
Frankly Speaking: The view from within the Palestinian Authority
Speaking on the Arab News weekly current affairs program 'Frankly Speaking,' Aghabekian urged the international community to step in and halt the offensive, which she said has turned Gaza into a killing field.
'What can be done is a stopping of this genocidal war,' she said. 'This impunity, which Israel has been enjoying for a long time, only begets more violence. And today, we see only destruction and killing of more civilians in Gaza.'
Aid to Gaza has been blocked for over a month and a half, and more than 60,000 children face malnutrition, according to international aid agencies. 'It's time to say enough is enough and halt this aggression — this genocidal war with the increasing brutality by the day on Gaza,' she said.
Aghabekian believes the collapse of the ceasefire agreement earlier this year was inevitable, given that Israel's political and military leadership has made no secret of its broader intentions.
'The ceasefire deal will continue to fall apart because Israel has no intention of stopping this war,' she said. 'Its defense minister, Israel Katz, said the other day: 'We don't intend to even leave Gaza, Lebanon, or Syria.' These are very clear messages that this war will continue and will only bring more disaster to the Palestinians in Gaza — and probably the region at large.'
In the face of proposals from foreign powers such as the Trump administration to resettle Palestinians or repurpose Gaza for tourism, Aghabekian maintains that only plans rooted in justice and dignity will succeed.
'We know that the US has unwavering support for the Israelis,' she said. 'Any plan for Gaza or the Palestinians must respect the dignity and the rights of the Palestinian people. Any other plan will not work and it will not bring peace to the region.'
A sustainable peace, she says, depends on international recognition of Palestinian rights. 'These rights, as I said, are enshrined in the division plan in 1948. The plan set two states. One state is on the ground today. Now it's time to materialize the second state,' she said.
She added that the Palestinian state has already gained recognition from 149 countries and has UN observer status. 'This is not a contested land; this is an occupied land,' she said. 'It is the land of the State of Palestine.'
During his last administration, US President Donald Trump championed normalization agreements between Arab states and Israel under the Abraham Accords. Despite acknowledging the widespread pessimism about his return to the White House, Aghabekian said she remains cautiously optimistic.
'If President Trump wants to forge peace and he wants to leave a legacy of peace, then that peace has a framework and it entails the respect and the rightful rights of the Palestinians,' she told Katie Jensen, host of 'Frankly Speaking.'
'So, I remain hopeful that this will get to the table of President Trump and the ears of President Trump, and he sees that the future of the Middle East includes the rights of the Palestinians on their state as enshrined in international law.'
Her comments come as Israeli strikes on Gaza continue to spark international outrage. A recent attack on Al-Ahli Arab Hospital on Palm Sunday forced patients into the streets. Israel claimed the site was being used as a Hamas command center.
'The genocidal war in Gaza is not justified in any way you look at it,' Aghabekian said. 'And bombing a hospital that is partially operating and part of a system that has been devastated in the last 19 months is not justified by any means. Bombing a Christian hospital on a Palm Sunday is extremely telling.'
Israel's military campaign in Gaza came in retaliation for the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led attack on southern Israel, which killed more than 1,200 people and saw another 250 taken hostage.
In 18 months, the war has killed at least 51,065 people, according to Gaza health officials. Last week, Hamas formally rejected Israel's latest ceasefire proposal, saying it was ready to negotiate a deal that would see the release of all 59 hostages it is still holding, 24 of whom are believed to be alive, in return for an end to the war. Israel had offered a 45-day ceasefire in return for the release of 10 hostages.
Aghabekian said the continued killings of Palestinian civilians — including aid workers — in Gaza are a stark indicator of unchecked brutality. 'Even after the ceasefire, we have seen that over 2,000 Palestinians have been killed, and these Palestinians are civilians; they have absolutely nothing to do with Hamas,' she said. 'Today, nothing has been done because everything passes with impunity.'
Efforts to establish peace through regional diplomacy are ongoing. Aghabekian pointed to a three-stage Gaza reconstruction plan presented by the Arab League and backed by the Islamic world and parts of Europe. But she acknowledged the resistance it faces, particularly from the US and Israel.
'We have to continue using our diplomatic efforts,' she said. 'We know that this military route is getting us nowhere. And our military efforts are directed at mobilizing the international community with several ventures today on ending occupation. We have the forthcoming international conference, spearheaded by France and Saudi Arabia, to take place in New York mid-year. And we have the global alliance on the materialization of the State of Palestine. And we will continue our efforts on the recognition of Palestine and the full membership efforts, as well as our efforts with international organizations, such as the Human Rights Council and UNESCO.'
Despite the challenges, she sees momentum building. 'We've seen that in the latest summit, and we are seeing support and unity from the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). We've seen unity from European countries and others giving us positive vibes about the plan and the possibility of sustaining that plan in the future,' she said. 'This is the only plan today on the table that may move us forward. It is very much — there's a consensus on it, and it is in line with the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002.'
Still, the obstacles remain formidable. Israel's latest ceasefire proposal reportedly calls for the disarming of Hamas and the release of all living hostages. Aghabekian warned such conditions are unrealistic given the devastation Palestinians have endured.
'A durable ceasefire entails, of course, meeting the demands of both parties, but today, the Palestinians have been crushed for the last 19 months,' she said. 'A durable peace should bring them an opening of the borders, feeding the people, starting immediate relief on the ground, and doing whatever it takes to have this genocidal war stop. We hope that reason prevails on all sides, and we reach the stage today before tomorrow.'
Addressing criticism about the Palestinian Authority's legitimacy, especially in Gaza, she acknowledged that ongoing hardships and political stagnation have eroded public trust.
'If we see something moving on the political track, people will start realizing that there is a hope for the future,' she said. 'And today, whoever is responsible or who has the mandate on the occupied State of Palestine is the Palestinian Authority. And that authority needs to be empowered to be able to meet the needs of its people.'
The Palestine Liberation Organization, she said, remains the umbrella under which all factions must gather if unity is to be achieved. 'Anyone can join the PLO, but you need to accept what the PLO stands for, accept agreements signed by the PLO, and accept the political vision of the PLO,' she said.
Asked whether ordinary Palestinians still have confidence in the PLO, Aghabekian said that trust is conditional. 'I think that confidence can fluctuate based on what is happening on the ground,' she said. 'And, as I said earlier, if people see something moving in terms of the vision of the PLO on a free Palestine, a sovereign Palestine, the liberation of the Palestinian people, bringing people a better future soon, then people will rally behind the PLO, and the PLO can look inwards and think of reform of the PLO.'
Turning to the West Bank, she expressed alarm at the scale of ongoing settlement expansion. 'We've seen more and more land grab, we've seen increased brutality, we've been seeing increased violations on the ground, withholding of our tax money, displacement of people, attacks on UNRWA and refugee camps, grabbing of more land for agricultural herding — and this is something new for the Palestinians,' she said.
'There is entrenchment and emboldening of occupation on all levels.'
She called for greater pressure on Israel to comply with international law. 'Statements are void if no actual measures are taken on the ground,' she said. 'What needs to be done is holding Israel to account.'
Citing hundreds of UN resolutions and a landmark International Court of Justice opinion calling for the end of Israel's occupation, she said enforcement mechanisms are long overdue.
'There are steps that are doable now in terms of what do we do with settler violence, with the settlers who are sitting on occupied stolen land. What do we do with settlement products? How do we deal with settlers who have dual citizenship. How do we deal with arms sent to Israel or sold to Israel?' Aghabekian said, adding that it was time for the international community to show its teeth.
While warning of the risk of a third intifada, she said the PA leadership is focused on avoiding further civilian casualties. 'We do not want to transfer what is happening in Gaza to the West Bank, and partly it is already being transferred,' she said. 'So, the leadership needs to spare the lives of the people.'
Aghabekian said the ICJ ruling provides a legal basis for action. 'It has told the whole world that this is not a contested territory, this is an occupied territory, and this Israeli belligerent occupation needs to be dismantled,' she said. 'There are steps that are doable.'
The PA is also preparing for governance in Gaza, should the violence end. 'The Palestinian Authority is doing its homework and it is preparing and ready to shoulder its responsibilities in Gaza,' Aghabekian said. 'There is a plan accepted by 57 countries for Gaza's rehabilitation, immediate relief and reconstruction. And we hope that we are enabled to start working on that plan.'
However, she said implementation hinges on external support. 'Those plans need billions of dollars, they need the empowerment of the Palestinian Authority in terms of actually practicing governance on the ground.'
Asked whether Israel or its allies might eventually accept a modified version of the Arab League's plan, Aghabekian said all parties must be willing to talk. 'It's a give-and-take thing,' she said. 'In the final analysis, what we want is to reach the goal of stopping this genocidal war and letting aid move in and for us to be able to start our relief and construction efforts. If this needs further discussion, I think we're open for discussion.'
But the human toll continues to mount. 'Palestinians will continue to lose their lives because Israel has no intent on stopping this war,' she said. 'There is no justification for the continuing of the war, and an agreement can be reached if there is genuine intent.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Al Arabiya
3 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
Ministers to gather at UN for Saudi, France- led conference on Israel, Palestinians
Dozens of ministers will gather at the United Nations on Monday for a delayed conference to work toward a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians, but the US and Israel are boycotting the event. The 193-member UN General Assembly decided in September last year that such a conference would be held in 2025. Hosted by France and Saudi Arabia, the conference was postponed in June after Israel attacked Iran. The conference aims to lay out the parameters for a roadmap to a Palestinian state, while ensuring Israel's security. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot told newspaper La Tribune Dimanche in an interview published on Sunday that he will also use the conference this week to push other countries to join France in recognizing a Palestinian state. France intends to recognize a Palestinian state in September at the annual gathering of world leaders at the United Nations General Assembly, President Emmanuel Macron said last week. 'We will launch an appeal in New York so that other countries join us to initiate an even more ambitious and demanding dynamic that will culminate on September 21,' Barrot said, adding that he expected Arab countries by then to condemn Palestinian militants Hamas and call for their disarmament. The conference comes as Israel continues its 22-month war on Gaza. Israel launched the war after the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack on its southern border. Since then, Israel has killed nearly 60,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health authorities. The US will not attend the conference at the United Nations, said a State Department spokesperson, describing it as 'a gift to Hamas, which continues to reject ceasefire proposals accepted by Israel that would lead to the release of hostages and bring calm in Gaza.' The State Department spokesperson added that Washington voted against the General Assembly last year calling for the conference and would 'not support actions that jeopardize the prospect for a long-term, peaceful resolution to the conflict.' Israel is also not taking part in the conference, 'which doesn't first urgently address the issue of condemning Hamas and returning all of the remaining hostages,' said Jonathan Harounoff, international spokesperson at Israel's UN mission. The UN has long endorsed a vision of two states living side by side within secure and recognized borders. Palestinians want a state in the West Bank, east Jerusalem and Gaza Strip, all territory captured by Israel in the 1967 war with neighboring Arab states. The UN General Assembly in May last year overwhelmingly backed a Palestinian bid to become a full UN member by recognizing it as qualified to join and recommending the UN Security Council 'reconsider the matter favorably.' The resolution garnered 143 votes in favor and nine against. The General Assembly vote was a global survey of support for the Palestinian bid to become a full UN member - a move that would effectively recognize a Palestinian state - after the US vetoed it in the UN Security Council several weeks earlier.


Arab News
11 hours ago
- Arab News
For the sake of peace, America should recognize Palestine
After an unexpected delay due to Israel's unprovoked attack on Iran last month, the UN will finally convene a crucial high-level meeting in New York this week. Scheduled for Monday and Tuesday at the foreign minister level, the meeting aims to discuss the long-promised but still unrealized political solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: the two-state solution. The idea is not new. It envisions two states — Israel and Palestine — living side by side in peace. While Israel has been recognized by the global community, including Arab nations and the Palestinians themselves, the state of Palestine still lacks full recognition by the UN Security Council. That recognition is a necessary step before Palestine can be admitted as a full UN member. Three permanent members of the UNSC — France, the UK and the US — have so far blocked that recognition. But change is coming. President Emmanuel Macron, whose government is co-chairing the UN conference with Saudi Arabia, has announced that France will recognize Palestine when the UN General Assembly meets this fall. The UK has expressed similar intentions, conditioned on there being a 'wider plan which ultimately results in a two-state solution.' Without a political horizon for Palestinians and a realistic long-term solution, we will only be kicking the can down the road. Both France and the UK understand the urgent need for an end to the Israeli revenge war on Gaza, accomplishing the release of detainees on both sides, followed immediately by an urgent effort to carry out the more important challenge of finding a political solution. Before the end of September, it is expected that 150 of the UN's 193 member states will have recognized the state of Palestine on the June 4, 1967, borders. This leaves the US as the lone major holdout. Leaders from both major American political parties, including President Donald Trump, have supported the idea of a two-state solution. Former Secretary of State Antony Blinken, despite his staunch support for Israel, even visited Ramallah last year and met with senior Palestinian leader Hussein Al-Sheikh. Yet, paradoxically, the US has announced that it does not plan to attend the UN meeting on the two-state solution. The reasons remain unclear. One possibility is that Washington is reacting to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's fiery rhetoric. After Macron's announcement, Netanyahu claimed that recognizing Palestine would endanger Israeli security. 'A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel,' he said. 'Let's be clear: the Palestinians do not seek a state alongside Israel; they seek a state instead of Israel.' Nothing could be further from the truth. If any side is attempting to negate the other, it is Israel seeking to erase Palestine, not the other way round. The current Palestinian leadership, based in Ramallah and led by President Mahmoud Abbas, has consistently opposed the Oct. 7 attacks and Hamas' militaristic approach. This leadership favors diplomacy and has long supported the two-state vision, as outlined in the 1988 Palestinian Declaration of Independence. That declaration explicitly envisioned a Palestinian state next to Israel. If any side is attempting to negate the other, it is Israel seeking to erase Palestine, not the other way round. Daoud Kuttab It is important to recall that Netanyahu himself has historically enabled Hamas, seeing it as a tool to divide and weaken the secular Palestinian national movement. The world now recognizes this cynical strategy for what it is. But Western leaders too often ignore this reality. Recognition of Palestine at the UN is not a 'reward for terror.' It is a recognition of an inalienable right: the right of self-determination. That principle is foundational to the very idea of the UN and the international order it represents. If Washington continues to pay lip service to a two-state solution while boycotting discussions intended to realize it, the implications will be stark. The current position suggests that American leaders — whether consciously or not — are aligning themselves with a vision of Jewish supremacy in the Middle East. That is a dangerous path. It will only prolong the conflict and isolate the US from the global consensus, which is increasingly united against apartheid, occupation and permanent discrimination. Palestinians and Israelis have two — and only two — realistic options: two states for two peoples or one democratic state with equal rights for all. All other ideas mean that America (and any other holdouts on Palestinian recognition) support apartheid by not opposing the current situation. As leading Israeli human rights organization B'Tselem stated in a report back in 2011, Israel has been conducting 'a regime of Jewish supremacy from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea: This is apartheid.' In 1948, Israel expelled 750,000 Palestinians and has refused to allow them to return ever since. Many of those refugees ended up in Gaza and we have seen what the absence of justice for Palestinians has produced. Continuing on this path of ignoring the Palestinian reality and denying the political rights of Palestinians under whatever religious or domestic political consideration will never work. Neither will the fantasy of permanently expelling or suppressing the 7 million Palestinians living between the river and the sea ever succeed. On May 15, 1948, within minutes of its declaration as a state, the US recognized Israel. It is high time that America recognized the other half of the two-state solution. The sooner Washington genuinely embraces the two-state solution and joins the world in recognizing the state of Palestine — including the principle of it being an independent, democratic nation living peacefully alongside Israel — the sooner peace in the Middle East can become a reality.


Arab News
12 hours ago
- Arab News
Starmer has chance to right a historical wrong
Feverish debate over recent months has centered on whether the UK and France will recognize the state of Palestine. French President Emmanuel Macron said in February that recognition was 'not a taboo.' France and Saudi Arabia were due to hold a conference on the two-state solution in New York in June, but it was delayed by Israel's aggression against Iran. Instead, it is being held this week. But the UK's position has been far from clear? Will Prime Minister Keir Starmer agree to join in or will he delay? No country in the world has more of a history of grappling with the issue of Palestine than Britain. It was, after all, the author of the 1917 Balfour Declaration, in which it pledged support for a Jewish homeland in Palestine. It did not mention a second state in that declaration. London had to grapple with this as the mandatory power all the way up to 1947, when it handed the issue over to the newly formed UN to resolve. In November of that year, the UN General Assembly voted for partition. The UK abstained on that resolution. However, its exit from Palestine was one of the low points of its Middle Eastern colonial era. It made little or no attempt to thwart the war that started even before its troops had left. Palestinians argue that, given all this, Britain has a particular historic responsibility toward Palestine. It should, many argue, be in the vanguard of pushing for the creation of that second state. It was not until the Venice Declaration of 1980 that European powers including the UK committed to acknowledging the Palestinian right to self-government. Even after that, it was many years before Britain had any formal relationship with the Palestine Liberation Organization as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Successive governments acted merely as backing vocalists to the US position on most aspects of the Palestinian question. With the Oslo Accords of 1993, the expectation that a peace process would lead to a Palestinian state grew. Britain and other donor states invested heavily in this option and aid to the fledgling Palestinian Authority grew as a result. It was all under the rubric that this would lead to a two-state solution, a secure Israel side by side with a state of Palestine based on the 1967 borders. The Palestinian leadership shifted its strategy after the Second Intifada to pushing for recognition. The UNGA approved the de facto recognition of the sovereign state of Palestine in 2012 and the state of Palestine also started applying for membership of international institutions, including the International Criminal Court. In 2014, the UK government's position was outlined by then-Foreign Secretary William Hague, who said that London 'reserves the right to recognize a Palestinian state bilaterally at the moment of our choosing and when it can best help bring about peace.' On Oct. 13, 2014, a debate took place in the House of Commons with a votable motion: 'That this House believes that the government should recognize the state of Palestine alongside the state of Israel.' The result of the vote was 274 to 12, a majority of 262 in favor of recognition. This was not binding on the government of the time but was a clear signal of parliamentary opinion. The low number of opponents to the motion indicated that few politicians were willing to oppose it in public. Significantly, this motion was backed by the leader of the Labour Party at the time, Ed Miliband. He said that recognition was 'right, just, fair and in line with the values' of his party. This tied Labour to supporting recognition. Contrary to widespread belief, it was not his pro-Palestinian successor, Jeremy Corbyn, who first made this move. Keir Starmer inherited this stance when he became Labour leader after the election defeat in 2019. But he made a significant change in Labour's position prior to the 2024 election. The manifesto committed the party to recognizing a Palestinian state, but only as part of a peace process. It stated: 'We are committed to recognizing a Palestinian state as a contribution to a renewed peace process which results in a two-state solution with a safe and secure Israel alongside a viable and sovereign Palestinian state.' The lack of clarity was deliberate. The decision on timing would be in the hands of the prime minister. As Israel's genocide has progressed, pressure has grown on European governments, including the UK, to get tough with Tel Aviv. Chris Doyle Debate endured as to whether these positions meant that Israel had veto power. Linking recognition to the state of a peace process, when the official Israel government policy was not to enter into negotiations, meant this was, in effect, exactly the case. Everything changed after Oct. 7, 2023. As Israel's genocide has progressed, pressure has grown on European governments, including the UK, to get tough with Tel Aviv. This has included a drive to recognize Palestine. In May 2024, Ireland, Norway and Spain recognized Palestine. Israel withdrew its ambassadors from those states. Larger European states such as the UK rejected the opportunity to join this move. This brings us to the present. Faced with Macron's announcement that France will recognize a Palestinian state in September, the focus returns to Starmer. He is facing considerable pressure to make the move immediately. Cabinet ministers are reported to have lobbied Starmer on recognition. They include Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper. Foreign Secretary David Lammy is also likely to have been backing this move. Now, 221 members of Parliament from nine parties have written to Starmer expressing their support for such a move. More than 130 of these are his own Labour MPs. Others are backing this letter even now. London Mayor Sadiq Khan announced his support, as did the leader of Labour in Scotland, Anas Sarwar. The Financial Times quoted a senior Labour official as stating: 'The block on this is Keir himself as well as his senior advisers. They want to stay close to the US.' Public opinion is more supportive of recognition than opposed. Recent polls indicate a large number of 'don't knows' but, in a June survey, 64 percent of Labour voters said they believe that the UK should recognize Palestine. Only 2 percent of these voters opposed any recognition. This highlights that Starmer would have the backing of the base of his political party if he were to go ahead. What is holding Starmer back? The obvious answer is the US. Starmer is desperately keen to stay on constructive terms with American President Donald Trump. He will pick his battles with him — and it is unlikely one will be over the recognition of Palestine. There is also the issue of the hangover of the Corbyn era, when the Labour Party was swamped by accusations of antisemitism and lost considerable support within the British Jewish community. Starmer and his circle do not wish to relive that experience. Some argue that it is also Starmer's strongly held personal belief. Two arguments seem to hold sway in 10 Downing Street. Firstly, that recognition would not bring peace any closer. The second is the Israeli line that this rewards Hamas and its atrocities. The counterargument is that, far from rewarding Hamas, it is the Palestinian national movement that would be boosted. Is Starmer's position reversible? He has made U-turns on significant domestic policy, so it is possible. One argument is that if Starmer does not do this jointly with France, then in what circumstances would he do it? France would offer diplomatic cover and encourage other states to do the same. On the other hand, Starmer is in many ways already treating Palestine as a state in all but name. Back in May, he met with PA Prime Minister Mohammed Mustafa in Downing Street with both flags on display as if Mustafa was head of a state government. Would UK recognition even matter? Israel seems to think so, as does the US. This explains their forthright condemnation of any state that recognizes Palestine. Supporters of the move believe that this matters too. It would mean official recognition — decades too late perhaps — that Palestinians do have a right to self-determination, that they have national rights and that, just like Israelis, they have a right to a state of their own. Acquiring statehood would also have legal benefits for Palestinians. Any UK recognition would be largely symbolic. However, if the UK were to recognize Palestine, it would be recognizing a state under occupation. That matters because it demonstrates that this 58-year-old Israeli occupation has to end — and the failure to do so must have consequences.