Eisenkot, Gaza and the Palestinian Narrative

Peace be upon you. Journalists, researchers, and those interested in Palestinian affairs must be very alert.

Because Eisenkot poses a strategic threat to the Palestinian narrative.

First, There will be an Israeli and American effort to link the crime of genocide that took place in the Gaza Strip to Netanyahu alone, not to the State of Israel, as if the genocide were a personal decision made by Netanyahu,

not a state decision, with its institutions, army, and security agencies involved, Shin Bet, Mossad, naval forces, and the air force, all involved in the crime of genocide.

I personally once asked an official in the U.S. Democratic Party about this, and he told me that if the Israelis themselves don't try to pin responsibility for the genocide on Netanyahu alone, we in the Democratic Party will do it,

because it serves the party's interests and strategic priorities, not just Israel's interests.

Second, bloodshed is to be expected from Eisenkot.

Netanyahu has committed a huge number of massacres and doesn't need to prove his bloodthirstiness or Zionism.

As for Eisenkot, his hand may be trembling, or he may be trying to prove that he is more bloodthirsty than Netanyahu.

We have a bad example in this regard: Shimon Peres, who accused an Israeli of being a dove for peace, of having a trembling hand, and of appeasing the Arabs.

After these accusations, he carried out the heinous Qana massacre in southern Lebanon.

Third, if Eisenkot becomes prime minister and commits a massacre, it would be his first massacre, God forbid, and a strategic danger to the Palestinian narrative as well, because it would be the first massacre in history committed with an Arab vote,

or its perpetrator would have received an Arab vote or Arab legitimacy in the Knesset.

Fourth, there is an assumption that if Eisenkot takes over the government and replaces Itamar Ben-Gvir or brings in another minister, that minister would be more kind to Palestinian prisoners and would work to improve their conditions in prison.

But this is still just an opinion and may not be correct.

I tend to agree with the view that changing the Israeli minister and the Israeli security minister It could be a shift from a foolish minister who films his crimes and posts them in the media to another criminal minister who wields the same power and commits the same crimes against prisoners,

but with greater intelligence and political experience, without filming them and posting them on social media.

Fifth and finally, on the narrative front too, these concessions made by the Arab parties without any political gain grant Israel some legitimacy and make it appear to be a truly democratic state.

They make it seem as though a Knesset vote or the Arabs' support for a government grants it more legitimacy, with no meaningful political gain.

Neither they nor Eisenkot have obtained anything.

The Arab parties have received no meaningful political gain.

Personally, I trust Ahmad Tibi, because he is a seasoned politician with a long national record, but I am worried about Mansour Abbas.

Mansour Abbas may make concessions for purely service- related reasons, meaning reasons related to budgets, funding, and so on.

And frankly, this is very painful and catastrophic for the Palestinian narrative.

To grant them legitimacy as a democratic state Without any concession, without any real political quid pro quo.