Following Washington’s intervention, Israel stopped massacring Gazans in order to ethnically cleanse Palestine and expand its settlements. Israel has also agreed to allow humanitarian aid to pass through to the civilians it has trapped.
However, nothing has been resolved by both Benjamin Netanyahu’s revisionist Zionists and Ismail Haniyeh’s Hamas. These two groups, which claim to defend Jews and Arabs respectively, are in fact pursuing the British colonial project, formulated in 1915 by Lord Spencer, of a region incapable of defending itself.
Since 1948, the only solution, which has always been postponed, is that of a single bi-national state, as set out in UN Resolution 181.
As a reminder, since 2017, Hamas has officially withdrawn from the Brotherhood, but its main leaders are still members and implement its long-term strategy. During the war against Syria, Hamas fought alongside Nato and Israel against the Syrian Arab Republic.
The Hamas current, which broke with the Brotherhood, made peace with Syria. October 19, 2022. President Bashar el-Assad received his leader, Khalil Hayya, in Damascus. On the other hand, he still refused to meet the Muslim Brotherhood current incarnated by Khaled Mechal.
Since the start of Operation Iron Glaive, Israel has been hunting down and killing Hamas members who have joined the Palestinian Resistance, and sparing those who have remained members of the Brotherhood. In Beirut, for example, the Israeli General Staff assassinated Saleh al-Arouri [2] the 2nd in command of the political branch of Hamas. He had been expelled from Qatar because of his opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood.
General Benny Gantz stopped off in London on his way back to Israel. It is known that he himself initiated this stopover, and that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did everything in his power to ensure that he did not enjoy diplomatic immunity in the UK, at the risk of being arrested there for complicity in crimes against humanity Be [3]. that as it may, Benny Gantz made the same remarks in London as he had in Washington: he showed himself anxious both to stop the massacre in Gaza and to continue the operation against Hamas. He confirmed to his astonished interlocutors that he feared as much as they did the threats made by Rabbi Uzi Sharbaf at the “Conference for the Victory of Israel” [4], but that he would also fight the Muslim Brotherhood.
Whatever they say, the British still control the Brotherhood. We saw this during the wars against Libya and Syria. They have taken charge of communications for this secret organization and all the militias that emanate from it. In some cases, they have supplied them with arms and intelligence.
So the Anglo-Saxons are back where they started: in 1915, in Lord Herbert Samuel’s memorandum on The Future of Palestine (i.e., before Lord Balfour’s Declaration), they intended to support an independent Jewish state in Palestine, but not strong enough to defend itself. Subsequently, the followers of Volodymyr Jabotinsky, a historic ally of Benito Mussoloni and therefore a “fascist” in the full sense of the word, broke with London and attempted to pursue their colonial project in the same way as Rhodesia did a little later. The British were forced, along with the Americans, to recycle their enemies during the Cold War. 75 years later, the situation is identical: Israel is not strong enough to defend itself alone, but the Anglo-Saxons refuse to sanction the massacre of the Arabs of Palestine in broad daylight. If they arm Israel, they cover themselves in public blood; if they don’t, they lose the last remnant of the British Empire [5].
Contrary to popular belief, the Muslim Brotherhood has never sought to establish a Palestinian state independent of a Jewish state (as proposed by Lord William Peel’s colonial commission and popularized as the “two-state solution”), nor a Palestinian state federated with a Jewish state within a binational state (as decided by the United Nations). The difference between these two projects is that the former ensures equality between Arabs among Arabs and between Jews among Jews, while the latter is concerned with equality between every man, whether Arab or Jew.
In his letter to the (pro-British) Egyptian Prime Minister Mustafa el-Nahhas Pasha, Hassan el-Banna, the founder of the Brotherhood, asks him to prepare “the restoration of the Caliphate, in application of the unity demanded by Islam”.
Similarly, during its first period, Hamas proclaimed in its charter that it wanted to build a state for Muslims (the Caliphate). However, in 2017, when part of its base rejected the Brotherhood, which had just lost in Syria, it adopted a charter that was in favour of an independent Palestinian state (in the sense of the Peel Commission and the “two-state solution”). However, the latest Hamas brochure, Our narrative… Operation Al-Aqsa Flood [6], marks a step backwards by presenting the eight demands of historical Hamas. It states that Hamas rejects the Israeli occupation, but in particular does not support a Palestinian state, since the Brotherhood’s aim is to re-establish a Caliphate, i.e. a supranational state for all Muslim peoples.
Israel, for its part, is also at an impasse. It no longer knows what to do. The war cabinet (i.e. both Benjamin Netanyahu’s Jewish supremacists and Benny Gantz’s democrats) intends to destroy Hamas, including at Rafah. Yet all the experts, including former heads of the Shin Bet and Mossad, agree that the problem is not a particular organization, but the political situation that fuels the Resistance. Under these conditions, even if Hamas were to be completely destroyed, this would only encourage the creation of a new Resistance network, and would not guarantee that a new October 7th could take place.
Incidentally, the “revisionist Zionists” have not given up their plan to expel the Arabs from Palestine (“a land without a people, for a people without a land”). From their point of view, the Pentagon’s creation, within the next two months, of a floating island off the Gaza coast could revive this plan. As the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (FLPL) has denounced, the landing stage for humanitarian aid could be transformed almost instantly into a landing stage for exile. At the start of the crisis, the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, announced in Cairo that the EU was ready to receive one million Gazans. African states had been contacted by Benjamin Netanyahu’s cabinet. The press cited Chad, Rwanda and Congo, all three of which denied this .
If such a turn were taken, the Egyptian-Palestinian border crossing at Rafah would lose its usefu [7]lness. Israel would take advantage of the situation to exclude Egypt from any political decisions. Cairo has long refused to let Gazans go into exile, and only last month set up a camp to house 1 million of them [8].
In fact, US intervention has forced Israel to cease its ethnic cleansing of Gaza and to agree to let humanitarian aid through. This is an enormous step forward. But Washington has not paved the way for peace, which would require not only the removal of the Jewish fascists, but also the end of the British colonial project in Palestine.