Will the "Gaza War" change the face of Palestinian politics?

The war of extermination on Gaza has left a clear and profound mark on the Palestinian political reality, revealing significant strategic changes that we may not notice now, but which will certainly reshape the Palestinian political landscape in the long term.

First, the war revealed the fragility of the Palestinian internal situation due to the ongoing division. It showed that repeating the same old story—who, how, and when—has become boring after eighteen years and benefits no one. It became clear that the ongoing Palestinian division weakens the Palestinian ability to confront all forms of violence and increases their suffering at all levels. Voices calling for national reconciliation have escalated, in an attempt to increase pressure on all parties to move towards truly unifying political and field efforts worthy of the ongoing bloodshed. However, so far, this does not seem to be bearing fruit.

Secondly, the war has put the Palestinian Authority to a difficult test, clearly revealing the limitations of its political approach, which has proven its “failure” to deter aggression, curb its aggression and brutality, or provide effective protection for Palestinians in general, and in the West Bank in particular. This is if we admit – for the sake of argument – that Gaza is in a different situation, and that it has been absent from it for nearly two decades. As a result, critical and resentful voices have also increased, both internally and externally, calling for a review of this approach, or for the effectiveness of agreements that no longer serve the Palestinians’ supreme interests.

Third, the war demonstrated the strength and impact of the resistance, and strengthened its popular standing, despite the criticisms of the October experience. However, without exonerating the occupation as the first and direct party responsible, let alone the complicity of those around it, both near and far. These developments will lead to noticeable changes in the internal Palestinian balance of power, and may open the way for new, young leaders more in tune with the pulse of the Palestinian street, calling for a more confrontational approach to the occupation, even if it is with less "intensity," but perhaps with more sophisticated and painful means, and rejecting the current reality as a whole.

Fourth, the war has reaffirmed the important and vital role of Palestinians everywhere, both within the occupied territories and in the diaspora, whose voices have been silenced for decades. This pressure and restrictions are merely an implicit recognition of their importance, which means redefining the rules of engagement and necessitating the development of political and organizational strategies that effectively absorb and utilize these energies, now and in the future.

Fifth, the war has repeatedly emphasized the importance of imagery and media in the battle. Images and video footage from the ground have been a key factor in conveying the extent of Palestinian suffering to the world and countering the Israeli narrative. It has become clear that the media battle is no less important than other battles, which necessitates the development of effective and professional media strategies.

Sixth, at the international level, the war has highlighted the shortcomings of official Palestinian diplomacy and its inability to capitalize on the widespread international sympathy for the Palestinian people. This is due to the Palestinian division, which has made Palestinian diplomacy appear to be "flying" with one wing, representing a single point of view that is not unanimously agreed upon by Palestinians. This necessitates the development of a comprehensive Palestinian strategy to activate popular diplomacy, in addition to prosecuting and exposing the crimes of the occupation.

Seventh, the war also revealed that the Palestinian reliance on international institutions was a great illusion, as it became clear how they were exploited and harnessed to serve the occupation and cover up its massacres and crimes, and that their “supportive” measures for the Palestinians, despite their scarcity, were of no real value on the ground, at least currently. We have seen how their crews, headquarters, and vehicles bearing their insignia were targeted, which requires a real re-evaluation of the mechanisms of cooperation with them, and the recognition that the “pressures” that were applied to buy their silence, whether real or imaginary, which cannot be justified under any circumstances, made these institutions part of the “current.”

Eighth, the war has highlighted the changing and confusing role of regional powers, and revealed the limitations of relying on their positions or actual support. Regional positions have ranged from verbal solidarity to hesitation and tacit complicity with what is happening. This forces the Palestinians to seriously review the nature of their relationship with these powers, and to rely primarily on themselves in determining their future political options, while attempting to invest any real support, but with intelligence and caution, far from any bets or illusions that may be misleading.

Ninth, the last war clearly demonstrated that the occupation’s talk of peace and political settlement was never anything more than an illusion, a means to buy time, a bridge to the Arab and international environment, and a tool to consolidate the occupation and impose facts on the ground. The attack, specifically on Jerusalem and the West Bank, clearly revealed this, and that it is not serious about this approach at all, and that its real goal is to completely control the Palestinian land and consolidate a “terrifying” settlement reality, making it an unbearable “hell” and a “repulsive” environment, on the path to completely emptying it of Palestinians.

In conclusion, it can be said that the massacre war, the horrific genocide in Gaza, and the assault on Jerusalem and the West Bank are not just another episode in the chain of confrontation. Rather, they represent a true turning point, forcing radical changes in Palestinian politics. However, a positive and effective response to these challenges requires clear political will and a radical shift in the current approach and even way of thinking. This is not limited to one party, but rather requires all actors on the Palestinian scene.

..................

The massacre war, the horrific genocide in Gaza, and the assault on Jerusalem and the West Bank are not just another episode in the chain of confrontation. They represent a true turning point, forcing radical changes in Palestinian politics.