Future of Resistance' Diplomacy against Normalization

The last round between the Palestinian resistance and the occupation had exceptional results for the Palestinian cause in general and the resistance in particular. Operation Al-Quds Sword was unprecedentedly embraced internally and externally.

The Palestinian factions did not miss the opportunity of building up the gains and attempted investing in the work the resistance had achieved in 11 days through diplomatic mobilization that encouraged regional and international support. The resistance' leaders, with Hamas' leader Ismael Haniya in the lead, paid some visits to Arab and Islamic countries officially addressing these countries and their peoples.

After meeting the Prince of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani and the Egyptian Minister of Intelligence in Cairo, Ismael Haniya arrived in Morocco in mid-June and attended several political and popular meetings along with the PM Saad-Eddine El Othmani. He also met with the President of the House of Representatives, some parties and commissions, and  Bayt Mal Al-Quds, which utterly supports Al-Quds and Al-Masjid Al-Aqsa.

Haniya made visits to Mauritania and Lebanon where he held several meetings with the countries' leaders and political and popular groups. His visits created a direct channel between the resistance' leaders and its political and popular supporters in the countries where the visits had taken place. He also met with Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah leader. Around the same time of the visits, Khaled Mashal appeared on the pro-nromalization Al Arabiya channel.

According to media sources, the visits which started on June 16 will continue in other countries in order to reinforce the political and popular support of the resistance in countries such as Tunisia, Algeria, Kuwait and Iran.

Insight of the Situation

  • The recent visits paid by Hamas' Head of Political Bureau reflect the political development of the resistance' methods, what it now calls 'Resistance' Diplomacy', which reinforce and mobilize the regional and international support, and promote resistance as the choice replacing settlement and normalization.
  • The visits made to countries that had signed normalization agreements with the occupation attempted to influence them and try to persuade them to abandon normalization and stand for resistance and the issues of the Palestinian people.
  • The resistance' delegation tried to make contact with all components of the communities it had visited at official and popular levels hence meeting with political parties, civil commissions and other religious and social groups.
  • The visits changed the stiffness in the relations between several countries and the Palestinian resistance, which clearly appeared in the countries' warm reception and welcoming of the delegation.
  • These visits open the door for the Arab and Islamic support, which may extend beyond these nations as more actor states are mobilized to support the Palestinian cause and resistance as the choice against the occupation.
  • The resistance exerted diverse efforts to reinforce its presence. It appeared on media outlets against the resistance and addressed their misled viewers who are exposed to normalization and co-existence with the occupation ads.
  • The importance of the resistance' diplomacy appears in exerting efforts that can counter the efforts of the Israeli occupation that aim to improve relations with Arab and Islamic countries and conclude more normalization agreements in order to expand the gap between the Arab world and the Palestinian resistance.

Possible Scenarios

  1. The resistance further invests in the field politically and mobilizes regional and international support towards the resistance and the Palestinian people's rights. What supports this scenario is global awareness that resulted from the media revolution that exposed the ugly face of the occupation and the crimes it commits against the Palestinians. The warm welcoming the delegations received also indicates the inclination towards recognizing the Palestinian resistance as an active and important player.
  2. The diplomatic success may last a while and be later met with disapproval again as the resistance' accomplishments are being minimized and the official regimes may contain their publics' emotions. The argument here is the countries' relation with the Palestinian resistance across history.

Based on the abovementioned, the future of diplomacy as a method is highly linked to the intensity of efforts exerted by the resistance. The first scenario is more likely to realize because of the popular and religious connectivity with the resistance in these countries and failure of the normalizing countries to gain any benefits from its agreements with the occupation. In addition, there has been increasing opposition at regional and international

Source : PALM Strategic Initiatives Centre