Introduction
Israel is in the midst of an invasion of Gaza City, which is a high-density area of the Gaza Strip where 1.2 million people currently live. The civilian casualty rate will be enormous. The remaining Israeli hostages, who are thought to be there, will be at risk; Israeli soldiers will be at risk; and the diplomatic reputation of Israel will suffer, and they will lose allies. Yet, there is a way to stop this invasion in its tracks, even with the finish-Hamas-off demands of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud Coalition.
Netanyahu was asked if Israel would still take over Gaza and eliminate the terrorists even if Hamas agrees to a deal.
To that question, Netanyahu answered, "Well, we're going to do that anyway. That was never a question, that we're not going to leave Hamas there. I've said that this war can end today. It can end if Hamas lays down its arms and releases the remaining 50 hostages, at least 20 of which are alive," he added. "That's our goal. To get all the hostages out, to disarm Hamas, demilitarize Gaza and give a different future for Gazans," he said. "My goal is not to occupy Gaza, it's to free Gaza."
Hamas has been badly weakened by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), and in the eyes of many Gazans, has seen over 60,000 Gazans needlessly killed in a war started by Hamas's brutal attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Still, many Gazans blame Israel and see their resistance as part of a Jihad (holy war) to get their entire (holy) land back, from the River to the Sea.
I have given up on assigning ultimate blame because it depends on what point in time one starts their causal analysis. But I do want to assign responsibility for bringing peace to that region.
I find it odd that a major party involved in sparking this conflagration is Iran; not by ordering the Oct. 7 attack but by funding and encouraging Hamas to act aggressively towards dismantling Israel. Yet, there is little mention on how Iran can reverse this, stop this war, and bring peace to this region; and at the same time, help their geopolitical aspirations and their own economy.
Hamas Out
Hamas can be demilitarized, and its political, military, and law enforcement leadership can be amicably expelled from Gaza to Iran. To facilitate an end to the Gaza war, seventeen countries, plus the European Union and Arab League, have been calling for the disarmament of Hamas. Disarmament is a welcome start, but a more sure path to peace is, in addition, to facilitate Hamas's political, military, and administrative leadership leaving Gaza to Iran, their main patron and sponsor.
An amicable removal of Hamas is necessary for Hamas to agree to a transfer from Gaza. “Amicable” includes Israeli abstention from revenge violence or incarceration directed at Hamas members, the inclusion of family members in resettlement, and a money stipend to assist with the costs of resettlement in Iran.
Of course, the remaining 50 hostages (20 live and 30 bodies) have to be released prior to or co-terminus with the cessation of warfare. I nominate the U.S., EU, and Abraham Accord countries to monitor Israeli compliance and Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Qatar to monitor Hamas compliance. Gaza needs to have a temporary peace-keeping and police presence in Gaza until there can be a transition to a peace-keeping police presence installed by a democratically elected government. One such organization has been recently created that could fulfill the first need and possibly also the second. That organization is the Gaza Transitional Service (GTS) in cooperation with a reformed Palestinian Authority (PA).
Iran Willingness
The rationale for Iran to accept Hamas members into their country is that they: (1) have some sympathy to stop the harm inflicted upon Gazans, (2) can place Hamas members into their military and propaganda infrastructures, and (3) can be economically rewarded through the removal of many of the sanctions placed upon them. For example, sanctions can be removed for purchasing or facilitating the delivery of Iranian oil, unfreezing Iranian governmental assets in the United States and overseas, and allowing the sale of U.S.- origin aircraft or related goods, technology, or services to be sold to Iranian civilian aviation companies. And, (4) perhaps most importantly, so they can be allowed to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes (with monitoring).
Mohammad Javad Zarif, former foreign minister of Iran, recently wrote: "Forging a different future requires vision, courage, and a conscious decision to break free from historical determinism. …The time for a paradigm shift is now."
Remaining Issues Easier to Address
Once Hamas is removed from Gaza to Iran and a transitional Palestinian peaceful governance is created, other issues can be more easily solved—such as the placement of Gazans in Gaza, in the West Bank, and elsewhere during the reconstruction of Gaza (with a right of return), the reduction and reconfiguration of settlements imposed in the West Bank (Iran can make settlement removal from the E1 section of the West Bank part of the Hamas withdrawal deal), and the creation of a Palestinian Province as part of a permanent or temporary Israel-Palestine Confederation (a three state solution). That Confederation would contain the following three provinces: Orthodox Jewish Eretz Yisrael, Traditional Muslim Falasteen, and a Liberal-Pluralistic Judaea-Palestina. All three would be bound by a constitution, which would include a Mideast version of Singapore's Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act.
Living in harmony and peace is an edifice that does not just happen. It must be thoughtfully constructed and nurtured.
Steven Balkin is a professor emeritus at Roosevelt University and a member of the Chicago Political Economy Group. His research focuses on violence prevention, international development, entrepreneurship and cultural preservation. Email: sbalkin@roosevelt.edu
photo courtesy of Michael Varga.
An Independent Voter's Perspective on Current Political Divides
In the column, "Is Donald Trump Right?", Fulcrum Executive Editor, Hugo Balta, wrote:
For millions of Americans, President Trump’s second term isn’t a threat to democracy—it’s the fulfillment of a promise they believe was long overdue.
Is Donald Trump right?
Should the presidency serve as a force for disruption or a safeguard of preservation?
Balta invited readers to share their thoughts at newsroom@fulcrum.us.
David Levine from Portland, Oregon, shared these thoughts...
I am an independent voter who voted for Kamala Harris in the last election.
I pay very close attention to the events going on, and I try and avoid taking other people's opinions as fact, so the following writing should be looked at with that in mind:
Is Trump right? On some things, absolutely.
As to DEI, there is a strong feeling that you cannot fight racism with more racism or sexism with more sexism. Standards have to be the same across the board, and the idea that only white people can be racist is one that I think a lot of us find delusional on its face. The question is not whether we want equality in the workplace, but whether these systems are the mechanism to achieve it, despite their claims to virtue, and many of us feel they are not.
I think if the Democrats want to take back immigration as an issue then every single illegal alien no matter how they are discovered needs to be processed and sanctuary cities need to end, every single illegal alien needs to be found at that point Democrats could argue for an amnesty for those who have shown they have been Good actors for a period of time but the dynamic of simply ignoring those who break the law by coming here illegally is I think a losing issue for the Democrats, they need to bend the knee and make a deal.
I think you have to quit calling the man Hitler or a fascist because an actual fascist would simply shoot the protesters, the journalists, and anyone else who challenges him. And while he definitely has authoritarian tendencies, the Democrats are overplaying their hand using those words, and it makes them look foolish.
Most of us understand that the tariffs are a game of economic chicken, and whether it is successful or not depends on who blinks before the midterms. Still, the Democrats' continuous attacks on the man make them look disloyal to the country, not to Trump.
Referring to any group of people as marginalized is to many of us the same as referring to them as lesser, and it seems racist and insulting.
We invite you to read the opinions of other Fulrum Readers:
Trump's Policies: A Threat to Farmers and American Values
The Trump Era: A Bitter Pill for American Renewal
Federal Hill's Warning: A Baltimorean's Reflection on Leadership
Also, check out "Is Donald Trump Right?" and consider accepting Hugo's invitation to share your thoughts at newsroom@fulcrum.us.
The Fulcrum will select a range of submissions to share with readers as part of our ongoing civic dialogue.
We offer this platform for discussion and debate.