Exclusive Insight: Aleef Sabbagh Reveals How Israel’s Military Setbacks Led to Gaza Withdrawal
In light of the recent ceasefire agreement between Hamas and Israel, brokered by the U.S. under Donald Trump’s controversial 20-point plan, it’s crucial to analyze the situation in Gaza. Following two years of relentless warfare and significant human suffering, this agreement aims to temporarily halt military operations while addressing key humanitarian issues. However, experts caution that this ceasefire may merely delay the underlying issues fueling the conflict.
To gain deeper insights into the political dynamics surrounding the ceasefire and its potential implications, Tehran Times conducted an exclusive interview with Aleef Sabbagh, a Palestinian political analyst focused on the strategic behaviors and colonial policies of the Zionist regime. Based in Quds (Jerusalem), Sabbagh sheds light on the internal and external factors that influenced both parties’ acceptance of the deal, the involvement of Washington and regional mediators, and the future of Gaza’s political and humanitarian landscape within Trump’s proposed framework for peace.
Here are the key points from our interview with Sabbagh:
- Political Pressures: The agreement arose from significant pressures on both Hamas and Israel. This partial deal avoids addressing deeper issues but aligns with each side’s short-term goals.
- Hamas’s Position: The ceasefire meets Hamas’s urgent demands to stop the violence and prevent forced displacements.
- Israel’s Demands: For Israel, the agreement provides a means to address the concerns of families of hostages and the broader Israeli public, who are demanding the release of their loved ones, even at high costs.
According to Sabbagh, several factors influenced Israel’s decision:
- Israel is experiencing massive international pressure, including political isolation at the United Nations and threats of economic sanctions from traditionally friendly nations, which have already resulted in canceled arms contracts and the expulsion of diplomats.
- Trump had allowed sufficient time for Israel to try to eliminate Hamas militarily, but these attempts were unsuccessful, leading to the realization that Hamas could not be defeated through military action alone.
- The Israeli military expressed concerns that prolonged military engagement in populated areas could lead to heavy casualties, adding pressure on political leadership.
On the other side, Hamas also faced considerable pressures:
- Arab and Muslim leaders exerted strong influence, offering political guarantees for Hamas to accept the proposal, including the release of many Palestinian detainees.
- Assurances were given that Trump would declare the war over before the initial phase of the plan was implemented.
- Commitments were made to ensure that Gaza’s reconstruction would be overseen by Palestinian and Arab authorities, preventing Western international control.
Discussing the implications of the Israeli withdrawal and the prisoner exchange, Sabbagh noted that while the withdrawal does not inherently shift the balance of power, it is beneficial for both sides. Israel seeks to avoid dangerous positions, and Palestinians benefit from the recognition of their right to withdrawal, even if partial.
Furthermore, a strategic withdrawal is necessary for logistical reasons, such as recovering deceased captives and facilitating humanitarian aid delivery without interference from occupying forces.
When asked about the role of regional mediators like Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey, Sabbagh emphasized the desire of each mediator to assert their influence in the negotiations. Egypt, in particular, aims to highlight its central role, while Turkey’s involvement comes at the behest of the U.S., serving as both a pressure point on Hamas and a guarantor of some of its demands.
“The U.S. has never been a neutral mediator,” Sabbagh stated. “Instead, it has acted as a partner in the aggression against Gaza, seeking to impose solutions that favor Israel and shield it from accountability.”
Looking ahead, the reconstruction of Gaza poses significant challenges:
- The reconstruction process will likely be a battleground among various regional and international actors, with competing interests at play.
- There are concerns that American plans might involve seizing parts of Gaza for international investors, while Palestinian interests focus on utilizing their land and resources for their people.
- A unified Palestinian stance, alongside official Arab and Islamic support, will be crucial for safeguarding Palestinian rights during reconstruction.
Ultimately, the future of Gaza’s recovery will hinge on the political dynamics surrounding issues such as weapon status and the displacement of resistance leaders. These complexities could significantly delay the reconstruction process, leaving the humanitarian needs of Gazans unaddressed for an extended period.
As the situation evolves, the global community must remain vigilant and engaged, advocating for a lasting solution that addresses the root causes of the conflict and prioritizes the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian people.
