Yearning for an Elusive Permanent Settlement, the Region Remains in a Precarious Transitional Phase.

The main drawback of transitional arrangements for a serious, complex, and tragic situation, such as Gaza, is that they are subject to terrifying and amoral calculations, which could undermine any hope for peace. A permanent ceasefire remains unlikely at this time: Israel has informed mediators, especially the United States, that it needs until mid-December to complete its objective of eliminating or destroying Hamas’s leadership in the Gaza Strip. According to analysts and those closely aligned with Hamas’s thinking, Israel is less interested in keeping the ceasefire arrangements made through American, Egyptian, and Qatari efforts, while Hamas prefers to prolong the ceasefire to continue negotiations for the release of prisoners and hostages. The difference between their positions is that Hamas sees an extension of the pause as an opportunity to regroup and rebuild its military capability and regain the initiative, while Israel is on the verge of achieving its goals, as it claims, and aims to release all hostages before ending Hamas's control of the Gaza Strip. For this, Israel has opted to resume hostilities.?

?

U.S. President Joe Biden finds himself forced to tacitly approve the continuation of Israel's offensive, especially since its justification was a Hamas rocket launch in alleged violation of the ceasefire. The U.S. president found himself caught between two contradictory positions. On the one hand, is the ceasefire he co-sponsored with Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi and Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad bin Khalifa in return for the exchange of prisoners and detainees between Israel and Hamas. The agreement was welcomed by the international community for halting the bloodletting and the killing of civilians, most of whom Palestinian children and women. ?

?

On the other hand, President Biden found himself compelled to greenlight Israel's resumption of bombing and destruction in Gaza to destroy the infrastructure of the Hamas movement, though his administration's spokespeople expressed hope that Israel would take extra measures to limit civilian casualties with a more cautious approach if it expanded its attack south Gaza. In other words, it seems that Israel convinced the United States that it needs a week or ten days to consolidate a buffer zone in northern Gaza under its control and to push Hamas out of the northern Gaza Strip, either towards its south, the West Bank, or any Arab state willing to receive the group’s leadership.?

?

Developments in the West Bank itself are also a source of concern for the Biden administration, which is working with the concerned parties, away from the spotlight, to reach a plan for political stability in Gaza. This necessarily requires the cooperation of the Palestinian Authority, based in the West Bank. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken made a third visit to Israel and the West Bank this week, seeking to reduce tension, including urging Israel to take immediate steps to hold extremist settlers accountable for violence in the West Bank.?

?

The challenge facing Washington is the potential for Congress to ambush the White House, demanding accountability if the administration appears less sympathetic to Israel—the favored ally that remains shielded from scrutiny. This poses a complex dilemma, especially in the midst of a heated election year.?

The recent developments in the Gaza war have shifted the spotlight onto President Biden's leadership, denying former President Donald Trump some of the spotlight. Some argue that Biden's handling of the Gaza conflict could earn him a healthy dose of electoral points, particularly if he succeeds in preventing the escalation of the conflict into a regional or international crisis. However, there is another perspective which holds that Trump gains by avoiding entanglement in the Gaza issue, as any political point scoring from the Gaza war is likely to be short-lived. Joe Biden may thus struggle to replicate the significant successes achieved by previous U.S. presidents, such as the Camp David Accords.?

?

The Biden administration is banking on a qualitative leap that secures a historic achievement for the president. The administration therefore is not satisfied with temporary arrangements and is actively working towards a permanent settlement. They are engaging with influential countries in the Middle East to ensure the success of a lasting solution.?

?

Critical partners include Arab and Islamic countries, represented by the ministerial committee formed at the recent Riyadh Summit; and Arab nations that have normalized relations with Israel, led by the United Arab Emirates. Additionally, countries with influence over Hamas, such as Qatar, Egypt, Turkey, and Iran, are involved, alongside Israel and the Palestinian Authority.?

?

The ministerial committee, led by Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan, has been approaching the permanent member states of the UN Security Council, and addressed the Security Council in New York with momentum, and credibility. Qatar's Foreign Minister and Prime Minister, Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani, participated in the Security Council session, reflecting Qatar's pivotal role in the Hamas-Israel ceasefire negotiations—and as a conduit and intermediary between the United States and Iran.?

?

The committee members convened an official meeting this month with the President of the Security Council, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, in New York. This meeting was attended by the prime minister of Qatar and committee members, along with the foreign ministers of Jordan Ayman Safadi, Egypt Sameh Shoukry, Palestine Riyad Al-Maliki, Turkey Hakan Fidan, and Indonesia Retno Marsudi. The Secretary-General of the Arab League, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, was also present, along with the Foreign Minister of Malaysia Zambry Abdul Kadir and the UAE's Minister of State Khalifa bin Shahin Al-Murr, representing the Arab group in the Security Council.?

?

Some may say committees, meetings, and speeches alone will not suffice, as long as Arab and Islamic nations withhold using leverage and sanctions against Israel for its ongoing violation of international laws and rules of war, particularly regarding the protection of civilians, and as long as the forced displacement from Gaza is being actively implemented.?

?

Perhaps these measures will become necessary if Israel continues to resist American and international pressures. However, for now, the ministerial committee will only proceed by utilizing political and economic influence—both Arab and Islamic—to exhaust efforts aimed at persuading Israel to accept a ceasefire and then the two-state solution in return for coexistence and normalization. The goal of the ministerial committee, appointed by the Riyadh Summit, is to ensure the maximum national rights for Palestinians and to find a permanent and just settlement, rather than beating the drums of war.?

?

China played a significant and prominent role this week in the framework of the ministerial committee’s efforts, as president of the UN Security Council and as the first stop of the committee’s visits to the capitals of permanent member states. The aim of the ministerial committee is not to diminish the central and vital role of the U.S. in convincing Israel to change its approach but rather to help bring about such a change with a measure of boldness. The objective is to broaden the circle of countries with leverage with Israel. China and Israel have extensive relations that concern both parties. Additionally, China played a crucial role in redirecting Saudi-Iranian relations away from confrontation and towards agreement. Moreover, China's entry as a supportive party for comprehensive and permanent settlement efforts under U.S. sponsorship could improve bilateral relations between the two giants, who both want stability in the Middle East and the Gulf.?

?

Russia is ready to assist but does not want to reclaim its traditional role in joint sponsorship with the United States—a role that was crucial during the Cold War era of polarization. Today, Russia does not oppose "resigning" from the position of joint sponsorship but is willing to assist in containing the conflict. Russia will not hinder American efforts to find a comprehensive, permanent, and just settlement. It also understands that its assistance in the success of American efforts may have a positive return in the end.?

?

Europe is prepared to board the American train towards a lasting settlement in the Middle East. It wants to be in the back seat because the driver's seat must be American-occupied, due to the unique nature of the U.S.-Israeli relationship and, secondly, because leadership has a cost that Europe is not willing to risk amidst its conflict with Russia and its support for Ukraine.?

?

All of this leaves the Biden administration in a delicate position amid divided public opinion within the United States and internal divisions within Israel. Indeed, Israeli public opinion is leaning towards revenge rather than coexistence and settlement. In addition, intra-Palestinian divisions hinder a historic breakthrough towards a comprehensive settlement.?

?

The new element that could benefit aspirations for a comprehensive and permanent settlement is the Arab and Islamic engagement through the ministerial committee and its challenging – but not impossible or futile – mission.?

?

What’s new, in other words, is the Saudi and Gulf determination to make a qualitative contribution to addressing this issue, which poses a potential threat to the visionary aspirations of the Arabian Gulf region, instead of leaving the Middle East vulnerable to shocks and setbacks.?

?

What is also noteworthy is Iran’s participation in the Arab-Islamic Riyadh Summit without objection to the final statement affirming the two-state solution—the State of Palestine and the State of Israel.?

?

October 7th was a history-altering event, and subsequent events presented Israel to the world in a manner it had not been known before. Global public condemnation wasn't restricted to Hamas but extended to Israel due to their violations of the rules of war, the holding of children as hostages and prisoners, and their use of civilians as ammunition in their wars.?

?

We are still in a precarious transitional phase, but the opportunity to reach a historic settlement has not been lost. The road ahead is, however, still fraught with difficulties and obstacles, especially given the intricate nature of the Middle East, where complexities are deeply rooted in the region's soil.?