«--[· Preface ·]--»
Will Hamas really give up its right to govern the Gaza ceasefire agreement after the ceasefire agreement comes into effect? Why is Turkey sending troops to Gaza? Who is Palestine's most hateful enemy?
«--[·Hamas throws the thunder of "decentralization"·]--»
The first phase of the ceasefire agreement in Gaza came into effect at 12:00 local time on the 10th. The Israeli government approved the agreement in the early morning, and Hamas also released the hostages as agreed. Under the calm surface, the undercurrent is surging wildly.
Basem Naim, a senior Hamas official, threw out heavy news in an exclusive interview that the organization is ready to give up its governance of the Gaza Strip. This decision instantly sparked global heated debate. The outside world is generally puzzled as to why Hamas, which had lost important bargaining chips after releasing the hostages, would voluntarily hand over governance power?
Naim’s statement hides a key premise.He made it clear that Hamas members spread across the West Bank, Jordan and overseas, and are by no means limited to Gaza.The more central point is that weapons will never be handed over to any third party unless the future Palestinian state is formally established and armed members can be integrated into the national army.
The meaning is clear: delegating power does not mean withdrawing from the market, and the attitude of resistance has never changed. Immediately afterwards, Hamas issued a joint statement with Jihad, PFDJ and other factions. The statement directly rejected any foreign regulatory agency taking over Gaza, emphasizing that the right to governance is an internal Palestinian matter. This has undoubtedly exposed the speculation that "Hamas has withdrawn from the stage", and the so-called "decentralization" is more like a tactical response to external interference.
«--[·Turkey enters Gaza·]--»
Turkey’s actions are concerned at the sensitive node of the ceasefire agreement coming into force.On October 9, local time, the French-hosted international conference on Gaza was held in Paris. Turkish Foreign Minister Ferdinand revealed at the meeting that the Turkish side will join the Joint Operations Group on Gaza composed of the United States, Egypt, Qatar and the Land.
The main task of the group is to follow up on the implementation of the ceasefire agreement and focus on the implementation of the four initial goals. Ferdinand emphasized that the group would be involved in addressing various issues at the key nodes of the agreement. The day before, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had released a signal in advance confirming that Turkey would join the group and oversee the implementation of the agreement.
Turkey’s involvement is not merely a humanitarian consideration, the post-war reconstruction and governance of Gaza is the core topic of the conference, and Turkey’s initiative is clearly meant to expand regional influence. It is more playful that Erdogan’s government has always been the “spokesman” of the Arab world, and the role of the Joint Operation Group gives Turkey the opportunity to directly intervene in Gaza affairs.
However, it should be clear that Turkey has not announced direct deployment of troops. The Joint Action Group it participates in is essentially a coordination mechanism, which is different from the expression of "sending troops to Gaza." But this deep involvement is enough to allow Turkey to occupy an important position in Gaza's future landscape.
“The Most Hateful Enemy” emerges from the water.
Hamas’s decision to relegate power implies strong dissatisfaction with some kind of force. In an interview, Naim explicitly criticized former British Prime Minister Blair’s proposal to participate in the governance of Gaza, saying that Blair is unpopular in Palestine.
Various Palestinian factions have a clear attitude in the joint statement. They stressed that the administrative form of Gaza should be determined by the Palestinians through national consensus and firmly opposed the interference of foreign regulatory agencies. This position is by no means accidental. The intervention of external forces has repeatedly brought the Palestinian issue to a deadlock in history.
The role of the United States is more controversial. White House spokesman Kobe had previously declared that “Hamas can’t implement the two-state plan when it comes to power,” a statement interpreted as a fingerprint on Palestinian internal affairs.
Israel's continued pressure has also exacerbated the conflict. IDF remained stationed in key areas of Gaza after the ceasefire, and Netanyahu also hinted at resuming military operations without disarming. This attitude is intertwined with the interference of external forces and has become the biggest obstacle to peace in Gaza.
“The dark battle behind the ceasefire paper.”
Peace in Gaza has not been stabilized by the entry into force of the agreement. Hamas 'decentralization is more like a tactical adjustment than a complete compromise. Naim's statement has drawn the bottom line: unless an independent Palestinian state is established, he will never lay down his arms.
Israel’s ambitions have not converged.The government has suspended its military operations, but its concern for Gaza is clear.Israel’s move to reside in critical areas is undoubtedly a reserve for subsequent negotiations or operations.The core contradictions between the two sides—territory and sovereignty—are still unresolved.
The intervention of Turkey and other countries has complicated the situation. Although the establishment of the joint action group is intended to promote the implementation of the agreement, the interests of different countries are different, and the coordination process may be uncertain. As traditional mediators, how Egypt and Qatar balance their roles with Turkey and the United States will profoundly affect the trend of the situation.
China has a clear understanding of this. When meeting with reporters, Foreign Minister Wang Yi clearly pointed out that the humanitarian disaster in Gaza is a stain in the 21st century. The consensus of the international community is taking shape, and the "two-state solution" is the fundamental way to solve the problem. However, many obstacles still need to be overcome to turn consensus into action.
“ ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ”
Hamas’s decision to liberate power opened a new page of the situation in Gaza. In this game, external interference is still the biggest variable. As long as the foreign hand is still stretched too long in Gaza affairs, the ceasefire agreement could repeat the “purpose paper” twist.