Afrasianet - Sinai has always been a prominent address by Western powers in general and the Israeli entity in particular, and at every stage of the Arab-Zionist conflict, the plan or attempts took different forms, sometimes retreating and sometimes advancing. At every stage, it never loses its compass of the need to introduce Sinai into a new geopolitical and demographic structure that converges between it and the dream of the forces supporting the Zionist project in Palestine and the Arab region to make Sinai a cutting tool on the one hand, and a connecting tool on the other.
It is a tool that links the Israeli ambitions and plans, and the Egyptian political leaders that came after the Sadat-Begin Agreement in 1979, and the first objective conditions for this plan were met after former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat signed the Camp David Accords in September 1978, and then the so-called "Egyptian-Israeli Peace Agreement" in March 1979.
Consider the Israeli plan for regional cooperation, which Israeli Intelligence Minister Yisrael Katz expressed in an interview with the Saudi website Elaph, published on December 13, 2017, in which he addressed a number of issues, most notably linking Israel to the countries of the Arab world through the revival of the historic Hejaz railway, but within a regional project that serves Israel's economic interests. He also reiterated the call for a greater Saudi role in the so-called "peace process" and Israeli satisfaction with such a role. A seaport on an artificial island off the Gaza Strip.
Thus, it seems clear that Sinai is still in the focus of dangerous attention, and with these Gulf "investment" moves linked to the Saudi "NEOM" project, we must put a thousand question marks about the path in the foreseeable future for Sinai. Arab rulers seem to be still oblivious to this scheme, or implicated in it.
Gaza has not become what it is today as an obstacle as a tool of the enemy, except from a security-military point of view, related to the axis of resistance, not from a political angle like the West Bank.
As soon as the Zionist enemy escalated its barbaric bombardment of civilians in the Gaza Strip, and pushed its forces to axes here and there inside the Strip, a media campaign was launched from well-known platforms that continued to spread despair, frustration and questioning the resistance and its axis, and the common denominator between them was post-Gaza and post-Qassam areas, and they competed in spreading various scenarios, including the two-state solution.
The battle today is taking place at the level of the entire region, including the clash with the American presence in the entire region, and the unprecedented Atlantic military build-up dedicated to clashing with the axis of resistance, will not defeat a strategic political project, regardless of its logistical capabilities, in besieging one of the rings of this project, and turning this ring and others into a station towards a Zionist and Americanized Middle East, and it is likely that a new Middle East is actually forming according to the question after the American-Zionist camp and its Arab followers, not after Hamas and the axis Resistance.
The two-state solution scenario is currently a cover for reconnecting the Gaza Strip to a (modified) settlement authority in the West Bank, and with regard to its regional environment, and whatever preparations are prepared for it, it is a scenario that draws a political and field clash fraught with dangers and failure for those involved in it, as they have been throughout the previous proven decades.
This scenario is an open and well-known edition that is amalgamated in all its details and merits, first from the point of view of its current position in a game such as dominoes and pots in the Middle East, which is very related to international tensions, America, Zionism and the European Union and their tools and alliances, vis-à-vis Eurasian Russia and China, the Silk Road, and the axis of resistance with its capitals and popular forces.
Second: From the point of view of its truth and masks designed in the service of the enemy, as well as from the angle of its history, which dates back to before the establishment of the entity itself and in preparation for it, as we will see, while the statements of Arab and international capitals interested today in the so-called "two-state solution" showed, as if this solution were a magical new initiative for the repercussions triggered by the heroic "Al-Aqsa flood" and the Nazi Zionist barbarism against civilians, which followed the flood.
If it is known that the aforementioned project under the title of the two-state solution has been circulating for decades and in wide official political circles here and there, it must also be recalled that this project was first proposed eight decades ago, specifically in 1937 and was known as the "Peel Commission project" that was submitted to Palestine to end the Great Revolution of 1936, as for the current repercussions after the "Al-Aqsa flood", it can be noted that since the first Oslo version (Jericho Gaza first), it has been clear that Gaza occupies Given a number of considerations, including the fact that Gaza is less important to the Zionist entity than from the point of view of its superstitious references represented by the West Bank (the land of Judea, Samaria and Davidic Jerusalem).
Gaza has not become what it is today as an obstacle as a tool of the enemy, except from a security-military point of view, related to the axis of resistance, not from a political angle like the West Bank.
The transformation of Gaza into a citadel of armed resistance was one of the geniuses of the entire axis of resistance, after it was just a sandy pocket that could be disciplined by Zionism at any time, which means that the Zionist criminal aggression on Gaza is carried by American-Zionist military strategic concerns in the first place, as it is today an essential link of the axis at the regional level, and it must be (destroyed) for this reason and handed over politically to a Palestinian party from the parties to the settlement, which enjoys Arab and international sponsorship from the Washington camp.
Also, despite the danger of attempts to transfer from Gaza to Sinai (the Palestinians had previously prevented this from 1954 to 1955, but the transfer in Gaza is not as dangerous as the transfer from the West Bank to Jordan).
In addition to the superstitious biblical dimension of Judea and Samaria, the enemy has been able to swallow up a large part of its territory and plant dozens of settlements in Judea and Samaria.
According to the Jordanian newspaper Al-Ghad, published on November 8, 2023, the number of settlers is estimated at about 730,000 settlers distributed over more than 350 settlements and outposts that constitute 42% of the area of the West Bank, not to mention the Zionist control over most of the areas known as (C) and (B) according to the Oslo Accords, which together constitute 80% of the various resources, including water.
The article also stated that the enemy is preparing to replace the 170,000 Palestinian workers in the 1948 occupied territories (the entity) with Indian workers, which means that in practice, the West Bank is under almost complete occupation in various forms, and it is possible that it will soon turn into an arena for transit to Jordan.
Judging from the enemy's insistence on occupying the West Bank politically, militarily and security in exchange for arrangements for the presence of a Palestinian political party in Gaza from the so-called settlement groups, it is likely that the following scenario in the American Zionist mind (a scenario and not a fate, especially with this great shift in the ability and valor of the resistance):
- Acknowledging the American-Zionist camp and its supporters of the difficulty of breaking the axis of resistance in the Gaza ring and the search for a settlement between the camp and the axis.
The scenario stems from several assumptions about the future of Hamas in the Gaza Strip that recognize the difficulty of liquidating it: Hamas with its weapons without a political role, or Hamas political participation with the least amount of weapons according to international experiences such as the resistance in Northern Ireland and Colombia.
Under the title of a nominal Palestinian state linking the West Bank to Gaza, rehabilitating the slogan of Gaza – Jericho first, and rather Gaza first plus an airport and a seaport under Arab-international supervision from settlement groups.
With regard to the West Bank, the reproduction of a form of functional sharing, on the one hand linking the West Bank and Gaza within the framework of a nominal state, and on the other hand expanding its relationship with Jordan in order to produce a confederation situation in favourable conditions for the relevant parties.
In this context, if it is known that the transfer is an essential part of the enemy's strategy, but this delayed transfer from the West Bank to Jordan will be composite, and the forced soft side of it will not be less dangerous than the forced rough side, the enemy will not loosen its criminal grip on the West Bank, no matter how many masks it uses, but it will bet on an economic environment that is fed by various forms of injecting Gulf and American funds into Jordan in exchange for restricting the economic situation in the West Bank. The danger occupied by the Regional Investment Fund, and the role of the Gulf in it, a project that Shimon Peres had previously proposed in his book "The New Middle East" or during the Treaty of "Wadi Araba".
After the annexation of Jordan by the West Bank, the imperialist powers of Britain, the United States and Germany were keen to concentrate aid to Jordan in the East Bank in conjunction with the opening of the Gulf to Palestinians and Jordanians and the transfer of their money to this environment.
In addition, there is a very important realization that the settlement of Palestinians in Jordan or the creation of an environment for this settlement does not mean political settlement, as what is proposed in the Zionist-American mind is population settlement based on political considerations first, and from the Jewish mind's consideration of the area between the sea and the desert (Anbar desert) as Jewish land on which Arab residents, whether Jordanian or Palestinian, live.
In his book The Expulsion of the Palestinians: The Concept of Deportation in Zionist Political Thought 1882-1948, published in 1992, Nour Masalha, a Palestinian-British historian, proved that the concept of "transfer" was one of the prevalent concepts in the Zionist movement even before the establishment of the Jewish "state."
In another book published in 1997 under the title "More Land and Less Arabs: Israel's Transfer Policy in Practice 1949-1996", he proved that the concept of "transfer" was not just a theoretical solution to the Arab demographic problem, but a systematic policy implemented by successive Israeli leaders and applied with varying degrees of success, and even considered it a radical solution to the problems of Israel" has been aggravated since '67. Israel was keen to retain the Palestinian territories it occupied in '67 for two reasons: first, that expansion is a cornerstone of the "great state" project, which should extend from the river to the sea, and second, it rejected the establishment of an independent Palestinian state because it sees its establishment as a threat to its security and perhaps to its very existence.
At the same time, because it fears the integration of Palestinians into the social fabric of the Jewish "state" for fear of the high fertility rates of the Palestinians, it has to anticipate this "demographic bomb" that may explode in its heart at any moment and put an end to its Jewish identity, which made the "transfer" seem a very attractive solution for all Zionist leaders, especially those who believe in the "Greater State of Israel" and its Jewish purity, who constitute the main current of the Zionist movement in its current stage.
When Israel responded to Operation Al-Aqsa Flood with Operation Hodeidah Swords, its goals were not limited to defeating Hamas militarily and overthrowing its rule in the Gaza Strip, as official statements indicate, but it was keen, as usual, to seize the opportunity to expand the scope of these goals to include reoccupying the Strip again and deporting its residents to Sinai. In a bold attempt to revive old projects and plans aimed at settling Gazans in Sinai, which Egypt categorically rejected.
However, this did not prevent Israel from intensifying its pressure to the fullest extent, as it asked the residents of the north of the Gaza Strip to leave their homes and head to the south, and did not hesitate to cut off water, electricity and power to the entire population, both in the north and south of the Strip, and together withheld all food supplies, demolished hundreds of thousands of homes, and raided most places of worship, hospitals and schools, including UNRWA schools.
But it is not wishful thinking and waiting for what the Zionist axis and imperialists do not like, to say that Gaza will not fall, and that the Qassamis will not leave Gaza for any exile, as happened with some resistance factions after the siege of Beirut in 1982, in addition to what Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah said, that the resistance with all its parties will not allow the weakening of the resistance in Gaza, which confirms every day that it is capable of defeating the enemy and missing the opportunity for projects to annex Gaza to the American-Zionist settlements.
Operation Al-Aqsa Flood proved that the Palestinian people continue to uphold their right to self-determination and to establish their independent State on all their historic land, and that they are capable of achieving this goal regardless of the sacrifices.