Lieberman's renewed demilitarisation demands

The aftermath of Israel’s colonial massacre has resulted in a stronger Palestinian resistance. Only a few weeks after Iran’s declaration to accelerate the process of armed resistance among Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has reverted back to demilitarisation rhetoric, albeit within a slightly varied narrative.

While admitting that insistence upon the demilitarisation of Hamas is currently unattainable, Lieberman is still insisting that it is Israel’s responsibility to ensure an absolute elimination of Palestinian resistance. However, he said, the concept needs to be articulated within the wider community in order to become an international imposition.

Quote in the Times of Israel during a briefing with Israeli diplomatic correspondents, Lieberman stated: “I welcome the idea of demilitarisation in exchange for rehabilitation, even though not everyone agrees with it, even in the West. It’s not realistic, but it is still important to talk about this narrative, to get it in people’s consciousness. We must not give up on the narrative of a demilitarised Gaza Strip.”

Interestingly, Lieberman conjured an erroneous similitude with the concept of the two-state solution, diversifying the narrative in the process by claiming that the Palestinians “succeeded in convincing the world that they deserve a state based on the 1967 lines by repeating this demand”.

Once again, Palestinian liberation is thwarted by political narratives. International endorsement of the two-state solution is based upon US demands which determine either impossible implementation or else the navigation of concessions to the detriment of the Palestinian population. So far, the two-state solution which Lieberman wrongly claims is endorsed by Palestinians, thus eliminating the clear demarcations between political representation and the people; has generated an interminable series of negotiations that are suspended and rekindled to ensure the accelerating deterioration of Palestine.

From demilitarisation, Lieberman moved on to legitimacy. Peace with PA President Mahmoud Abbas is deemed impossible due to lack of “democratic legitimacy”. Clearly, Abbas lacks legitimacy on various counts, including the insistence upon maintaining security coordination with the settler-colonial state. However, the legitimacy granted to Israel by the compromised international community does not render it valid. Any discourse regarding legitimacy needs to be based upon different parameters that exclude the current trends of sabotaging human rights and freedom through the already manipulative international law.

Israel has so far been allowed the luxury of prolonging negotiations as part of its manipulation to ensure completion of its settler-colonial project. Fortunately for Palestinians, resistance is unlikely to be diluted through diplomatic engagement – a fact that indicates renewed awareness of the factors that constitute violence against Palestine, including imperialist violence. As talk of the deployment of international forces gains momentum, Hamas clearly outlined its position against international intervention – a move that consolidates resistance to the entire liberation of Palestine. Nevertheless, the so-called unity government constitutes a major contradiction in the path towards Palestinian liberation. Political national reconciliation remains intangible at a time when the magnitude of damage caused by “Operation Protective Edge” is also addressed within the confines of a two-state solution by the international community. The renewed stance embraced by Palestinian resistance, therefore, should eliminate all notions of substitutes or temporary agreements destined to dissolve within oblivion, if the hegemonic narrative is yet again enforced to determine another compromised outcome.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.