After the Israel-Hamas War Palestinian Perspectives

Key Findings:

Governance in Gaza:

Sayigh emphasizes that Israel’s ultimate goal is to prevent Hamas from ruling Gaza, but there are no credible Palestinian alternatives. He sees a paradox where Israel wants control over Gaza without being formally accountable, and any lasting solution requires a broader agreement involving the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Shikaki agrees with Sayigh but suggests that, despite efforts to dismantle Hamas' military infrastructure, Hamas will retain control over Gaza. Any external forces, like Egypt, would need Hamas's consent to operate. He envisions an international or UN-managed humanitarian presence but doubts any short-term reconstruction of Gaza.

Palestinian Authority (PA) in Gaza:

Both experts argue that Israel has avoided facilitating the PA's return to Gaza, preferring a situation where Hamas governs. The PA's legitimacy in Gaza is questioned, with Shikaki noting that Abbas, the PA leader, is weak both in Gaza and the West Bank. He suggests that the only potential for the PA’s return would require significant regional or international shifts and possibly a reconciliation with Hamas.

Sayigh highlights the PA’s diminished role and legitimacy, suggesting that its continued existence, particularly in the West Bank, may no longer serve its original purpose. The situation could evolve if Fatah (the PA's dominant faction) finds new strategies to confront Israeli colonization.

The West Bank:

Both experts discuss the precarious situation in the West Bank, where Israeli settlement activity and military operations continue. Shikaki raises the possibility of unrest or even a third Intifada, especially if conditions in Gaza worsen or a regional conflict expands. However, at present, the PA's lack of legitimacy prevents significant opposition or militancy in the West Bank.

Settler Violence and Policy:

Shikaki describes the settler violence and forced displacement of Palestinians as routine and unopposed by the Israeli military (often acting in alignment with settlers). This environment, supported by Israel's national-religious government, further entrenches a one-state reality incompatible with a two-state solution.

Sayigh suggests the West Bank is central to Israel's ultranationalist project. Reversing the current trajectory would require monumental shifts in Israeli governance and international political will, which are unlikely in the current global climate.

Global and Historical Context:

Both experts believe that international actors, including the US and Europe, lack the political will to challenge Israeli policies. Arab governments, too, are unwilling to alter their strategic posture to address the crisis effectively.

Sayigh underscores the broader global context: the rise of ultranationalist movements worldwide and geopolitical shifts focusing on Russia and China diminish the likelihood of robust intervention in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Reflections from the Second Intifada:

Shikaki draws parallels to the Second Intifada, suggesting that even after catastrophic breakdowns, mutual interests between Israelis and Palestinians can sometimes foster a path forward, albeit under extreme circumstances.

Sayigh is more pessimistic, reflecting on how misjudgments and internal Palestinian divisions during the Second Intifada eroded the potential for progress. He now foresees a protracted stalemate, potentially lasting a century, before any resolution emerges.