Recent discussions hosted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace have raised concerns among experts regarding the Israel-Hamas conflict, with fears of a possible mass transfer of Palestinians from Gaza to Egypt and from the West Bank to Jordan.
The implications of such a scenario, including the risk of regional war and instability, were thoroughly examined by a panel of experts representing Israel, Jordan, Egypt, and Palestine.
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Panel:
The panel, convened under the title “The Israel-Hamas Conflict: What Comes After?” featured experts providing insights into the evolving situation. Dr. Mustafa Barghouti, a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council and Palestine Liberation Organization Central Council, voiced concerns about the potential regional repercussions of the conflict. The discussion, moderated by Joyce Karam, the senior news editor at Al-Monitor, delved into the complex dynamics at play.
Displacement and Regional Ramifications:
A significant portion of the discussion revolved around the displacement of Palestinians and the potential dispersal of refugees throughout the region. Marwan Muasher, Vice President for Studies at Carnegie and former Jordanian foreign minister, drew parallels with past instances of mass transfers, such as those in Ukraine and Syria. The fear of a mass exodus from Gaza and the West Bank raises questions about the lack of countries offering reprieve to Palestinians by opening their borders.
Status Quo and Leadership Dynamics:
The panel scrutinized the leadership dynamics, especially focusing on Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s approach. Celine Touboul, co-executive director of the Economic Cooperation Foundation, characterized Netanyahu as a leader averse to significant decisions, emphasizing the stagnation in Israeli-Palestinian conflict resolution.
Challenges to Regional Acceptance:
Amr Hamzawy, Senior Fellow and Director of the Carnegie Middle East Program, challenged the notion of Arab countries readily accepting Palestinian refugees. His rhetorical questions highlighted the potential resistance from countries like Egypt and Jordan, emphasizing national sovereignty and social fabric concerns. The historical context, including incidents like Jordan’s Black September in 1970 and the Lebanese civil war in 1982, adds complexity to the regional perspective.
Regional Security Concerns:
The panel acknowledged the broader regional security implications following developments in Gaza. Hamzawy referred to historical incidents, emphasizing that Gaza-related issues would likely transcend the immediate geographical confines, echoing concerns about the security arrangements across the region.
Egypt’s Stance on Sovereignty:
Hamzawy made it clear that Egypt would not allow its national sovereignty to be compromised for addressing an issue created by the occupying force. He underscored Egypt’s solidarity with Palestine but emphasized that it should not come at the expense of Egypt’s territorial integrity.
Anticipated Deterioration:
The panel’s consensus pointed toward an expected deterioration in the situation when Israel enters Gaza, raising concerns about the potential escalation of the conflict.
Conclusion:
As tensions escalate in the Israel-Hamas conflict, the insights provided by the panel underscore the intricate challenges, potential displacements, and regional ramifications. The discussions shed light on the complex dynamics involving various stakeholders and the historical context that influences the decision-making process. The fear of a mass transfer of Palestinians and the regional consequences highlight the urgency of finding a sustainable and equitable resolution to the ongoing conflict.
