Wadah Khanfar, Founder President of Al Sharq Forum spoke to Harici: “The current reality in the region is shameful. Because the regional states have decided to work within the ceiling that the Americans actually decide for them. And the Americans, as you know, favor the Israelis more than they favor anyone else.”
Wadah Khanfar answered our questions on key debates such as the position of regional countries in the Gaza conflict, plans for a two-state solution, the attitude of the international community and the resolution of the Palestinian conflict.
I did a few interviews about Gaza, but one was very harsh. Daniel Levy, a senior adviser in former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s government and a former Israeli peace negotiator, told me it was a shame for the Arabs that it was South Africa that sued Israel at the International Court of Justice. Let’s start with this comment. You are also Arab, but I am sure you will take an objective approach.
I think it is shameful, no doubt about that. Because the regional states have decided to work within the ceiling that the Americans actually decide for them. And the Americans, as you know, favor the Israelis more than they favor anyone else. So, at this stage, we are stuck in a situation whereby no one is taking proper initiative and everyone is trying to maneuver while he is standing on his own one square meter. The best they could do sometimes is make speeches which are irrelevant to the reality on the ground.
The situation in Gaza has gone beyond any conflict from 1945 until now. We have never seen starvation to death in front of the eyes of the public as it is happening today, while countries are in a state of paralysis and they only could deliver some talks in a shy way without confronting the Israelis or try to do something that breaks the norm. We are in a situation where you need something new, something challenging, something to stop the current aggression.
Unfortunately, I agree that the current reality in the region is shameful and generation after another will look back at this moment and feel ashamed of the response of our governments to the current crisis.
Several times underlined the hypocrisy issue. Are you referring to the West or actually the Saudis being hypocrite or the ones who signed Abraham Accords being hypocrite? Because they knew that when they are signing this deal with Israel, they knew which power that is going to give to Israel that Gazans and Palestinians will be backless.
I do believe that the West has advocated for the last, maybe, three centuries the values of liberalism, rule of law and justice and equality and human rights. Because of that, they were trying to introduce a global philosophy which they think that it should rule the world basically.
But we noticed that these ideals, these values have been utilized in the hand of the power in order to create some hegemony rather than actual justice and equality and rule of law. Gaza has basically uncovered that deep racism within the Western mind of how to deal with us. So there are two categories of humans in the eyes of the Western Powers; the Europeans, themselves and the Westerners, including the Americans, of course, and then the rest of the world. The rest of the world not necessarily should enjoy the same fruits of liberalism that the West should have. This is one aspect of hypocrisy. The second aspect of hypocrisy is that our governments, as you mentioned rightly, who have been trying to appease the Israelis in order to appease the Americans or to secure their thrones and to secure their regimes, have been in a way or another for also decades now following the recipes that the Americans have introduced to us.
So when the Americans lead with Abraham Accords, governments in this region applaud and follow without any assurance that this will achieve any justice to the Palestinians or national security for the region itself. So, this is why this region is in turmoil. This is why our governments are not capable of gaining legitimacy in the eyes of the public. This is why we have civil wars everywhere in this region. This is why we cannot achieve security and prosperity if we continue to follow the Western-centric approach to our own interests, to our own cases, like the case or the cause of Palestine.
Do you think that if Israel is not declared a war criminal and a genocidal state for these acts, it will not pave the way for greater disasters in the international community?
The international community is going through one of the worst tests since 1945 because in 1945 they have decided that the world should be established on new foundations. There is a United Nations and Security Council to guarantee security in the world. There is international law to guarantee that the states do not go against each other and achieve another war. Now the current reality has demolished all of that. There is no United Nations at this moment in time. It is irrelevant because at the Security Council, the Americans are vetoing every ceasefire decision, proposal. And on the other hand, the Israelis are attacking the United Nations, accusing the Secretary General of anti-Semitism. The same United Nations that in 1947 decided the partition of Palestine by a majority of 33 votes only. And at that time the United Nations had only 57 members. 33 of them voted for the partition of Palestine and the creation of Israel. Now that particular institution is attacked now as anti-Semitic. While today we have almost 200 states, 154 of them voted against Israel. So, you see how the double standards are achieving.
The international law is attacked. There is nothing called international law anymore at this stage because Israel has actually broken every paragraph in every convention and every international law without anyone holding them to account, especially the Americans who are giving them a cover. So what kind of world order do we have? This is a world order of chaos. This is a world order that will lead to much more conflicts in the future and everyone can do whatever he wants to do without regard to anyone.
Regarding the world order, some of the analysts are saying that the U.S. is no longer in the position to mediate any of the crises anywhere in the world, including the Israel-Palestine crisis or the two-state solution. There are some voices who say that China could be a good advocate for this. I’m not sure why, but maybe they just want to bring another country which is confronting the U.S.. Do you think that the power of Asia can come closer to the Middle East to solve some problems?
Not necessarily, actually. I don’t trust hegemonic powers in any way. At this moment in time, I do welcome the rise of China simply because the centrality of the American foreign policy and American hegemony in the world has led us to the current horrible reality we are in. So, this is why the challenge that China poses to the Americans is welcomed, in my opinion. But the replacement of that is not also a unipolar system where China is on top of it. What we should aspire for, as people in this region, is to have our own geopolitical center through integration amongst our nations in the Middle East where we could sit together with the Chinese and the Americans and the Russians and could negotiate a much better world order that could preserve our right.
We should not be under the mercy of the Americans or the Chinese. This is bad politics. We should look inside. We have nations like the Arabs, the Turks, the Iranians, the Kurds. In this part of the world, we have been living together for thousands of years. And we could establish a center whereby that center, politically and economically, and that could be through integration; governmental, political integration, economic integration; we could become a powerful actor in the international order like what Europe is doing. Because Europe is the most fragmented continent in the world. And after the Second World War, they realized that they need to go for integration. And now we have a European Union which could present itself as a major actor in the economic world and in the political world.
Two-state solution… There is no side who is accepting it at Israeli side. And it’s also discussed within Israeli, let’s say, intellectuals who want to defend the rights of Gazan civilians who are leftists. They also say that while there is a big fact of increasing settlements, it’s impossible to have a two-state solution because it’s a problem for Palestinians. Where are you going to have a two-state solution? Is it really realistic? What are we discussing for dozens of years now?
I think the current situation whereby the international society, especially the Americans, are resurrecting the two-state solution after 30 years of negotiations in Oslo, which we couldn’t achieve anything out of it, is only just to end the current conflict in a way that makes Israel much more relevant to the future because Israel strategically has lost in this war. The image of Israel internationally is horrible. Israel is a country that is accused of genocide. Israel is a country that is starving people to death. So, they would like to replace that image of a process where Israel is negotiating with the Palestinians. Again, another myth called the two-state solution… So, the current situation is basically trying to bring us back to where the Palestinian issue was before 7th of October. I do believe that the two-state solution will be rejected by the Israelis, as it has been rejected for the last 30 years since Oslo. You should remember that by this year, we could have been celebrating the 25th anniversary of the Palestinian state, based on the Oslo agreement, where the Israelis signed it. But nothing happened. So what kind of two-state solutions are we going to talk about? The Americans are talking about a state without sovereignty as it existed in South Africa, a state without control over borders or water or its own resources or security. So, to a large extent, they would like us to declare something called a state, which does not exist in any lexicon of international politics. It does not exist in reality at all, just to save the image of Israel.
You say that the US cannot manage this crisis anymore, and you say that you do not trust other hegemonic powers like China or Russia. Who, according to you, can solve this crisis or can hold the position of mediation?
If there is a bold regional initiative, then we could put the Americans and the international powers under the following choice. Either you stop the Israelis, or this region is going to react to you in a harsh way. The Americans are comfortable that most of our leaders… This is why the conflict will continue for now. Most likely, it will continue in different ways and shapes. We might have a truce for a few days, for a few weeks, then another conflict will arise. Even if they succeed to destroy Hamas in Gaza, there will be another generation that is going to fight for the Palestinian right, because Hamas did not exist before 1987. Before 1987, we had PLO, Palestinian Liberation Organization, and PLO found exactly the same track, that they were destroyed, but then another generation of people rose up in Palestine to defend their rights. So, it’s not an issue of Hamas. It is an issue of the rights of the Palestinians and the rights of this region to feel free, not to be under the custodianship and basically colonialism of the American and Israeli interests.
How do you see the future of Gaza? Let’s talk about the new post-war administration, how it’s going to take shape. Do you think a formula, as the US desires, a formula without Hamas is possible?
It is impossible to have a formula without Hamas in Gaza. It’s impossible to have a formula without Hamas in the Palestinian territories in Gaza and West Bank altogether. In my opinion, Hamas should join the Palestinian organization, PLO.
But PLO doesn’t like this idea.
PLO would love that if they are permitted to do so. The current balance of power internationally and maybe regionally is not pushing for that. But Hamas declared that they are willing to join PLO, and I think PLO eventually, in order to resurrect itself would do it. because PLO today is a dead body. PLO does not exist, you know. So, I’m not speaking about PNA, Palestinian National Authority, in West Bank. I’m speaking about PLO which existed as the representative of the struggle of Palestinians from the early 1960’s. This PLO should become the umbrella where all Palestinians struggle to end the occupation. And it should be reformed where it could become representative of all Palestinian sectors inside Palestine and outside Palestine. Because we have 7 million or 8 million Palestinians living in diaspora. And they have the right to be represented in PLO as well.
So, if there is a representative PLO body, Hamas would be a member of it. Then we could say as Palestinians, we have a united front that could, in the future, find a way either to establish a Palestinian state or to negotiate or to struggle or whatever. But this is a Palestinian decision, not American or Israeli decision.
And what is your opinion about post-war Gaza administration?
I think the Americans and a lot of powers in the region are pushing for technocrat government formed in West Bank and Gaza with a prime minister delegated more powers than the president of PNA, which is Mahmoud Abbas. And this technocrat government will be able to work on reconstructing Gaza and creating a period where later on elections could be held.
Unfortunately, this plan, which is bought by the Americans to a lot of actors in the region, does not answer major questions about the withdrawal of the Israeli army from Gaza or the future of the Palestinian struggle, in a sense. Because it is actually a proposal meant to end the conflict without committing Israel to a lasting solution. And this is the problem of it. If there are serious commitments coming from the Americans, forcing the Israelis to accept total withdrawal from Gaza, total end of the blockade and proper rebuilding of Gaza, then I think we will have a good deal and that could become sustainable.
