the story of the Palestinian issue did not begin on the 7th of October, but rather as part of a historical injustice that occurred.” On the Palestinian people."

Sweilem points out that international recognition of the State of Palestine will follow, and the Palestinian people will take part of their international rights, which remained outside international attention for many years, but the world has begun to come back to its senses, whether official positions, international law, or the peoples. Everyone is in a state of awakening, and phenomena are not recurring. Therefore, we are facing the building of a new world, after large countries were forced to change their positions for fear of the political repercussions on them. We are facing a “political tsunami” whose main pillars are the activation of international law, recognition of the State of Palestine, and popular demonstrations.

He confirms that the United States is the one defeated in this war, after it lost its ability to confront Russia and China as an economic power, and the middle condition remains to be worked on.

Sweilem points out that international recognition of the State of Palestine was delayed due to official intransigence, but those countries were forced to change their positions, and what happened was a great victory for Palestine, and those countries were afraid of the protest movement, which made them fear political collapse, which may explain their move about eight months after The war of extermination against the Palestinians.

He believes that the major international change in positions is important, and that the Palestinian state is coming, and it is also a result of Palestinian steadfastness, which requires real unity and investment in the new international situation, as we are facing the stage of the end of Western control of the world and the end of American hegemony, and the failure of Israel and the decline of its regional role, as it has become a burden on The countries that support it, and we are facing an important stage with the rise of global awareness regarding the Palestinian issue, which has put pressure on official governments and pushed them to recognize the State of Palestine.

For his part, Dr. Hassan Ayoub, professor of political science at An-Najah University, says: “What is happening has historical meanings, and it means the cracking of the front that supports Israel, and we have begun to see the result of enormous pressure in these countries, which recognized the State of Palestine, and what is happening confirms On the importance of Palestinian steadfastness and the resistance project that confronts the Israeli occupation within an accumulated struggle by all Palestinian forces.

According to Ayoub, international recognition of Palestine has two drawbacks: The first is that he later linked this to the resumption of the negotiation process, and they all presented their credentials not as a kind of harm to Israel, and that is what we fear for the starting point in the negotiation. The other thing is that these countries do not have the courage to force Israel to accept its steps, as the decision needs implementation mechanisms and political perceptions.

Regarding some of the reasons that prompted those countries to recognize the State of Palestine, Ayoub believes that after 8 months, those countries found that Israel wants an endless war, which is something that cannot be tolerated morally or legally. The historical relations between those countries and Palestine also played importance, as did the legal movement in International courts and institutions, public pressure and peoples, the ferocity of the Israeli campaign in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as well as the solid and steadfast Palestinian position, all of which pushed those countries to recognize the State of Palestine.

Professor of International Relations at the Arab American University, writer and political analyst Dr. Amjad Abu Al-Ezz confirms that the idea of European recognition of the State of Palestine began in the 1980s, through recognition of the PLO and viewing the refugee issue as not only humanitarian but political and rights-based, but after about four decades The idea was not implemented on the ground and was delayed, in contradiction to the European no’s on the Palestinian issue, due to the history of many European countries supporting Israel, especially Germany, and the decision-making mechanism in Europe is carried out by consensus, and it has some kind of interests between countries, and its collision with opposition. Israel and America.

Abu Al-Ezz points out that the European countries that recognized Palestine made their decision individually, without the consensus of the European Union’s position, which is an indication of failure and internal divisions. In addition, the decision came due to the arrival of political parties to the head of government that support the Palestinian issue, pointing out that the European position towards the Palestinian issue is divided. Between strong countries that have the capabilities but are unwilling to recognize the State of Palestine, countries that are willing to recognize but do not have the capabilities, and countries that do not have the capabilities and do not wish to recognize.

Despite his view that the recognition of the State of Palestine by Norway, Spain, and Ireland is a snowball that rolls toward other countries, Dr. Abu Al-Ezz, professor of international relations at the Arab American University, believes that everything that happened occurred with American approval, as part of American pressure for a political solution based on Arab-Israeli normalization and strengthening American control over the Middle East.

He points out that reading the Israeli position rejecting the idea of accepting a two-state solution and responding to recognizing the State of Palestine was aimed at pushing Netanyahu and his government to create an explosion and intifada in the West Bank, leading to the collapse of the Palestinian Authority, and thus the death of the idea of a two-state solution, so that Israel would tell the world that there is no one it can recognize. .

He believes that America's idea of controlling the Middle East came to mimic what is known as the "Biden Doctrine" towards the Middle East, which he spoke about during the administration of President Barack Obama, about building a normal Israeli-Arab alliance, in exchange for stopping the Chinese-Russian-Iranian expansion. However, October 7 confused The papers revealed the neglect of the Middle East, so the United States returned to it.

Abu Al-Ezz stresses that the idea of recognizing the State of Palestine by these countries is important because it strengthens the Palestinian narrative, listens to the Palestinian voice, and returns the Palestinian issue to the international forefront. One of the advantages of these recognitions is that they deny the idea that the Palestinians are terrorists, and that those countries turned against the idea of normalization first, then Recognizing the State of Palestine, so that recognition comes first and then normalization, and that recognition puts European-European relations to the test, and may lead to divisions between European countries, especially since the decision-making mechanism in the foreign policy of European countries allows member states to go to individual initiatives, Provided that it does not conflict with previous policies of the Union.

The recognition of the State of Palestine by Norway, Ireland and Spain comes less than two weeks after the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution entitlement of the State of Palestine to full membership in the United Nations, and the Security Council recommends that this issue be reconsidered positively.

According to the resolution, for which 143 countries voted, 25 abstained from voting, and 9 countries rejected the resolution, the State of Palestine qualifies for membership in the United Nations in accordance with Article 4 of the Charter, and therefore it should be accepted into membership in the United Nations. Accordingly, the resolution recommends that the Security Council reconsider on this issue positively, in light of this resolution, and in light of the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice issued on May 28, 1948, and in full accordance with Article 4 of the United Nations Charter, while the resolution reaffirmed the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right In establishing an independent State of Palestine.

Norway, Ireland and Spain join 9 member countries of the European Union that recognize the State of Palestine: Bulgaria, Poland, Czechia, Romania, Slovakia, Hungary, Cyprus, Sweden and Malta.

In response to these countries’ announcement, Israel responded by retaliating against the Palestinians by announcing settlement expansion, canceling the “disengagement law” in a number of settlements evacuated two decades ago in the northern West Bank, and imposing economic and political sanctions on the Palestinian Authority.

The Israeli government intends to hold an immediate session of the “Planning and Construction Council” to approve the establishment of 10,000 housing units in the Israeli settlements in the West Bank, including the “E1” area, which is the area planned for a settlement project aimed at linking Jerusalem to a number of settlements located east of it in the West Bank. .

The Israeli government will grant its Ministerial Council for Security and Political Affairs (the Cabinet) a mandate to establish a new settlement in the West Bank in exchange for every country that recognizes the Palestinian state, cancel the agreement that requires the transfer of clearing funds to the Palestinian Authority through Norway, permanently cancel all VIP permits from Palestinian Authority officials, and impose sanctions. economic burden on PA officials and their families, and not transferring tax revenues from goods arriving at the ports to the Palestinians.

Meanwhile, Israeli Foreign Minister Yisrael Katz quickly summoned the Israeli ambassadors in Madrid, Dublin and Oslo for consultations while keeping them in Israel, and also summoned the ambassadors of the three countries to Israel to a “reprimand” session, and imposed a boycott on them by not summoning them to any ceremonial diplomatic ceremonies, and limiting their movements. The movement of diplomats of these countries in the West Bank or contact and communication with the Palestinian Authority.