Harris supported genocide and Trump reeks of the new deal of the century

I won't risk making "predictions" about which of the two White House contenders will prevail in the November 5 race, a risk that becomes increasingly difficult as the poll numbers become closer and appear to be neck-and-neck with the two contenders on the road to the Oval Office.

What concerns us here is to extrapolate what the victory of either Kamala Harris or Donald Trump could mean for the region’s wars and open crises. Are there fundamental differences in the positions of the two parties on the issues of the inflamed region that require attention, and what is the most dangerous scenario for the Palestinians in Gaza, and even for the Palestinian cause and the future of the Palestinian national project?

Although the “question of differences” has lost much of its political value, in light of the hypocritical and evasive performance of the Biden/Harris administration over the past four years, specifically in the “Year of the Flood” and beyond, and the administration’s reluctance to “correct” Trump’s mistakes and sins against the Palestinians and Arabs on the one hand, and its bias to the point of complicity in the war crimes committed by the fascist right-wing government in Israel on the other hand... we say, despite all this, the question still exists, and has political value, which must be anticipated and taken into consideration.

Trump if he comes back!

We are not facing a new candidate, so we must wait to learn about his choices and orientations. The man has ruled the White House for four years, and he is naturally a talkative person, who says what is in his heart on his tongue, and he is simplistic to the point of believing that he has magical and immediate solutions to the most complex problems in the universe.

In his first term, he granted Israel a series of major prizes: he recognized “united Jerusalem” as the capital of Israel, moved his country’s embassy from Tel Aviv to it, approved the annexation of the occupied Syrian Golan Heights to Israeli sovereignty, and launched a project bearing his name for the final solution to the Palestinian conflict, which was widely known as the “Deal of the Century,” through which he granted Netanyahu’s government nearly a third of the West Bank.

Not to mention, of course, the closure of the PLO office in Washington and the US consulate in East Jerusalem, a century and a half after their opening, in addition to the fierce “McCarthyist” campaign against the United Nations organizations, especially “UNRWA” and human rights organizations.

It can be said without exaggeration that Trump has overthrown the “paradigm” that has governed the positions and policies of successive American administrations, Republican and Democratic, regarding the Palestinian issue, and has set for himself a different model. He has overthrown the traditional regional framework surrounding it, specifically the Jordanian and Egyptian roles, and replaced it with another regional framework, almost confined to the Saudi and Emirati roles, which was viewed by Amman, at the very least, as marginalization of the Jordanian role in one of its most vital areas.

Because of this, Jordanian political elites felt that Washington, under Trump’s leadership, not only threatens the deepest interests and legitimate national rights of the Palestinian people, but also began to show greater “tolerance” towards sacrificing Jordan’s interests, calculations, and sensitivities, within the framework of his project for a final solution to the Palestinian issue.

A question dominating political, diplomatic and media circles is: What can Trump offer Israel in his second term? Especially after a disturbing comment he made a few weeks ago, when he saw Israel as “very small” on the world map, and that the time had come to think about expanding it.

Packages and generosity

I think that Trump will be more decisive and firm in stopping the war, and as soon as possible, because that is his personality, and that is his way of dealing with crises, players and leaders, opponents and allies alike.

But the man will be more "generous" in giving more consolation prizes to the Netanyahu government and the most extreme right. If not in return for rushing to stop the war, then as an expression of the unity of the situation between the American right, which he represents and embodies in his administration, and the fascist right that is rampant on the map of the government and the opposition in Tel Aviv.

I also think that Trump will scoop from the West Bank primarily to satisfy the expansionist appetite of the religious and nationalist right in Israel, and I do not rule out that he will give the Netanyahu government a green light to annex Area C of the entire West Bank, and cram its residents into Areas A and B, within the framework of the “Deal of the Second Century,” even if that leads to burying any chance of establishing a viable Palestinian entity, and I am not talking here about an independent Palestinian state.

New scenarios.

It is most likely that the “Deal of the Century 2” will restore the Jordanian and Egyptian roles, unlike the state of neglect and marginalization that these two roles were subjected to in the “Deal of the Century 1,” but from a different gateway this time... the gateway to receiving the outcomes of the “final solution,” the Israeli-American solution to the Palestinian issue.

Jordan, in Trump’s view, could be a “lifeline” for the Palestinian entity established on the “remnants of the West Bank,” within a federal or confederal formula, and Egypt will remain the gateway to the Israeli solution for Gaza, if the re-engineering of the Strip succeeds... and always to help Israel get rid of the Palestinian “surplus demographics.”

It would be possible to claim that a Palestinian state has been established on the national soil or what remains of it, and that as a "sovereign" and "independent" entity it has decided to enter into a kind of "unity or union" with its sister country Jordan. It is likely that such a project will find support from several Arab circles, and capable countries may even rush to provide it with money and reconstruction, to be the "Singapore" of the Middle East, the expression here being Donald Trump's "chat" about the future of the Gaza Strip.

Players Map

Those welcoming Trump’s return in the region and the world will not make the “Deal of the Century 2” a reason to spoil the relationship with a Republican administration in appearance, but “Trumpian” in essence. Trumpism is the most vulgar populist expression of the rising far-right movements in the West, which includes several Arab countries, as well as international players such as the Russian Federation, which gives absolute priority to getting out of the “Ukrainian quagmire” and stopping the war in its arena.

In return, he may go for long-term settlements and “bartering,” including facilitating Trump’s mission in some of the most complex Middle East issues… Such a development (Trump’s return) may be worrying for the European Union and its influential countries, with its implications for the relationship between the two sides of the Atlantic, the future of NATO, and divisions over a number of major issues that top the global agenda, such as the issue of climate change, for example, but not limited to.

Bad and worse

When faced with two bitter choices, or between bad and worse, Kamala Harris seems to be the preferred choice for many Palestinian and Arab circles (the Authority, Jordan, Egypt, and others), and she is also the most suitable choice for regional parties such as Iran, as diplomacy takes precedence over “beating the drums of war” in everything related to Iran’s nuclear program.

While Moscow will greet such a development with great concern, President Harris, continuing the Obama administration, will continue to rally support for Ukraine, to defeat Russia, and subsequently China, the greatest threat to the United States’ hegemonic influence, over the international economy and order.

Future strategies

The options and margins of maneuver are shrinking for the Palestinians, as they choose between two bitter choices: a devolved administration that has given Israel in ten months of war what it has obtained from Democratic and Republican administrations in ten years, and another administration that reeks of the old deal of the century and a new one, threatening to strip them of their land, rights and holy sites. This dictates that they develop a new national strategy that shakes off the illusions of imminent political solutions and establishes the foundations for the continuation of this conflict, perhaps for decades and generations to come.

A strategy that builds on what was achieved in terms of strengthening Palestine’s position on the world’s agenda, as a result of the “flood.”

A strategy that seeks to strengthen the bonds of alliance with countries and global youth and popular movements that have been liberated from the “Israeli narrative.”

A strategy that begins with putting the Palestinian house in order, away from the weak projects for dialogue and reconciliation that have not led to any tangible results. A strategy whose focus is "steadfastness and resistance", and strengthening the acquired immune system of Palestinian society, which is suffering under successive occupations, old and new, by the same enemy.. A strategy that revives

Renewing the Palestinian national movement and reclaiming the PLO.

A strategy that restores the role of the Arab peoples in supporting, backing, resisting normalization, and strengthening the boycott, considering it a battle for these peoples to defend their future, freedom, and dignity, and not a seasonal expression of solidarity with a brotherly Arab people groaning under the yoke of a racist, exterminationist occupation that does not hesitate to wage wars of encirclement, cleansing, and extermination against our Arab peoples, as happened and is happening in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon.

A strategy that moves the Palestinian people's struggle for freedom and independence from dependence on others to dependence on oneself and on loyal friends.