“Without political resolution, new clashes will arise”, says Pascal Boniface

Rockets, bombardments, clashes, calls for calm, negotiations via the United States and Egypt, a ceasefire and a “victory” claimed by both sides. The choreography of recurring clashes between Israel and Hamas was respected during ten days of near war. Meanwhile, 243 people have died on the Palestinian side, 12 on the Israeli side: the heaviest human toll since the last open war in Gaza in 2014. After Thursday night’s ceasefire, can calm be restored? sustainable? Maybe not, explain to 20 minutes the director of Iris Pascal Boniface, author of Understanding the world (Armand Colin).

Have the ten days of confrontation changed the situation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

There are new elements. First, the internal clashes in Israel between Jews and Israeli Arabs. There had not been this type of clashes since the start of the second intifada, in the fall of 2000. Between the push of the extreme right in Israel and a kind of despair following the adoption in 2018 of the As the law made Israel the state of the Jewish nation, the gap widened. There is still an element of mutual hatred that is going to be something difficult for the Israeli government to manage, whatever it is.

The second important element is the opening of a debate in the United States on the unconditional character of support for Israel. This is really quite new. While this debate was very marginal, many elected officials, such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, but also the young Jewish senator from Georgia Jon Ossoff, called on both parties to lay down their arms. Senator Bernie Sanders, also a Jew, calls in very harsh terms to end support for Israel. The organization Human Rights Watch, a classic not radical NGO, had also, even before the clashes, described the situation in occupied Palestine asapartheid. The opening of this debate accelerated the decision to move towards a ceasefire on the Israeli side.

Benjamin Netanyahu has been in power in Israel for more than a decade, it is said that he also owes his success to the fact that he made “forget” the conflict with the Palestinians. Is the Prime Minister weakened by this return to the Palestinian question?

It is not certain. Benjamin Netanyahu’s position has been fragile for a long time: he is under trial and there have been four elections in a row from which he has neither emerged victorious nor defeated. It is therefore always a little on the go because it remains very divisive. It is true that the nature of relations with the Palestinians is no longer a subject of debate in Israel. Previously, until the early 2000s, the major theme of the campaign was: “Should we negotiate with the Palestinians or not?” “. In the last four elections that has not been a topic. Israel’s communication relays in France have been explaining for years that this is no longer a central strategic subject, diplomatic agreements with several Arab countries have only confirmed this rhetoric.

However, when we make peace with people with whom we are not at war, that does not really change the situation. Even if the Israelis no longer want to debate the Palestinian affair, the Palestinians have not disappeared. They are always there, always busy and there is little chance that they will suddenly convert to the virtues of this occupation. The ceasefire is good for everyone, we will save human lives, but without a political resolution, one day or another, new clashes will arise.

On the Palestinian side, the temptations of the last ten days only reveal even more the total impotence or even helplessness of the Palestinian Authority, which had to cancel the first elections in fifteen years. Will she be forced to organize these famous elections?

The Palestinian Authority is still under terrible pressure to organize elections. The least we can say is that Mahmoud Abbas [le président de l’Autorité palestinienne] was to absent subscribers during the period. His legitimacy, which was already weak, has really been shattered: he has totally shown his helplessness, the expression is correct. Abbas is stuck: if he resorts to elections he has every chance of losing them and if he does not resort to them, it will be seen that he is only a naked king, who is not maintained only by a masquerade, on the basis of a poll that took place in 2005. Hamas can say that it is they who defend the Palestinian cause while Mahmoud Abbas does nothing. Of course, one could argue that Hamas also causes deadly bombings, but what matters is that it gives a certain pride to the Palestinians.

Would a Hamas victory in the hypothetical future elections make the situation worse or could it contribute to its normalization?

It depends on whether the Westerners agree or not to negotiate with Hamas. As long as they don’t recognize it, saying it’s a terrorist movement, which they used to do for the Palestine Liberation Organization. [que Yasser Arafat a longtemps dirigée], things will not move forward. However, it is not for external representatives to choose the representatives of Palestine. It is for the Palestinians to decide, not for the West in whom they do not have great confidence. From this point of view, Angela Merkel’s statement that she was not against “indirect contacts” with Hamas is extremely important. Since it comes from one of the main European leaders but in addition to Germany, which has always until now forbidden itself to do anything that could offend Israel. This type of statement is an extremely important warning to Israel.