Dr. Dalal Erekat: I hope that the Palestinian position will be clear in rejecting any economic solutions proposed as an alternative to the political solution

Dr. Hassan Ayoub: Pressure is currently increasing to force the Authority to accept a political deal that cannot achieve the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people

Oraib Al-Rantawi: Any Arab retreat will lead to transferring the conflict from its Palestinian-Israeli framework to internal conflicts in each Arab country separately

Raed Al-Dabai: Sheikh Boitkov's meeting indicates that Washington has no reservations about dealing with the PLO and the Authority despite the ambiguity of the American path

The region is witnessing intensive diplomatic movements within the framework of the US administration’s attempts to revive the so-called “Deal of the Century” or push forward the path of the “Abraham Accords” in their two new versions, amid questions about the extent of the success of these efforts in achieving a diplomatic breakthrough in terms of Arab-Israeli normalization, an attempt to exploit the Palestinian issue in favor of achieving these agreements.

In separate interviews with “I,” writers, political analysts, specialists, and university professors believe that Saudi Arabia is emerging as a pivotal element in these efforts, as Washington is trying to convince it to conclude a normalization agreement with Israel, in exchange for making promises related to the Palestinian issue. However, the official Saudi position still insists on the necessity of a “clear path” to establishing a Palestinian state.

Writers, analysts, specialists and university professors believe that while pressure is increasing on the Palestinian Authority to engage in these efforts, the Palestinian leadership faces challenges by rejecting any economic solutions proposed as an alternative to a political solution to the Palestinian issue, amid concerns about the “Gaza State” scenario.

Displacement scenarios are rejected and have proven their failure on the ground

Dr. Dalal Erekat, Professor of Diplomacy and Conflict Resolution at the Arab American University, confirms that attempts to displace Palestinians from the Gaza Strip to Egypt and Jordan have not succeeded since the beginning of the war and will not succeed in the future, stressing that these scenarios are not only unacceptable, but have also proven their failure on the ground.

Erekat believes that the proposals put forward by the Donald Trump administration in this context were "trial balloons," but they were not accepted by the Arab Republic of Egypt and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, which categorically rejected any project aimed at emptying the Gaza Strip of its population.

Erekat points out that despite the presence of about 1.9 million Palestinians in the southern Gaza Strip, especially in Al-Mawasi and on the border with Rafah during the first months of the war, the Egyptian borders were not opened to a scenario of forced displacement. On the contrary, Egypt sought to preserve the steadfastness of the Palestinians in their lands in service of the Palestinian cause.

In the context of talking about the recent diplomatic moves of the United States of America, Erekat considers that they come within the framework of the "second season" of what is known as the "Deal of the Century", or what can be called the "renewed Abraham Accords", through which the US administration aims to complete a normalization agreement between Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Erekat explains that Saudi Arabia has so far maintained its position in support of Palestinian rights, especially with regard to the establishment of a Palestinian state, but Erekat warns of changes in political discourse, noting that the language used recently has focused on a “roadmap to establish a Palestinian state” rather than an immediate demand for statehood as a precondition for normalization.

Erekat points out that this change may carry political implications that require careful reading by the Palestinian side, especially since any future agreement may be contingent on shifts in priorities and demands.

In this context, Erekat stresses the importance of the Palestinian role in these movements, affirming that the Palestinian issue cannot be reduced to economic or security dimensions, but must remain a political issue at its core.

"I hope that Palestinian officials who meet with American or Arab officials express the true Palestinian position, based on deep-rooted political rights, not just economic rights or improved living conditions," Erekat said.

Erekat stressed that any political track discussed with the American or regional side must first focus on ending the Israeli military occupation, defining the borders of the State of Israel, and affirming the concept of Palestinian sovereignty, stressing that security and stability in the region will not be achieved without a just and comprehensive solution to the Palestinian issue.

Warning of the danger of the scenario of establishing the "State of Gaza"

Regarding talk about the scenario of establishing a “Gaza State,” Erekat warns of the danger of this proposal, noting that “it must be completely rejected,” because it contradicts the unity of the Palestinian land, which includes the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, and Jerusalem.

It stresses that any attempts to separate Gaza from the West Bank threaten the Palestinian national project and serve the Israeli vision aimed at undermining the two-state solution.

Erekat expressed her concerns about attempts to weaken the West Bank by strengthening the economic situation separately from political solutions, explaining that there is a trend to pump more money into the institutions of the Palestinian National Authority under titles such as supporting civil society or improving economic conditions, which may reproduce previous scenarios that did not achieve any real political progress during the past decades.

She hopes that the Palestinian position will be clear in rejecting any economic solutions proposed as an alternative to the political solution.

Erekat says: “The Palestinian issue is not just a humanitarian issue, despite the priority that should be given to humanitarian aid, but it is a political issue par excellence, and no economic initiatives can compensate for Palestinian national rights.”

It stresses the importance of adopting a firm Palestinian national position in any future negotiations, so that the discussion is not reduced to issues such as clearance funds or salaries, but rather focuses on achieving the legitimate political rights of the Palestinians as an integral part of any future agreement, and that “any solution that does not guarantee justice for the Palestinians will remain temporary and vulnerable to collapse.”

The genocide continues by other means.

Dr. Hassan Ayoub, a professor of political science at An-Najah National University and a specialist in American affairs, considers the Arab position rejecting what is happening in the Gaza Strip to be a “classic” position since the beginning of the Israeli aggression, explaining that the primary Israeli goal is still to displace the residents of Gaza, and that the danger after the truce still exists, noting that “the genocide continues by other means,” indicating that this context should be the framework through which the repeated American statements regarding the future of the Strip are understood.

Ayoub believes that Arab regimes suffer from “fragility and weakness in the face of American hegemony,” especially after the Arab Spring revolutions and the political changes that followed in the region.

Ayoub points out that the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria and the open possibilities for change in the region have pushed these regimes to cling more to their alliance with the United States, seeking financial, political and diplomatic support.

Ayoub points out that the current Arab position "has not yet risen to the level of actually confronting Washington's positions," but is still within the framework of formal statements and positions.

Regarding the latest political developments, Ayoub sheds light on the meeting between the Secretary-General of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization, Hussein al-Sheikh, and the US President’s envoy, Steve Witkoff, in Riyadh, noting that this meeting coincides with repeated statements from the new Israeli ambassador in Washington, and the new US President’s contact with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, all of which are aimed at reviving the Arab-Israeli normalization process.

He asks: "What is the meaning of justifying the continuation of normalization by the existence of a reliable path - according to the American and Saudi expression - towards a Palestinian state? This is just talk that has no real value, and states either exist or they do not exist, and therefore the pressures are currently increasing to force the Palestinian Authority to accept a political deal that cannot achieve the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, whether in establishing an independent state or in self-determination and liberation from the occupation."

Ayoub points out that the US administration may try to push in this direction, although it will be much less than the understandings presented in the “Deal of the Century,” explaining that this scenario requires “an ethnic cleansing operation in the Gaza Strip,” where the demographic issue remains the “cornerstone” of the conflict.

Regarding the Jordanian position, Ayoub explains that the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan paid a “heavy price” during Donald Trump’s first term in office, due to its lack of enthusiasm for the normalization agreements, as it did not participate in the signing ceremony of the “Abraham Accords,” which prompted the Trump administration to ignore Jordan and exert economic pressure on it, including reducing American aid to it.

Ayoub points out that today there are Jordanian voices saying that the kingdom "will not pay this price again," and therefore it has not expressed any objection to the continuation of the normalization agreements, as long as this guarantees the continuation of its relationship with the new American administration.

Ayoub stresses that Jordan, like Egypt, is suffering from economic crises and increasing pressures, which may make it more inclined to make concessions in order to maintain its internal stability and the continuation of American support.

Ayoub explains that Arab leaders have not yet realized that Washington is “willing to gamble with the stability of their countries and political systems if it serves Israel’s interests or serves the agenda of Christian Zionists in America, who embrace a biblical vision of the conflict.”

Ayyoub points out that the current talk about a “mini Palestinian state” is something that was not officially proposed, explaining that talk about establishing a “mini state in Gaza” that extends to the West Bank is an old idea that was proposed since the era that accompanied the establishment of the Palestinian Authority under the leadership of the late President Yasser Arafat, but that was completely rejected, because it meant establishing a “temporary state in Gaza forever.”

Ayoub points out that the current scenario is “worse than that,” as there is no longer any idea of a Palestinian state in Gaza or the West Bank, because Israel and the United States “do not want any political entity for the Palestinians,” but rather focus on “fighting the Palestinian national identity and eliminating any chance for the Palestinians to remain committed to their legitimate rights.”

Ayoub says: “In light of these facts, continuing to talk about a Palestinian state, a two-state solution, or exchanging normalization for a political path is just throwing dust in the eyes, as there is no serious project on the table that achieves Palestinian rights, most importantly ending the occupation.”

Trump administration moves toward new version of 'deal of the century'

Director of the Jerusalem Center for Political Studies, Oraib al-Rantawi, believes that the administration of US President Donald Trump has not yet completed a clear vision for the so-called “comprehensive deal” for the Middle East, but it has defined its basic features, most notably establishing a path of normalization between Israel and Arab countries, especially Saudi Arabia.

Al-Rantawi explains that Riyadh is stipulating progress on the Palestinian track as part of this deal, to ensure that any normalization steps are marketed to Saudi and Arab public opinion, while preserving its regional and international position, especially with the growth of its role in the Syrian and Lebanese arenas.

Al-Rantawi points out that the ongoing consultations led by US envoy Steve Witkoff aim to explore what is possible and impossible in the Palestinian file, explaining that his visit to Saudi Arabia, in addition to the shuttle meetings between Cairo and Doha, play a decisive role in shaping the US vision for the next deal.

He points out that the upcoming visit of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Washington will contribute to crystallizing the final vision of this plan.

Rantawi asserts that the Trump administration is not seeking an ambitious project to resolve the conflict, but rather is moving towards a new version of the “Deal of the Century,” which is more generous in favor of Israel.

Rantawi explains that the series of steps taken by Trump since taking office show his complete bias towards the Israeli far right, as he believes that his team in the White House shares the same visions and perceptions about the conflict with his counterpart in the Kirya (the headquarters of the Israeli Ministry of War).

Al-Rantawi points out that since the first day of his term, Trump has adopted policies that are in line with the extremist Israeli approach, including removing settlers from the US sanctions lists, resuming the supply of heavy bombs to Israel, and exempting it from the decision to freeze foreign aid, considering that these steps indicate the US administration’s tendency towards escalation rather than political solutions.

Rantawi points out that Trump views Gaza as a key focus of this deal, but he is not seeking to establish an “emirate” there, but rather a solution that is consistent with what the US administration calls “the questions of the day after.”

It is believed that Trump's plan is based on an attempt to empty Gaza of its population, in light of the increasing talk about major investment projects led by the United States and Israel in cooperation with Gulf states, targeting the region after displacing a large part of its population, and keeping only those it needs as cheap labor to serve these projects.

Regarding the Arab position, Rantawi points out that Trump seems confident that the Arab countries will respond to his vision regarding the displacement of the people of Gaza, which raises questions about the source of this confidence.

Al-Rantawi points out that the issue is no longer related only to traditional support for the Palestinian cause, but extends to the effects of this deal on security and stability in Egypt and Jordan, in addition to the risks that threaten the national and political identity of the two countries.

Al-Rantawi stresses that any Arab acceptance of the proposed displacement projects and settlements will cause great harm to the interests of the countries concerned, pointing out that Jordan, for example, had previously gone through a stifling siege during the Second Gulf War, but was able to overcome it without making strategic concessions.

Al-Rantawi stresses that Arab countries should not be subject to the logic of barter, as there are sovereign issues related to national and ethnic identity that cannot be linked to financial deals or economic aid.

He warns that any Arab retreat will lead to the conflict being transferred from its Palestinian-Israeli framework to internal conflicts in each Arab country separately, which is what Washington and Tel Aviv are seeking.

At the internal Palestinian level, Rantawi asserts that the failure to build a national consensus around a Palestinian unity government or a unifying leadership reference within the framework of the PLO has led to the Egyptian “community support” initiative remaining the only option.

Al-Rantawi points out that this initiative, despite its emphasis on the unity of the West Bank and Gaza, will in fact lead to the establishment of a de facto separation, as each will be managed separately.

Rantawi asserts that Trump and Kushner view Gaza as a real estate project, not as an independent political entity, as they seek to implement huge economic projects in the region in cooperation with Israel and the Gulf states, with a focus on displacing a large number of the Strip’s residents, and keeping those who can be employed in these projects.

Despite the challenges facing the Palestinians, Rantawi stresses that Gaza and the Palestinian resistance have proven their commitment to the unity of the Palestinian land and the Palestinian people, pointing out that the recent waves of mass displacement witnessed by the Strip were a popular referendum on rejecting displacement and separation from the West Bank.

Al-Rantawi believes that the war on the Gaza Strip is not over yet, as the resistance was able to manage the military battle efficiently, despite the heavy losses, but the political battle is still ongoing, and it requires popular support and a strong Palestinian leadership capable of facing the challenges.

Al-Rantawi stresses that the priority now must be to rebuild the PLO and restore its leadership role through radical reforms in the institutional structure to enable the Palestinian leadership to deal effectively with the upcoming strategic challenges, stressing that the stage requires a real Palestinian consensus, not just formal understandings.

Sheikh-Wittkov meeting.. political implications

Raed Al-Dabai, head of the Political Science Department at An-Najah National University, believes that choosing Riyadh to host the meeting between US envoy Steve Witkoff and Secretary-General of the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization Hussein Al-Sheikh carries clear political implications, as it reflects an American desire to grant Saudi Arabia an increasing leadership role in the region, especially in light of its potential involvement in the US project based on normalization with Israel.

Al-Dabai explains that holding this meeting in itself indicates that the United States has no reservations about dealing with the PLO and the Palestinian Authority, even though the American path towards the Palestinian Authority is still unclear.

Al-Dabai says: “At a time when US President Donald Trump is announcing his rejection of the return of Hamas to the administration of the Gaza Strip, reports indicate that Witkov met with a minister from the Hamas leadership through Qatari mediation, which reflects a new American approach based on direct interests rather than comprehensive political solutions.”

Al-Dabai points out that the absence of Ramallah from the agenda of Witkoff's visit, which began today, in contrast to his visit to Gaza and his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and his previous visit to the Auschwitz camp in Poland, where he met with the families of Israeli detainees held by Hamas, reflects the priority of the security file in American policy, especially with regard to the release of Israeli prisoners, without a clear vision for a two-state solution.

Al-Dabai asserts that “this approach indicates a shift in American priorities, as Washington appears to be focusing on urgent security issues instead of proposing major political initiatives,” noting that the American proposals being floated to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict appear disastrous and cannot be accepted by the Palestinians.

Al-Dabai explains that the Arab position is facing increasing pressures, especially after Trump’s call for Egypt and Jordan to receive the residents of the Gaza Strip, in a move that would put the two countries before major political and security challenges.

Al-Dabai says: “Accepting this step may mean placing responsibility on Egypt and Jordan for Gaza on behalf of Israel, which has serious implications for their internal stability.”

Al-Dabai points out that these pressures come in the context of the US administration’s use of the weapon of financial and political blackmail to impose its vision on the region, which increases the difficulty of maintaining a unified Arab position on the Palestinian issue.

Al-Dabai believes that regional transformations, Palestinian division, and the results of the recent war on Gaza have put the Palestinian National Authority and Hamas in a weak negotiating position.

Al-Dabai says: “It is no longer possible to manage the Palestinian division using the same mechanisms as before. The US administration seeks to reshape the centers of power in the Middle East through intense political and economic pressures, and does not hesitate to use the threat of economic sanctions, which reduces the Palestinians’ options in confronting this new reality.”

Al-Dabai asserts that talk about establishing a Palestinian state has become closer to fantasy, given the political reality on both the Israeli and American levels.

Al-Dabai says: “The Israeli government led by Benjamin Netanyahu includes extreme right-wing components that do not believe in the two-state solution, and seek to perpetuate the occupation and strengthen settlements, which makes any proposal to establish a Palestinian state unrealistic.”

Al-Dabai explains that the formation of the current American administration reflects a trend that does not support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. Rather, it seems that American policy is moving towards resolving the conflict according to the Israeli vision based on ensuring a Jewish majority and reducing the number of Arabs in the areas under Israeli control.

Al-Dabai points out that one of the indicators of this trend is that US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth previously stormed Al-Aqsa Mosque accompanied by a group of extremist settlers, in a move that reflects his support for the hardline right-wing positions that are in line with the Israeli vision based on Judaizing Jerusalem and strengthening control over the Palestinian territories.

He points out that the positions of the new US ambassador to Israel and the Secretary of State also reflect this trend, which confirms that the management of the conflict is proceeding according to a purely Israeli agenda.

Al-Dabai stresses that Israel is not seeking in any way to establish a Palestinian state, whether in the West Bank or Gaza, but rather is working to perpetuate the Palestinian division and destroy any foundations of national unity.

Al-Dabai says: “The Israeli strategy is based on keeping the Palestinians in a state of geographic and political division between the West Bank and Gaza, where the Palestinian Authority is kept under constant economic and security pressures, while work is underway to decide the future of the Gaza Strip with arrangements that ensure that the Palestinian political system is not unified.”

He points out that Israel may support proposals such as forming an administrative committee or any other scenario that ensures the continuation of the division, even if that is through Hamas returning to rule Gaza within understandings with the new American administration.

Al-Dabai explains that this policy aims to weaken any possibility of the emergence of a unified Palestinian leadership capable of imposing negotiating conditions or forming a cohesive political entity.

Al-Dabai believes that “the most likely scenario in the near future is not the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, but rather the strengthening of the reality of separation between Gaza and the West Bank, which perpetuates the Palestinian division and gives Israel more time to consolidate its control over the Palestinian territories.”