Is the Beijing Declaration an Opportunity for Palestine?

On 23 July 2024, 14 Palestinian organizations and groups, including Fatah and Hamas, signed an agreement aimed at ending the long-standing divisions between the various Palestinian factions at a meeting in Beijing, China.

News of the Beijing Declaration initially came as a surprise. The rift between Fatah and Hamas has appeared too deep for such an agreement since at least 2006, when Hamas won the presidential and parliamentary elections in the Palestinian autonomous territories and neither Fatah nor the United States or other Western countries were willing to recognize the election results. For years, efforts at reconciliation have been underway to restore Palestinian unity and to create a common position with regard to Israel and the future of Palestine. Despite the enthusiasm with which these ongoing talks have been orchestrated, thus far, they have failed every time.

Katja Hermann of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation’s West Asia Unit spoke with Karin Gerster of the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation’s Ramallah Office, and Jan Turowski from the Beijing Office, to get an initial assessment of the Palestinian unity agreement with an emphasis on China’s role in the negotiations.

What exactly have Hamas, Fatah, and the other Palestinian parties agreed on in the new deal?

KG: The Beijing Declaration is essentially a proposal to establish an interim government or unity government supported by all fourteen Palestinian parties in order to jointly govern the Gaza Strip after the war. After many months of war, people are thinking about “day-after” scenarios. Yet in order to be able to stand up to Israel and the international community, the Palestinian side must speak with a unified voice. All Palestinian parties are certain of one thing: the future of the Gaza Strip is primarily a Palestinian issue.

How do you explain the timing of the agreement?

KG: The enormously destructive war against Gaza, which has been going on for almost ten months, is one crucial part of the context. Another is the increasingly tense situation in the West Bank, where a “silent war” is being waged in the form of land seizures, house demolitions, waves of arrests, and widespread violence by Israeli settlers against Palestinians.

Despite everything, the Fatah-led government in Ramallah is sticking to the security agreements made with Israel in the 1990s, and holds Hamas solely responsible for the current situation. For a long time, Fatah has been weakened and internally divided. Now the party has its back against the wall and pressure is mounting. The calls for President Mahmoud Abbas to resign are impossible to ignore, and steps must now be taken to resolve the matter. Hamas is also facing growing pressure.

Due to the fact that Palestinians by and large saw the attack on 7 October 2023 as an act of resistance, Hamas initially managed to boost its reputation. Now Hamas is willing to enter into negotiations in order to secure itself a position in governing the Gaza Strip after the war. To this end, an alliance with Fatah and the Palestinian Authority seems promising.

What role did China play in the negotiations?

JT: China is increasingly positioning itself as a serious player on the global political stage. From the perspective of the Chinese leadership, Western dominance has failed to secure a peaceful and just world order. China is therefore striving to create a new multipolar world in which global problems will be solved by involving a large number of different actors.

First and foremost, China seeks to establish itself as a reliable partner that provides new multilateral political forums and mechanisms to facilitate problem solving. Secondly, Beijing recognizes the danger of any escalation in the Middle East conflict, since this could quickly spread to the Asia-Pacific region and have a detrimental political and economic impact on China itself.

To some extent, one could say that Palestinian president Abbas’s admission that he has lost the backing of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is being received positively here.

At the same time, the various Palestinian factions and their partners appear to consider China to be an assertive and trustworthy partner — after all, China sits on the Security Council and would have the economic means to aid with reconstruction. It is difficult to say what specific role China played behind the closed doors of the “negotiating room”. In any case, by making the negotiating room possible in the first place, and by deliberately inviting all actors, Beijing has demonstrated exceptional diplomatic talent.

How involved has China been in the conflict between Israel and Palestine so far? What kinds of interventions has it made?

JT: For the Chinese government, the outbreak of the Gaza war is essentially the result of an overdue conflict over the occupation of the Palestinian territories, which has never been dealt with adequately. It is convinced that this conflict can only be resolved if the central questions receive definitive answers. These answers must be found in an international peace conference involving all relevant players.

In China’s view, an immediate ceasefire is a prerequisite for such negotiations. China sees itself in a position to host such a conference as a quasi-neutral player. Despite its good economic relations with Israel, China has declared its unequivocal support for the legitimacy of the Palestinian demands. Although China has long advocated for a two-state solution and supported the corresponding UN resolutions, official statements made in recent months have raised the question of whether a two-state solution is still realistic at this point.

China appears to be expanding its influence in West Asia. What interests is it pursuing?

JT: China is now the main trading partner of most countries in the region. China’s prospective economic growth is highly dependent on energy, and thus it has an interest in securing access to existing oil and gas reserves. Secure trade routes in the region also play a key role.

How is the new deal being received in Palestine?

KG: Reactions are divided and generally not optimistic. There have been countless previous attempts at reconciliation, unity agreements, and signed treaties that have not been kept and which have failed to shift the political situation or change the realities of life under occupation. For this reason, the news of the renewed efforts in Beijing has failed to draw much interest in Ramallah. Palestinians are of the opinion that a government can only be successful if it is set up and recognized by Palestinian people through democratic elections. People in Palestine are sceptical of any contracts concluded by politicians to maintain their own power.

To some extent, one could say that Palestinian president Abbas’s admission that he has lost the backing of Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is being received positively here. Netanyahu is concerned with his own political survival, which he can only ensure with the support of far-right figures such as Ben Gvir and Smotrich. The radicals in Israel have no interest in a functioning Palestinian government or in reaching an agreement with the Palestinians. On the contrary, the annexation of the West Bank is proceeding.

Beijing sees the attack in Tehran as an escalation by Israel that could provoke a war with Iran, and as further proof that the United States is ultimately unwilling to stop the Israelis from pursuing a spiral of escalation.

Abbas has had to prove himself willing to compromise in order to save himself as well as Fatah’s reputation. However, we cannot rule out the possibility that the agreement is about tactical calculation and that sees it as appealing because it will help the party maintain its grip on power. The government in Ramallah knows full well that Hamas will not be recognized internationally. With that in mind, Fatah may be attempting to demonstrate that it is making an effort, while other players — Western or Arab states — are rejecting the agreement. However, it is still too early to tell.

How has the situation changed since the assassination of Ismail Haniya, the political leader of Hamas? Will this have any impact on the unity agreement?

JT: China’s official position on the attack of 30 July 2024 was as clear as was to be expected. Lin Jian, the spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, stated that “China strongly condemns the assassination and is deeply concerned that the incident will further escalate the situation in the region”. No official comment was made on the unity agreement.

In China, people are certainly concerned that Haniya’s death could lead to power struggles within Hamas, resulting in radicalization or a power vacuum. Nevertheless, the majority of Chinese experts believe that the unity agreement will remain in place. With regard to the dramatic situation unfolding in Gaza, the Chinese actors involved believe that a historic turning point has been reached at which Israel’s “divide-and-conquer” strategy of recent decades will no longer be effective. In China’s view, it is no longer possible for Israel or the United States to be in charge of setting up a post-war Palestinian government. Any such negotiations will have to include Hamas as well, albeit in a weakened state.

Beyond the unity agreement, Beijing sees the attack in Tehran as an escalation by Israel that could provoke a war with Iran, and as further proof that the United States is ultimately unwilling to stop the Israelis from pursuing a spiral of escalation and is therefore failing to act as a “reliable broker” in resolving the crisis.

KG: The situation in Palestine is very tense at the moment. The killing of Ismail Haniya in Tehran is being interpreted as a targeted attack on Iran and at the same time as an attempt to prevent Palestinian unity. Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president and opponent of Haniya, even called for a general strike in the Palestinian territories the following day. Demonstrations are already taking place in many cities, and a call is circulating for people to demonstrate at all checkpoints. This has already led to clashes and the situation could escalate further. It is extremely dangerous, and how things will develop is completely undetermined.

Translated by Hunter Bolin and Anna Dinwoodie for Gegensatz Translation Collective.