Haniyeh’s foreign tour: Between Egyptian approval and the expected agenda

Dr Adnan Abu Amer

Finally, after many attempts, Egypt has agreed to allowing the head of the Hamas Political Bureau, Ismail Haniyeh, to leave its lands, after holding talks with its senior security officials. They have allowed Haniyeh to carry out a regional tour, including Turkey, Malaysia, Qatar, Lebanon, and possibly Iran, among other countries. This comes despite the fact that Egypt has refused, more than once, to allow him to take this tour, fearing his visit to Iran due to the Saudi and Israeli pressures on Egypt.

The following lines discuss Haniyeh’s new tour around the region, what he will discuss, his agenda and files – the truce with Israel and the Palestinian elections – and why Egypt has allowed him to conduct his tour this time, after having refused many times before. I will also discuss which countries he will visit, how the tour affects the strengthening of Hamas’s relations with Egypt and the region’s countries, the accuracy of the information regarding Haniyeh living abroad for many months, as well as the truth behind Egypt’s request for him not to visit Iran, due to the pressure from Israel and Saudi Arabia.

On 2 December, Haniyeh left the Gaza Strip to Egypt, on a visit that was supposed to last a few days, to hold extensive discussions with Egyptian intelligence on the future of the security in Gaza, to stop the Israeli attacks against Palestinians, on holding Palestinian elections, achieving reconciliation and ending the division.

It was surprising that Haniyeh ended his intensive dialogue with Egyptian officials, including the intelligence minister, Abbas Kamel, heading to Cairo International Airport to start a regional and international tour, instead of the Rafah crossing back to Gaza, as was customary in his many visits to Egypt over the past years. It was most surprising due to the fact that in recent years, Hamas has made several formal requests to Egypt to allow Haniyeh to execute this tour, but the requests were not granted.

This current tour by Haniyeh may be of exceptional importance because, since his election as head of the Hamas Political Bureau in May 2017, he has not made any foreign tours, with his visits being limited only to Egypt . These visits took place in September 2017, February 2018, May 2018 and February 2019, during which he discussed easing the suffering of the besieged Gaza Strip and their bilateral relations. However, his last tour before leading Hamas lasted five months, between September 2016 and January 2017, and included Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

From time to time, Hamas circles have disclosed that Haniyeh would conduct a foreign tour including Arab and Muslim countries, such as Qatar, Egypt, Turkey, Iran and Algeria, alongside Lebanon, Kuwait, Mauritania, Malaysia, Indonesia and Morocco, but at the last minute, the tour did not take place. Russian deputy foreign minister, Mikhail Bogdanov, even announced in late December 2018, that Haniyeh would visit Moscow in January 2019, in response to their invitation, but the visit did not occur due to the Egyptian veto.

In the past, Hamas has not given a clear and specific explanation for the repeated postponements of Haniyeh’s tours, and it has not accused anyone of preventing it. This is so as not to strain relations with any party, especially Egypt, because the movement seeks to restore its regional relations. Therefore, it favoured silent diplomacy with these parties to facilitate Haniyeh’s tours, which were postponed several times, despite the importance of these tours, whether to arrange the movement’s files, to meet its branches abroad or to hold meetings with other factions in a number of Arab and Muslim countries.

I worked tirelessly to obtain reactions from Hamas regarding the repeated Egyptian rejection of Haniyeh’s departure to regional and international tours, and the reason for this recent approval. However, the movement’s leaders and speakers have expressed clear reservations about giving a convincing explanation. This leads to employing our own diligence to attempt to identify the reasons behind Haniyeh’s tours not taking place.

The Israeli escalation against Gaza, from time to time, is a primary reason for Haniyeh’s desire to remain in Gaza and to follow its developments. A second reason is the security situation in Sinai, and the inability to secure a safe exit route from Gaza to Egypt. While the third reason is related to the internal conditions of some countries that have postponed, not cancelled, the visits for some time. A fourth reason is Egypt’s stalling to give Hamas the final approval.

There have been increasing Palestinian predictions that Cairo’s prevention of Haniyeh from organising a regional, and perhaps international tour for over two years, lies in the fact that it is not an Egyptian decision. There are beliefs that these are Israeli, American and Saudi decisions, as all of these parties are relying on Egypt to restrict Haniyeh’s movements and limit him to Gaza because his visits to Qatar, Iran, and Turkey harm Israel. Meanwhile, keeping Hamas leaders abroad and distributing them among several countries, gives them ease of movement, rather than their concentration in Gaza, and it gives Egypt the right to place a veto on the travel of its leaders.

Preventing Haniyeh from his regional tour aims to restrict Hamas from strengthening its legitimacy in front of the region and the international community, while the Arab states, with Israeli-American agreement, put pressure on Hamas and suffocate it by boycotting it, politically and diplomatically. They also pressure other countries to prevent them from meeting with Hamas, with the exception of a few countries that have deviated from the US. There has also been major diplomatic efforts made by the Palestinian Authority to prevent Haniyeh from visiting some countries, such as Russia, for example.

The repeated postponement of Haniyeh’s tour represents a model for making Hamas, again, forcibly pay the price for Arab disputes. Every country is seeking to make the movement close to it, and far from its opponents, despite Hamas’s rejection of this political action, because it does not want to be in anyone’s pocket.

It is increasingly clear that Hamas is paying these prices just by looking at Haniyeh’s expected agenda, in the event that he can organise his foreign tour. The tour includes Qatar and Turkey first, who share poor relations with Egypt and near-complete estrangement. This may allow Egypt to justify their prevention of Haniyeh’s tour, because their control of major Palestinian issues, such as the international national reconciliation or the relationship with Israel, gives them strong cards of influence, both regionally and internationally.

Consequently, denying Haniyeh access to these capitals, makes Hamas, at least in Cairo’s view, immune to any regional external pressures that disturb the Egyptian political track of the Palestinian cause. This is despite the fact that Hamas continuously asserts that it has its own policy, and that it is not affected by intimidation nor pressure from any country.

People come out in support of Egypt’s efforts to end divisions and support the Palestinian reconciliation on 25 September 2017. [Moahmmed Asad/Middle East Monitor]

Egypt’s recent approval of Haniyeh’s foreign tour, after continuous refusal and rejection, does not hide its desire to seek to impose its guidance on Hamas, determining who it visits and who it boycotts. This did not happen with the other countries that the movement has dealt with, such as Jordan, Syria and Qatar.

Today, after Haniyeh’s tour commenced, Hamas hopes it results in an improvement of its regional relations, developing friendly ties with allied countries and mending the tension and estrangement with other countries. The movement wants its leader to visit certain countries to obtain financial support and closer political relations, although countries influencing Egypt, such as Saudi Arabia and Israel, have a firm hostility with the countries that Haniyeh intends to visit, and they do not want to give them a card to interfere in the Palestinian cause, by meeting with the leader of Hamas. They are seeking to prevent him from visiting these countries.

In this round, which has just begun, we are hearing frequent news that the Egyptian approval of Haniyeh’s foreign tour came after stipulation that he should not visit Iran, in particular. This is a significant request in the political relations between the parties, and does not imply wise diplomacy. However, it is clear that the Egyptian request is accompanied by Israeli and Saudi’s insistence to deny Tehran any foothold in the Palestinian arena, that may be strengthened by Haniyeh’s supposed meetings with Tehran’s leaders, who are locked in an invisible struggle with Riyadh and Tel Aviv.

It is still unknown whether Haniyeh will respond to the supposed Egyptian request, because it hurts the independence of the movement’s decision, and may negatively affect its relationship with its most important ally, Iran, if he does not visit it. This is especially true if he visits a number of other countries in the region, and refrains from visiting Iran, rendering Hamas’s position very difficult. Its decision will be sensitive and probably costly either way, whether it responds to Egypt’s request or chooses to ignore it.

In the same context, it does not seem that Haniyeh will appear to be hasty to return from his foreign tour. Predictions from inside Hamas are that he will remain abroad for several months, to conduct internal discussions with the movement, for foreign discussions with friends and allies and accomplish some of the leadership tasks that only he can complete.

Perhaps this issue, again, indicates the suitability that part of the Hamas leadership remains outside of the Palestinian territories, away from the siege and restrictions of movement – something that the current Hamas leadership may not have paid attention to when it placed all its political and military leaders in the Gaza Strip. This has put the movement, and its leaders, under the mercy of the Egyptian decision-maker, which allows Hamas to travel when relations are good, but when there is tension, it closes the Rafah crossing until further notice.

First Global Conference on Israeli Apartheid

Muhammad Hussein

Israel’s continued occupation of Palestinian territory, as well as the efforts that Israel goes to to impose second-class citizen status on Palestinian citizens and inhabitants of the occupied West Bank prompted the “First Global Conference on Israeli Apartheid” to take place in Istanbul, Turkey, last weekend.

Inaugurating the conference, President of the Union of Non-Governmental Organisations in the Islamic World (UNIW), Ali Kurk reiterated the Western governments’ overwhelming support for Israel’s apartheid system and the country as a whole, and stated: “International law has become meaningless now the law of the strong rules.”

Retired general of the Turkish armed forces who was appointed Chief Political Adviser to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan in 2016, Adnan Tanriverdi, said Jerusalem was particularly under threat of becoming a purely Jewish city as a result of Israel’s policy of evacuating Palestinian homes in occupied East Jerusalem and then either allowing Jewish settlers to occupy them or destroying them.

Jewish exclusivity

Former Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA), Rima Khalaf, said Israel is “the only country in the world to confer full citizenship based on inherited religion.” She also linked the Israeli apartheid system to the racial Darwinism that was prevalent throughout the 19th and 20th centuries in Europe, which fostered an ideology of racial and ethnic supremacy that is the root cause of apartheid.

Archbishop of the Greek Orthodox Church in Jerusalem, Atallah Hanna, added: “Israeli occupiers want Muslims and Christians to be racist to each other,” but that will not work as “we share a common Palestinian identity.”

Greek Orthodox Church in Jerusalem, at the ‘ First Global Conference on Israeli Apartheid’ in Istanbul, Turkey on 29 November 2019 [Middle East Monitor]

He warned that Israel is carrying out a gradual ethnic cleansing campaign in Jerusalem in an effort to turn it into a purely Jewish city. The Christian population of the holy city has been decreasing over the years, he added, making up only one per cent of the population now. The solution, he said, is for both Christians and Muslims to join forces as they are both being insulted and oppressed by the Israeli occupation.

They want to evacuate Jerusalem and spread their colonial rule…We say to them: we will not leave, we will stay and protect our land.

Former United Nations human rights investigator Richard Falk said Israel is continuing the legacy of European-style colonialism by shifting entire demographics on the ground. This Zionist project “was unfolding at a time when colonisation was collapsing,” and that colonial legacy did not simply end in 1967 but is continuing to this day with its allies such as the US providing “unconditional” support.

This policy of demographic change makes the two-state solution defunct and no longer a viable solution, Falk added. It is “a ghost-solution or a zombie-solution” which refuses to die, which Israel holds onto due to the fact that if it renounces that concept then it will effectively renounce the very legitimacy of a separate and autonomous Jewish state. This reality of Israel’s established population plan, international political manipulation, and US support makes for a “dystopian outcome which rests on violence and apartheid”.

The unreliability of the two-state solution has long been espoused by many among both the pro-Palestine and pro-Israel communities, with some calling for a one-state solution instead, in which Palestinians have an equal status as Israelis and apartheid is abolished, while others call for a more Jewish identity and supremacy in the state of Israel.

Activists, politicians and supporters of the Palestinian cause gather in Istanbul for the’ First Global Conference on Israeli Apartheid’ on 29 November 2019 [Middle East Monitor]

Palestinians need to have a clear vision of how to navigate through their predicament, former Arab member of the Israeli Knesset (parliament) Haneen Zoabi said. She stressed that Palestinians – whether in the West Bank or in Israel – will not be liberated and apartheid will not be destroyed by going to the courts and asking for help.

Israel’s monopoly in the court system and its apartheid policies will not enable such endeavours to succeed, she explained. But the failures of such attempts have woken Palestinians up and encouraged them to be more active.

The conference was hugely effective in shedding light on the extent of the Israeli apartheid system and its suppression of the Palestinian people, with a variety of well-experienced and knowledgeable speakers, intellectuals, academics and figures at the forefront of it. A plethora of statistics and research were efficient in propagating the continued plight of Palestinians living under occupation and the numerous unspeakable violations of human rights and international law that the state of Israel has committed.

What the conference failed to do, however, was provide clear and direct solutions to the issue of the Israeli apartheid as a whole. This is not entirely blameworthy on the conference itself – the crisis of the Israeli-Palestinian “conflict” is not an easy one to find solutions for – but apart from Tanriverdi’s call for a united military force in the Muslim world, recommendations on how to pressure Israel using international law, frequent references to toppling of apartheid in South Africa and the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, a clear and united solution was sorely lacking.

The final communique on the conference, UNIW included the five primary guidelines which are to be observed in its aim to form the Global Coalition against Israeli Apartheid:

1. The Coalition shall be open to all individuals and organizations committed to the principles of justice, equality, and dignity for all;
2. The goal of the Coalition is to contribute to and expedite the dismantlement of the Israeli apartheid regime imposed on the Palestinian people, in the framework of achieving equality, dignity, and justice for all;
3. The Coalition shall use all legal means possible towards that end;
4. The Coalition shall act as a forum and support network allowing its members to maximize the impact of their work in their respective fields, 4 including research, awareness raising, legal action, and activities of boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS),with a view to combatting Israeli apartheid;
5. In all its initiatives and activities, the Coalition shall adhere to the principles set forth in international law.

 

Netanyahu-Pompeo Meeting Solidifies War Plan on Iran

Finian CUNNINGHAM

Ratcheting economic sanctions, military force encirclement, inciting seditious violence and relentless war rhetoric. This all by the US and its allies over the past year towards Iran, yet it is Iran which is portrayed as posing “potential threats” to American interests.

The hastily arranged meeting last week between Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had the hallmarks of a war-plan summit amid a peak in renewed media provocation against Iran.

In the last weeks there has been a flurry of US media reports claiming that Iran is secretly moving ballistic missiles into Iraq and elsewhere across the region. As usual the media credulously cite anonymous intelligence and Pentagon officials on those claims.

Here’s CNN quoting one administration official: “There has been consistent intelligence in the last several weeks,” the official said, referring to “a potential Iranian threat against US forces and interests in the Middle East.”

Last month, the head of US CentCom made a similar dire forecast of Iranian intentions. General Kenneth McKenzie said: “I would expect that if we look at the past three or four months, it’s possible they [Iran] will do something that is irresponsible.”

Notice how General McKenzie tacitly acknowledges the background of the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign of economic sanctions and US military force buildup against Iran as if that is somehow normal international conduct. Then he turns all that US aggression on its head by accusing Iran of possibly doing “something that is irresponsible”.

There are worrying signs that the US and Israel are redoubling the pressure of war against Iran. This pressure has to be seen in the context of a formidable deployment of US military forces – troops, warplanes and warships in the region since May this year. The earlier buildup was announced on the basis of unfounded claims that Iran was preparing to launch offensive operations against American interests. Then came a series of mysterious attacks on oil tankers in the Persian Gulf over the summer which Washington blamed on Iran without evidence.

Street protests in Iran since mid-November over fuel-price increases appear to be hijacked by subversive elements. President Trump and other US officials have openly called for the protests to destabilize the Iranian government.

Fresh claims that Iran is sending ballistic missiles to neighboring countries appear to be setting the stage for justifying a pre-emptive US attack on Iran.

No doubt the Iranian government is under severe pressure from the economic hardship that the US has re-imposed unlawfully since Trump dumped the international nuclear accord in May 2018. No doubt too Iran is apprehensive about the relentless military threats against it from Washington and its Israeli ally. Almost certainly, Iran will have mobilized forces in the reasonable calculation that it may come under attack at any moment.

But, perversely, US intelligence and military officials are interpreting Iranian defensive moves as “indications of a potential threat” to American “interests”.

The meeting last week between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo signals a foreboding development. Recall that this is in the context of US media reports of Iranian ballistic missiles being deployed and of reports that the Trump administration is considering a doubling of troop levels in the Middle East to 28,000, as well as sending more missiles and warplanes.

Netanyahu met Pompeo in Lisbon, Portugal, on Wednesday, December 04. The meeting was called urgently and was unscheduled. Netanyahu – who is fighting for his political survival over corruption charges – tried to arrange discussions with Pompeo on the sidelines of the NATO summit near London, but according to Israeli media reports there was not enough time for security logistics to be put in place by the British. That indicates the Israeli leader was trying to meet Pompeo in a hurry.

When Netanyahu met with Pompeo in Lisbon, he said at the start of their discussions: “The first subject that I will raise is Iran. The second subject is Iran, and so is the third. And many more.

The Israeli premier added: “We have been fortunate as President Trump has led a consistent policy of exerting pressure on Iran. Iran is increasing its aggression in the region as we speak, even today, in the region. They are trying to have staging grounds against us and the region from Iran itself, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and Yemen and we are actively engaged in countering that aggression.”

Netanyahu also gloated that the “Iranian empire [sic] is tottering… let’s make it totter even more.”

For several months Iran has steadfastly refused to take the bait of war laid down by the Trump administration. But with pressures mounting both within the country and externally, it would be imperative for the Iranian authorities to marshall their defenses.

US intelligence and military officials are using contorted logic to accuse Iran of posing a threat, and the American corporate media are ably assisting in the propagation of this oxymoron.

Netanyahu’s hasty meeting with Pompeo last week suggests that the US and Israel are putting the final touches to their malignant masterpiece for provoking a war with Iran.

Finian CUNNINGHAM

Former editor and writer for major news media organizations. He has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages

Hanna: Christians must defend Palestine

'We will remain in Jerusalem, defending our religious sites and endowments. We reject the policies of the occupation. We will not surrender'

Muhammad Hussein

The Palestinian Archbishop of Jerusalem’s Greek Orthodox Church, Atallah Hanna, has spoken out against the Israeli occupation and stressed his support for the Palestinian people and cause, urging Christians around the world to do the same.

Speaking exclusively to MEMO at the “First Global Conference on Israeli Apartheid”, which took place in Istanbul last week, Hanna said: “The city of Jerusalem is the city of the three Abrahamic religions…Christian and Muslim Palestinians living in Jerusalem suffer from the occupation, suffer from repression, tyranny and oppression.”

READ: Archbishop Atallah Hanna slams extrajudicial executions by Israeli soldiers

He emphasised the increasing policies enforcing apartheid in the holy city and in the rest of Palestine, stating:

The occupation in Jerusalem is treating us as if we are guests and foreigners in our own city. This is the embodiment of apartheid policies and practices against our people in Jerusalem specifically and in Palestine more generally.

Hanna was firm in his commitment that the apartheid system enforced by the Israeli government – which separates Palestinians from Jewish Israelis and treats them as second-class citizens who do not have equal rights such as access to certain areas, jobs, livelihood and resources – will not drive the Christians from the city and from defending the Palestinian cause and justice.

“We will remain in Jerusalem, defending our religious sites and endowments. We reject the policies of the occupation. We will not surrender. Our motto will always be: freedom and dignity for the Palestinian people. Our religious sites will remain ours. Jerusalem will remain ours.”

READ: Israel advances major expansion of settlement between Jerusalem and Bethlehem

He also touched on the US support for Israel and it  not holding the Jewish state to account over its violations of human rights and international law, adding: “We reject America’s unjust decisions which come in support of Israeli policies and the occupation of Jerusalem.”

Archbishop Hanna also had a strong message for Christians throughout the world, reminding them that “In a few days, Christians will be celebrating Christmas all over the world. The streets and town squares will be decorated with lights, adornments and Christmas trees in Europe and the world. I would like to remind all Christians all around the world: there is no point in celebrating Christmas if you do not pay attention to what is happening in Palestine as it is the birthplace of Christ and where Christianity originated and spread its message throughout the world. The nativity grotto is in Bethlehem. The true light of Christmas emanated from Bethlehem.”


Hanna stressed that Christianity’s roots in Jerusalem and in the land of Palestine means that oppression in the very land that Jesus was born must be opposed and fought, rather than the pro-Israel and Zionist stance with which many Christians in the West are perceived to associate with. The continued Israeli occupation and the apartheid system which it enforces prompted the Archbishop to “call upon all the churches of the world, in the west and east, to urgently defend Palestine, the children of Palestine, and the Palestinian cause. Let our message this Christmas be to free Palestine and the Palestinian people.”