Our problem in the Third World, and therefore in Palestine as well, is that our leaders appoint themselves, whether through inheritance, oppression, or deception. The oppressive model may include elements of all three spectrums, albeit to varying degrees. In Palestine, which has been colonized since the days of the British Mandate, prior to the Nakba, the people find themselves committed to those who stand up to the occupier and resist. Thus, for at least a century, the people have not been able to choose their leaders from among their scientific and cultural cadres, rather the leadership has imposed itself, in the name of resistance, from among the sheikhs, the clergy, or the feudal families. Each acting according to their interests, with fighters under various names: commandos, revolutionaries, mujahideen, etc. There was no development towards leadership elections other than at the inception of the Oslo Accords, and, of course, in this case, the fighters who signed the agreement were elected because they held both the economic, and the military power.  This was then followed by one more recent election in which religious fighters, who had turned against the government in Gaza and led society ‘on the straight path’ but without themselves exercising any financial, political, or social integrity

    It could be asserted again that if the Palestinian leadership had been unified and periodically elected, we would not have fallen into the trap of the genocidal massacre in which we find ourselves, whether in the Gaza Strip or even in the West Bank, which is nominally governed by the Palestinian Authority, while interacting with the occupation. However, for two decades, the Palestinians have been fighting over the entire cake, and their disagreements have disrupted the elections and the people’s choice of leadership, which practically make it impossible for the Gaza Strip to be implicated in what happened, or to deal with the occupation, as is happening in the West Bank. Even if this assertion is false, and what is happening would still have happened; it would be by the people’s choice and desire, and thus they would willingly bear the consequences of their choice

    Like a conflict between roosters, which are originally from the family of chickens, and therefore are characterized by stupidity and only know how to squawk and crow, and in the end the occupier dines on them, this conflict reflects the background of the combatants. From day one until now, they have overlooked the educational and social struggle, and what concerns us here specifically, the legal struggle. They have been advised repeatedly to resort to international law, which is in the interests of Palestine and its cause, but they are not sufficiently developed to realize the importance of this, especially as they do not understand international law to any extent, and do not want to hand over the reins to others, even in a specific area such as litigation…and to be honest, when Palestinian public opinion urged them to sue the occupation in past years and wars, they submitted to the occupier’s blackmail that their appeal to any international bodies would mean cutting off benefits and budgets and would cause them harm. We would have avoided all these disasters if we had gone to the law and international bodies on previous occasions

    In October 1998, under pressure from Clinton, Arafat and Netanyahu signed an agreement stipulating an additional withdrawal from some areas of the West Bank, in exchange for the Palestinian Authority’s confrontation with the resistance. During the negotiations, Netanyahu refused to sign; Clinton told him: If you do not sign, Arafat will go to the United Nations to amend Israel’s status from incomplete to returning it to a Jewish agency. Netanyahu signed, but of course did not implement the agreement. Amending Israel’s status has been available as an option since 1948, and is still available today, but the PLO and then the Authority, or any Arab country, have not dared to demand the amendment

    When the United Nations recognized Israel as a member, and all the countries that recognized it at that time and later, recognition was conditional on the implementation and respect of the United Nations resolutions, i.e. Partition Resolution 181, the Return and Compensation of Refugees Resolution 194, the division of Jerusalem, the establishment of two demilitarized states in Palestine, and other things stated in the Partition Resolution and those that followed, but Israel did not implement those conditions later, after its conditional recognition, and therefore its membership is incomplete and an appeal can be made to return to the status of the Jewish Agency, as existed in Palestine during the Mandate and politically defended the rights of the Jews

    In addition, since 1921, Palestine has been placed under British guardianship, and a trusteeship council was formed from several countries, to develop the Palestinian people and lead them to independence. But Britain behaved as is well-known, and when the Partition Resolution was put forward in the United Nations, the guardian state, Britain, did not vote in favor of the resolution, therefore making it legally unenforceable, but Arab ignorance, colonial bullying, and Russian interests at the time passed over the issue quietly and silently. Here is also another reason for the lack of legitimacy of Israel as a state… States cannot be recognized by others and accepted in the United Nations unless three conditions are met: the presence of a homogeneous people on land, the existence of an authority that regulates the affairs of the state and the people, and the existence of known and declared geographical borders for this state

    All the countries that recognize Israel now, recognize it only within the limits of the partition resolution, and even after the Oslo Accords, which conceded to Israel and recognized it within the 1967 borders, these also are invalid because Israel failed to implement them, as everyone admits… All of the above indicates the possibility of amending Israel’s status legally. And legally to restore matters to the situation they were in during the guardianship period, by activating the guardianship council, and demanding international protection and new guardianship, until the conflict is decided from its first foundations. It is not too late for this, rather, we can start from the recent and temporary decisions of the International Court of Justice, according to the case that South Africa filed against Israel, not the Palestinian Authority, the preoccupied Arab League, or any Arab country, but, thank God for them, the State of South Africa

    The decisions issued by the highest international judicial body in the world with near unanimity must be implemented in every aspect if there is someone to follow them procedurally. Judges do not have a duty to fight for their decisions, but any of the countries concerned must continue legal procedures through the Security Council, even if the Council refuses; through the General Assembly, and the formation of an armed protection force to implement the court decisions to stop the ongoing genocide in the Gaza Strip… Here are some details and clarification

The International Court of Justice is the main judicial body of the United Nations, and on Friday, January 26, 2024, it issued a preliminary ruling and emergency measures against Israel in the lawsuit filed by South Africa, accusing Israel of violating the United Nations Genocide Convention. The provision includes: taking all measures to prevent any acts that could be considered genocide, ensuring that the Israeli army does not carry out any acts of genocide, preventing and punishing any statements or public comments that could incite the commission of genocide in Gaza, taking all measures to ensure humanitarian access, not eliminating any evidence that could be used in the case brought against it, Israel must submit a report to the court within one month on the extent of her application of these measures and provisions

    This ruling was unanimous, except for a Ugandan judge who was later disowned by her government. That is, judges from 15 countries, including America, Russia, Germany, France, Australia, and others… all of them supported the decision on rapid interim measures, and this is a clear indication of condemnation, as the court asked Israel to submit a report within a month on what it did in relation to the court’s decision, and it will likely be proven that it did nothing to alleviate the accusations, but rather went too far with all of them, and therefore it will almost certainly be sentenced as a genocidal state

    The court did not demand an immediate cessation of fighting, but implementing all or some of its demands certainly requires stopping the fighting… or rather stopping the Israeli attack. If the court demanded a cessation of fighting, this would be binding on both parties, but the Palestinian side is resistant to the occupation and has the right under international law to resist. If the court had issued a ruling to stop the fighting, it would have contradicted international law, so it resorted to a solution of responding to all of South Africa’s quick demands before the final ruling on the call

    South Africa’s call against Israel came in accordance with Article 9 of the Convention on the Prevention of Genocide, which obligates everyone who signed it to respect and implement its provisions, while Article 8 recognizes the possibility of forming an international force to protect those threatened with genocide, and therefore South Africa or any other country that has signed the Convention can now submit a request to form an international force to protect the Palestinians in Gaza from annihilation, in accordance with and in implementation of the court’s decisions. Resolutions can also be taken to the Security Council for the same purpose, and any country that objects to the implementation of the decisions of the International Court is practically participating in genocide, in which case the General Assembly is resorted to and authorized to take binding decisions, including the formation of an international protection force. This is not to mention the necessity of decisions to boycott the accused state, as happened in the case of South Africa during the days of apartheid rule

    There is a group of colonial and racist countries that support Israel in all circumstances and supply it with weapons, equipment, money, and dual-national mercenaries. After the issuance of the decision, Israel, with the support of this group, moved to accuse UNRWA of the United Nations of the presence of 12 of its employees who acted in support of the Hamas attack on October 7th, and this out of thirty thousand employees of Palestinian origin!! Instead of saying that the majority of the Palestinian people, according to this percentage, do not support Hamas, they said that UNRWA encourages terrorism, and immediately, before forming an investigative committee or waiting for the accusation to be examined, these countries stopped their annual aid to UNRWA… that is, in practice, they rejected some of the decisions of the International Court, and participated with Israel in the process of extermination through starvation… and above all created immediate confusion surrounding the court’s decisions and distraction from their possible consequences

    Any failure to follow up on the court’s decisions in the Security Council and the General Assembly will be dependent on American-Israeli policy, and directing empty accusations against the world will be of no use… South Africa may move and take the issue to the Security Council before waiting for Israel’s report within a month, but any Arab or international country that is a signatory to the agreement preventing genocide can refer the issue to the Security Council… What is important is that the Palestinian leadership should not hesitate to ask others to take the initiative, nor should they intervene to urge patience

    Experiences over the decades prove that the Palestinian people are among the bravest people on earth. It is resisting not only settler-colonial Israel, which is supported by the most powerful capital in the world, one of the largest successive colonial powers from the beginning, but the Palestinians are steadfast and steadfast on their land, confronting the plans of unjust colonialism, where instead they were supposed to be liberated, independent, and live in peace, especially once the world decided to end the era of colonialism. But one of the most important problems of the Palestinian people is that their leaders always come from the ranks of the military and the mujahideen, and that the people respond to the sound of bullets, regardless of the harmful concepts and framework behind that mistake

There is no victor but God, as the Bani Al-Ahmar said in Andalusia

Abdel-Gabbar Adwan

Citizen of Gaza