Speaker 1: Col Zone Media.
Speaker 2: Hello everyone, and welcome to it could happen here. My
Speaker 2: name is Dana al Kurd and I'm a writer, analyst,
Speaker 2: and researcher of Palestinian and Arab politics. I'm an associate
Speaker 2: professor of political science and a senior non resident fellow
Speaker 2: at the Arab Center Washington. I'm recording this on October nineteenth,
Speaker 2: twenty twenty five. Negotiators from a number of countries and
Speaker 2: Israel were in Cairo recently discussing the next phase of
Speaker 2: the ceasefire agreement between Hamas and Israel. Hamas has since
Speaker 2: released all remaining Israeli hostages as well as the bodies
Speaker 2: of those who were killed, and Israel has withdrawn from
Speaker 2: certain parts of the Gaza Strip and started to release
Speaker 2: political prisoners as well as the bodies of Palestinians who
Speaker 2: have been killed after they were detained since October seventh.
Speaker 2: Some of the testimonies from these prisoners is just incredibly
Speaker 2: heart to stomach. The degree of the humanization that's been
Speaker 2: allowed to take place in these Israeli prisons, the torture
Speaker 2: and abuse that they faced, is truly truly harrowing. Some
Speaker 2: of the Palestinian bodies that have been released, are mutilated
Speaker 2: with extreme signs of torture. Some were released blindfolded and cuffed,
Speaker 2: returned with a noose around their neck. Greta Tunberg, who
Speaker 2: was on the flotilla recently trying to break the siege
Speaker 2: of Gaza, just also returned from Israeli prison where she
Speaker 2: was also abused and stripped and mistreated. She said in
Speaker 2: a recent interview, if they do this to a white
Speaker 2: person with a Swedish passport, we can only imagine what
Speaker 2: they do to Palestinians. And of course we are seeing
Speaker 2: this play out before our eyes. In a fair and
Speaker 2: just world where international law meant something, there would be
Speaker 2: consequences for this. Instead, today I want to talk about
Speaker 2: this plan that's been proposed by the Trump administration, the
Speaker 2: Point Piece Plan for Gaza. Reportedly, ex UK Prime Minister
Speaker 2: Tony Blair has been consulting with Trump and his son
Speaker 2: in law slash adviser Jared Kushner for some time hashing
Speaker 2: this plan out. We'll get back to him in a bit,
Speaker 2: as he's quite the character. This plan, as the name suggests,
Speaker 2: has twenty points, but it's a little light on details.
Speaker 2: It outlines the return of remaining Israel hostages very quickly
Speaker 2: within seventy two hours. It says the Gaza Strip needs
Speaker 2: to be quote demilitarized. It talks about the creation of
Speaker 2: an international stabilization force, an international security force to operate
Speaker 2: on the ground in Gaza with the eventual withdrawal of
Speaker 2: Israeli troops, but within a buffer zone, and this force
Speaker 2: would consist of soldiers from other countries. It also talks
Speaker 2: about the formation of a quote technocratic, apolitical Palestinian temporary
Speaker 2: government to run the Gaza Strip territory until the peace
Speaker 2: process is concluded. But this temporary Palestinian government would only
Speaker 2: be allowed to engage in service provision nothing more. That
Speaker 2: government would also be overseen by a quote Board of
Speaker 2: Peace run by Trump himself, his pal Tony Blair, and
Speaker 2: other yet unspecified members. There is some language on the
Speaker 2: economic development of a quote new Gaza, and some discussion
Speaker 2: of initiatives to promote tolerance, essentially to deradicalize Palestinians. Notably,
Speaker 2: the plan does not endorse ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza,
Speaker 2: which was wildly a serious thing on the table for
Speaker 2: a few months that Trump endorsed. But what it does
Speaker 2: say is still pretty insidious. Essentially, the plan says that
Speaker 2: a possible pathway to Palestinian self determination and statehood is
Speaker 2: conditioned on advances in quote Gaza's redevelopment and a quote
Speaker 2: Palestinian authority reform program that is faithfully carried out. Only then,
Speaker 2: the plan says, quote conditions may finally be in place
Speaker 2: for a credible pathway to Palestinian self determination and statehood. Basically,
Speaker 2: if the Palestinians do good, if they comply with the
Speaker 2: International Security Force, if they take orders from the Board
Speaker 2: of Peace and quote reform the PA in some way,
Speaker 2: and what that means is a really big open question,
Speaker 2: then maybe their demands for self determination in statehood will
Speaker 2: eventually be discussed. As I've said before on previous episodes,
Speaker 2: that statehood part is a bit tricky because statehood means
Speaker 2: different things to different people. Apparently, Jared Kushner talked about
Speaker 2: maybe giving Palestinians a state without the annoying little detail
Speaker 2: of actual sovereignty. The Israeli prime minister that signed the
Speaker 2: Oslo Accords yet Zakrabin, which was the first time Palestinians
Speaker 2: and Israelis a reed to anything directly said after signing
Speaker 2: that Israel would only ever give Palestinians something quote less
Speaker 2: than a state. The international community keeps recognizing a Palestinian
Speaker 2: state when the Palestinians don't really have control of any territory.
Speaker 2: It's like is the state in the room with us now.
Speaker 2: It's also important to note here that the plan that
Speaker 2: Trump is proposing doesn't really include any Palestinian input, at
Speaker 2: least meaningfully. The goal from Israel and the US's perspective
Speaker 2: is for Hamas to be removed from the equation altogether.
Speaker 2: There's some discussion actually still of whether they will actually
Speaker 2: disarm or not, because Hamas has said to the media
Speaker 2: that it's not considering this. And as I mentioned, there
Speaker 2: is this throwaway line about reforming the Palestinian authority, but
Speaker 2: what that means and how the Palestinian people actually factor
Speaker 2: in isn't addressed. Here's my educated guess. When Trump, an Israel,
Speaker 2: and the international community say they want to reform the PA,
Speaker 2: we have to look at what they've been doing and
Speaker 2: pushing for in the past couple of months to understand
Speaker 2: what that actually means. So for them, if we look
Speaker 2: at their track record, reforming the PA means figuring out
Speaker 2: an acceptable alternative from their perspective, to replace the octagenarian
Speaker 2: Palestinian President Mahmud Abbas, so that the PA can seem
Speaker 2: on paper more legitimate and better positioned to sign away
Speaker 2: Palestinian rights during future negotiations. They've already been pushing behind
Speaker 2: the scenes to set that up. They pressured Abbas to
Speaker 2: convene the Palestine Liberation Organization Central Council, change the bylaws,
Speaker 2: create a vice president position, and appoint the guy that's
Speaker 2: acceptable to the US and Israel to that role. That
Speaker 2: man was Sena Cher, Palestinian businessman and former security guy
Speaker 2: who polls at two percent with Palestinians. What reforming the
Speaker 2: PA does not mean it looks like, is actual democratic
Speaker 2: reform where Palestinians can choose not only their president but
Speaker 2: also on their legislative representatives and on the PLO legislative body,
Speaker 2: the National Council. It looks like reforming the PA doesn't
Speaker 2: mean all Palestinians will be allowed to participate if limited
Speaker 2: elections are held, and it seems it doesn't mean responding
Speaker 2: to what Palestinian civil society has been asking for, which
Speaker 2: is reforming the PA by reforming the PLO altogether, so
Speaker 2: that all Palestinians can participate in the discussion of national liberation.
Speaker 2: We can guess that the US, Israel, and the international
Speaker 2: community quote unquote are unlikely to offer any of this
Speaker 2: because they've propped up the PA in the past and
Speaker 2: seem intent on propping up some puppet government of the
Speaker 2: PA in the future. But they need the PA, as
Speaker 2: some acceptable Palestinian entity to be even tangentially involved in
Speaker 2: future negotiations so that they can say, look, the Palestinians
Speaker 2: agree to this is legitimate, even if that PA doesn't
Speaker 2: represent people. Even if most Palestinians eighty five percent in
Speaker 2: the latest poll are dissatisfied with the PA's conduct and
Speaker 2: forty two percent support the the solution of the PA altogether,
Speaker 2: this is a dangerous game to play. Any sort of
Speaker 2: peace process in the future, as impossible as it seems
Speaker 2: at this current moment, that isn't predicated on the complete
Speaker 2: annihilation of one side of the conflict, will need some
Speaker 2: degree of public support. It will need societies involved in
Speaker 2: this conflict to buy into the process. Otherwise you get spoilers,
Speaker 2: you get political actors engaging violence to disrupt the peace process,
Speaker 2: or you don't really resolve the underlying issues in an
Speaker 2: even compromised, satisfactory way, and people get upset and the
Speaker 2: conflict continues. So if you don't include people's buy in,
Speaker 2: what you're banking on is being able to suppress people,
Speaker 2: and what you want isn't really peace. It's authoritarian conflict management.
Speaker 2: It's illiberal. It maintains structural violence in the name of
Speaker 2: preserving peace. It means Palestinians wouldn't get the rights they
Speaker 2: have under international law, the right to self determination, and
Speaker 2: it means the occupation in some form doesn't end. The
Speaker 2: thing is this is well understood, and it's well understood
Speaker 2: by the people involved in this twenty point piece plan
Speaker 2: for Gaza. Tony Blair, for example, was Prime Minister of
Speaker 2: the UK when the Northern Ireland conflict was being negotiated
Speaker 2: and settled. He understood then that public buy in was important.
Speaker 2: The Good Friday Agreement, which ended the conflict in Northern
Speaker 2: Ireland for the past twenty seven years, had not one
Speaker 2: but two referendums, one for the people of Northern Ireland
Speaker 2: and one for the people of the Republic of Ireland.
Speaker 2: The process of getting to the Good Friday Agreement also
Speaker 2: included all groups militant groups from both sides of the conflict.
Speaker 2: This is what it takes for a conflict to be
Speaker 2: contained in some shape or form. But for some reason,
Speaker 2: when international leaders or ex leaders in the case of
Speaker 2: Tony Blair, think about conflicts in the Middle East involving Arabs,
Speaker 2: then public buy in, democratic processes, sustainable peace no longer
Speaker 2: factor into decision making. The buy in an opinion of
Speaker 2: the public matters, but apparently only certain publics. In other conflicts, also,
Speaker 2: like the breakdown of Yugoslavia, the perpetrators of genophsidal violence
Speaker 2: were held accountable by international law. They were taken to
Speaker 2: the Hague. They faced repercussions, of course, not perfectly, not entirely,
Speaker 2: not everyone. Some parties of the conflict that emerged in
Speaker 2: Bosnia after were rewarded for their violence. The vision of
Speaker 2: the Serbian leadership that committed war crimes in Bosnia came
Speaker 2: to fruition to some degree in the form of Republica
Speaker 2: Serpska today, which is a semi autonomous region that divides
Speaker 2: Bosnia Herzegovina. But nevertheless, the international community at least understood
Speaker 2: the necessity of holding perpetrators accountable for violence and war crimes,
Speaker 2: even if the execution was incomplete. In this case, there
Speaker 2: is no such discussion. A number of human rights organizations
Speaker 2: and the UN Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian
Speaker 2: Territory have found Israeli leaders President Isaac Hertzog, Prime Minister
Speaker 2: Benjamin Netanyahu, and then Defense Minister Yuav Gallant personally responsible
Speaker 2: for the decisions made in Gaza, the decision to engage
Speaker 2: in genocide in Gaza, but the ceasefire plan, which they
Speaker 2: are billing as a quote peace plan for a new Gaza,
Speaker 2: and their time trying to make the basis of future
Speaker 2: negotiations says nothing about accountability for crimes committed. Trump, in fact,
Speaker 2: went in front of the Kanesset, the Israeli parliament, and
Speaker 2: insisted on his support for Prime Minister Natanieho. He even
Speaker 2: got involved in Nataniahu's corruption case that he has domestically
Speaker 2: in Israel, addressing President Isaac Hertzog, as Kanesse members clapped
Speaker 2: and jeered, hey, I have an idea, mister President. Why
Speaker 2: don't you give him a pardon. That's what we're dealing
Speaker 2: with here, Just an audacious, outrageous display of corruption on
Speaker 2: so many levels. The fact that these guys are the
Speaker 2: guys putting together the so called peace plan votes poorly
Speaker 2: for the sustainability of this ceasefire agreement beyond the first phase.
Speaker 2: Beyond Israel getting what it wants the hostages, a huge
Speaker 2: buffer zone that leaves Israel in control of Gaza's former
Speaker 2: urban areas, and possibly they might get the neutralization of Hamas,
Speaker 2: it's not clear that this ceasefire agreement can actually advance
Speaker 2: into a sustainable negotiation that maintains peace in the long run.
Speaker 2: It's why scholar Marika Sosnowski at the University of Melbourne,
Speaker 2: who studies ceasefire agreements in particular, calls this a strangle contract.
Speaker 2: She notes that Israeli withdrawal, release of hostages, and full
Speaker 2: aid being led into Gaza is the quote bare minimum
Speaker 2: you would expect both sides to acquiesce to as part
Speaker 2: of a ceasefire deal. She expresses concern that this agreement
Speaker 2: is highly coercive and that it quote enables the more
Speaker 2: powerful party to force the weaker party into agreeing to
Speaker 2: anything in order for them to survive. This is in
Speaker 2: direct contrast to a bargain between two equal parties that
Speaker 2: can sustain peace. She also very rightly notes that Israel
Speaker 2: could at any time claim the Palestinians are not abiding
Speaker 2: by the terms of the agreement and and the ceasefire,
Speaker 2: justifying restarting the war. The Palestinians have no leverage at
Speaker 2: all in this agreement, and obviously they can't rely on
Speaker 2: unbiased international mediation with the Trump and Kushner and Blairs
Speaker 2: of the world. At the helm of this Sisnowski quotes
Speaker 2: a Palestinian leader from Yermuk camp in Syria who said,
Speaker 2: to her quote, if there is a ceasefire, people know
Speaker 2: the devil is coming. I think that captures exactly everyone's
Speaker 2: fears in this moment. The Palesadian Civil Defense Agency says
Speaker 2: forty Palestinians have been killed in Gaza today October nineteenth.
Speaker 2: Children have been shot and killed in the West Bank.
Speaker 2: After the ceasefire agreement, Israel raided the family homes of
Speaker 2: Palestinian prisoners in five districts across the West Bank before
Speaker 2: releasing them. Nataniehu has said he won't open the Rafach crossing.
Speaker 2: These all seem like Israeli violations to the ceasefire to me,
Speaker 2: but that's not how it'll be reported. And because the
Speaker 2: Trump administration has twisted the meaning of words where domination
Speaker 2: equals peace and injustice equal stability. Once this happens, I
Speaker 2: fear very few will question the premise of this agreement
Speaker 2: and the entire peace process to begin with a peace
Speaker 2: process for Palestinians aren't even allowed to participate. No one
Speaker 2: can be surprised when this doesn't last, and no one
Speaker 2: can be surprised that this cannot be the basis for
Speaker 2: sustainable peace. But hey, I hope I'm wrong. Thank you
Speaker 2: for listening to this episode of It Could Happen Here.
Speaker 2: Here's hoping for justice and peace.
Speaker 1: It could Happen Here is a production of cool Zone Media.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts from cool Zone Media, visit our website
Speaker 1: Coolzonemedia dot com, or check us out on the iHeartRadio app,
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can
Speaker 1: now find sources for it could Happen Here listed directly
Speaker 1: in episode descriptions. Thanks for listening. Thank