The Fantasy of negotiating with Israel

Israel wants to negotiate without paying the dues of this negotiation. It announces that it wants to eliminate the resistance and negotiate with it at the same time, that it will not stop the fire but will continue to negotiate, that it will not release certain prisoners, and that it will keep its forces in the Strip in a way that allows it to control and dominate. It wants to make the flow of aid another weapon for punishment and tightening control over the Palestinian people. Thus, the negotiation becomes as if Israel is talking to itself.

Israel wants to negotiate without recognizing, participating, or sharing with the Palestinian people the idea of their survival, existence, or ability to live, as if Israel is negotiating with a transparent or invisible people. Thus, Israel appears to be negotiating only to the extent that it serves its own interests, or the survival of its government, or to please pressure groups, or to polish its image, or to avoid the evil of the International Court, or for an internal party settlement.

Therefore, the negotiations that Israel is conducting are ridiculous negotiations, and there is a completely sarcastic aspect to them. It proposes, then adds and deletes from the proposal whatever it wants, to make it imaginary or impossible or require a century to explain. It convinces the American administration with ideas for negotiations, then denies them, then exposes this administration by saying that it changed them, or modified them, or did not understand them at all. Israel does not hesitate to accuse the mediators of forgery, distortion, weakness, or inability to pressure, or blackmail. Israel has no problem sending a negotiating delegation that only listens and does not speak, or speaks within limits, or a delegation that does not decide, or a delegation that monitors a delegation or reports on it, or a delegation whose members and references are at odds.

In its negotiations, Israel differentiates between the substantive and the procedural, between the humanitarian and the security, and between the fixed and the variable. Thus, the cup is lost more than it was originally lost.

In its negotiations, Israel is drowning in details, until the big frameworks are lost, and Israel can blow up every agreement by focusing on details that can be bypassed if there is the will.

It can be said that Israel's rules for negotiation are as follows, based on the negotiation processes since Israel was established until now:

First, dividing the issue into small squares assigned to specialized technical committees, so that small achievements are recorded here and there, and thus the originally bleak reality is transformed into a reality that is negotiated.

Second, using the method of reward and punishment or the carrot and stick. Israel is not skilled at negotiating except because it is strong. If it were not so, it would not have been able to impose agendas, schedules, options or alternatives, or would not have been able to control the time, mechanism of negotiation, its form, content, participants, ceilings, tactics, dates, etc.

Third, using the straw man mechanism, diverting attention and changing directions and interests, so that there is a logical connection between unrelated matters, and mixing the cards in a surprising and confusing way.

Fourth, the negotiation imposed by Israel is a negotiation about establishing a reality imposed by force, not a reality of law and right. This is why Israel usually seeks to quickly change a reality in order to change priorities and interests. The best evidence of this is the deepening of settlements, the repetition of wars, and the repetition and change of plans.

In short, negotiating with Israel is difficult, bitter, and never guaranteed. There are no governing references, no fixed commitment, and no sacred treaty. Everything is subject to explosion and change at any moment, and the pretext is always ready. If you don’t like a certain pretext, there are endless pretexts.

What is the advice then? How can we negotiate with Israel to oblige and force it to implement what is agreed upon?!
The answer to that is simple..

Israel convinces the American administration of ideas for negotiations, then denies them, then exposes this administration by saying that it changed them, modified them, or did not understand them at all, and Israel does not hesitate to accuse the mediators of forgery, distortion, or weakness.