—Mahfuzur Rahman—

In the last two years, more than sixty-thousand Palestinians have lost their lives in the Gaza Strip. In contrast, Israeli soldiers, hostages and concertgoers have lost thousands. Gaza’s physical infrastructure has been destroyed on a massive scale. The financial loss has not yet been calculated, but it will reach trillions of dollars. The conflict between nations is still going on in the 21st century, and nothing could be more meaningless. For a hundred years, political and religious leaders have been unable to bring peace to the Middle East, which is a great embarrassment for human civilisation. The development of art, literature, sports, or science, the finesse of consumer products and luxury goods – all seem pointless when we cannot give people their human dignity. The course of events in the Middle East is certainly placing this question before our conscience.

The agreement reached between Israel and Hamas to end the war, brokered by the United States and supported by Qatar, Turkey and Egypt, has signs of lasting peace in the Middle East. But there are many people who will think just the opposite because of our bitter experiences of the last hundred years. In peace and stability, nothing is guaranteed. Many people say that the two-state solution of the Palestinian issue will bring a lasting peace to the Middle East. But is it that straight? Can the two-state solution really bring peace? Apart from the hostile attitude of Israel, even the vast ideological gap between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, the deep distrust and conflict in their leaderships, make it seem like no reason to think so. The Shia-Sunni conflict among the different factions within Islam has also kept the possibility of peace in the Middle East at bay. Yet, those who embrace harmony, who love living peacefully, who respect others, whose consciences are disturbed by such rampant ethnic cleansing, are hoping for an end to this war and are expecting a fast implementation of the peace plan.

What exactly is there in the peace deal? Since the deal was brokered by Donald Trump, the Trump-allies vis-a-vis the United States has a clear role in implementing the deal. Donald Trump’s ambitious real estate business may remain active behind it, but with trillion-dollar business and investment plan, as well as plan for international monitoring, there are elements of at least saving of Palestinian lives. Of course, at the same time, there are signs that the Palestinians will lose ownership of Gaza.

The future of the peace deal, therefore, depends largely on the goodwill of the United States. If this move is a mere ambitious real estate business, if this move is a plan to destroy or neutralise Hamas or any other specific Palestinian groups, it will only cause greater chaos in the Middle East. History testifies that no such initiative has ever succeeded anywhere. Such a game with the fate of the Palestinians will not be pleasant for anyone.

According to the agreement, the international task force will take charge of the Gaza Strip, or will be actively engaged in a buffer zone between Gaza and Israel. It is very difficult for any task force to work in a region as in a hotpot as Gaza. We have seen on many occasions that Israel care very less about the international system. On the other hand, Hamas or the forces who believe in the independence of Palestine will not also sit idle. Never in the history has any armed group given up its arms so easily. But it is also true that in many places, armed groups are gradually included in the mainstream politics. There are such examples in Latin America. In such cases, members of such an armed group cannot be victimised for their previous involvement, and their rehabilitation programmes should be tailored to align with their dignity. Otherwise, wound remains and violent conflict continues for generations.

I think that a possibility of lasting peace has emerged in the Middle East. Many models of peace have been followed by people in many places. Various attempts have been made in the Middle East as well. Apparently, international consensus has been formed to recognise Palestine as an independent sovereign state. First, this must be done as early as possible. This will be a significant improvement on the principles that was initiated in Oslo. Secondly, in order to make that state of Palestine a viable and durable state, the geographical boundaries of Palestine must be made realistic. If the Gaza area is kept physically separate from the West Bank, Palestine may not be able to function as a state. And, being a weak state from the beginning, it may find itself in conflict at some point.

Therefore, at this moment, the most attention must be paid to the formation of the international task force which is envisaged to establish peace in the Middle East. The composition and mandate of the task force are also crucial. In this regard, the more the United Nations is involved in the process, the more it will be inclusive, and the easier the task will be. Not all countries in the Middle East were equally active in the peace negotiations. Now, the formation of the task force should involve not only the countries of the Middle East, but also some Islamic countries, and other important countries, including the five permanent members, to bring a sense of inclusion.

It is understood that from now on, diplomacy will be active in the international arena on this issue. Bangladesh is a Muslim-majority country. A large part of the people of Bangladesh sympathise with the Palestinians. During various crises, Bangladesh has expressed its solidarity with the Palestinian freedom movement as much as possible. Therefore, Bangladesh should take this opportunity and demonstrate its biasness for peace and stability. It must strive to be a partner in any international or regional initiative. After all, the foreign policy must reflect the hopes and aspirations of the people of Bangladesh.

—————————————————-

The writer is a former Bangladeshi Ambassador