Last Sunday, the Head of the Palestinian Authority of Civil Affairs Hussein Al-Sheikh met the Israeli occupation's Foreign Minister Yair Lapid in his house, according to Israeli and Palestinians media sources. Al-Sheikh stated that they discussed several bilateral political issues, yet Lapid negated those claims, confirming that the meeting was only about security and economic matters.

This meeting comes within the series of meetings organized by the Palestinian Authority with a number of Israeli leaders. For instance, Benny Gantz, the occupation's Minister of Defense, once met President Abbas while the Director of Palestinian Intelligence Majed Faraj met Yair Lapid.

Although the new Israeli government rejects to politicize its meetings, its leaders continue to refuse to meet Abbas for political purposes; instead, they tend to maintain their meetings within the framework of security and civil issues. This was explicit in the last meeting where Al-Sheikh announced the completion of the reunification procedures and the grant of the Palestinian identity for 500 Palestinians.

On the other side, such meetings between the Israeli occupation and the Palestinian Authority produce a state of anger among the Palestinian factions and the Palestinian people. This anger is generated as those meetings come in a time when the Israeli occupation soldiers and the colonial settlers increase their crimes in the West Bank and Al-Quds, and the Israeli violations against the female and male prisoners in the Israeli prisons escalate. Thereafter, Hamas and the Islamic Jihad express their anger by describing such meeting as a "betrayal of the Palestinian sacrifices and the core of the Palestinian cause."

 

Analysis and Insight of the Scene

• Lapid's meeting with Al-Sheikh is a continuation of the series of meetings held between the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli occupation within the continuing economic and civil work, and the security coordination in the occupied West Bank.
• Lapid-Sheikh meeting comes after several previous meetings between President Mahmoud Abbas, Majid Faraj; the director of the Palestinian Intelligence, and Benny Gantz, the occupation's Minister of Defense.
• The Israeli occupation always seeks to confirm that its meetings with Palestinian officials are only to discuss some economic and security purposes, not political ones.
• The Israeli occupation seeks, through such meetings, to deliver a message to the United States and the European Union that it is exerting efforts to engage with the Palestinian Authority and reactivate the peace process.
• Those meetings do not offer any real results that would benefit the Palestinian people. They are only fake achievements the Israeli occupation and the Palestinian Authority feel proud of.
• Such meetings cover the Israeli occupation's right-wing policies that support colonization and Judaization, as the Israeli government never pledged to stop or end the policy of colonial expansion or the demolition of Al-Quds' neighborhoods.
• Al-Sheikh's meeting with an Israeli leader is a continuation of his role as an official of the civil coordination between the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli occupation, and is a maturation of his future role as a nominee for the Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

Situation Report: Following are the expected scenarios:

• This sort of meetings might continue in a way that violates the general Palestinian directions and without achieving any valuable results for the Palestinian citizens. This scenario is enhanced by the rightist background of the current Israeli government and the achievement of its security and economic needs through the Palestinian Authority, which is considered as a deputy of the occupation in the West Bank, not as a partner or a political body that can be negotiated.
• This sort of meetings might develop to include wider and more effective political issues regarding the Palestinian cause. This scenario could be strengthened if the United States and the European Union pressured the Israeli occupation to widen the issues covered by those meetings, or if the Israeli occupation was forced to change its racist policies through the popular pressure of the Palestinian resistance work.

In General, the first scenario seems more realistic, especially amid the state of comfort the Israeli occupation enjoys in the occupied West Bank, and the consistency of its policies with the Palestinian Authority's. Thus, the occupation does not need to change or develop its policies, according to its current status.