Palestinian analysts and observers say reports about the so-called Deal of the Century are trial balloons that are intentionally leaked to the media to gauge official and public reactions and amend course accordingly. The primary goal is to protect Israel's interests, but also entice Arab countries and Palestinians with funding and improved living conditions, especially due to current difficult economic conditions in a region that has endured revolutions and wars and has not reached the desired stability. Another camp believes that the intention of the “deal” is for Palestinians to reject it and thus usher in the beginning of the end of the Palestinian cause. Analysts say that many Palestinian leaders of all stripes are still talking about two states for two people. The first, the occupying state of Israel, already exists; and the second, the Palestinians are trying to create on less than 22 per cent of historic Palestine. But this is not a real option without actual steps by Palestinians to end Israeli violations and find other means and strategies to force Israel to uphold international resolutions. Hany Al-Masry, director of the Palestinian Centre for Policy Research and Strategic Studies, said there is a possibility to thwart US President Donald Trump's “deal”, whether it is revealed in June (as announced by Trump's son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner) or if it is postponed once again as a sign of the difficulties it is facing. It is also a way to divert attention from what is happening on the ground. It also prevents Palestinians from taking steps to thwart the deal, because they cannot reject something that has not yet been officially proposed. The team working on the US deal are Zionists who are competing with the staunchest and most radical Zionists. Al-Masry said that the proposal could be in the form of visions and ideas, rather than a specific plan, which implies it is flexible and can be moulded in order to lure Arabs and Palestinians into accepting it or coexisting with it. This would be the start of a new and long political process that does not seek peace, but rather to cover up steps to dismantle the Palestinian cause. Al-Masry added that the deal — if it is ever revealed — will not contain terms acceptable to the Palestinians, and will not aim for peace but rather to bait a Palestinian refusal that will justify Israel annexing more than 60 per cent of the West Bank. He believes that accepting the deal or considering it as the basis for negotiations is surrender, while rejecting it would be suicide if it is not followed by counter-measures. Thus, Palestinian rejection must be the start of steps to thwart the deal. Al-Masry said that the Palestinian strategy of wait and react is a waste of time. He cited how the decisions by the Central Council taken in March 2015 were referred to the National Council and then to committees. They then went back to the Central Council, the previous government, and finally to the incumbent cabinet, according to press statements after the recent meeting of the Central Committee. They finally reached the Central Council again, as Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas told a meeting of Arab foreign ministers in Cairo recently. This means decisions would be taken as if they were never taken to begin with. Al-Masry said it is not enough for all factions and Abbas to verbally reject “Trump's deal” while everyone remains adamant about their stipulations to end divisions, which aid the deal. Neither is it enough to reject the deal but negotiate a truce for the Gaza Strip separately from the rest of the Palestinian territories or as a humanitarian or security issue, not one pertaining to the people's rights. It is not enough to suspend political contacts with the US administration while maintaining security communication with it, security coordination with Israel, and other Oslo requirements. Akram Attallah, a Palestinian political writer, referred to statements by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in his famous 2008 address at Bar Ilan University where he accepted to a two-state solution. After his address, Netanyahu went to his father's house who objected to the address, but the prime minister told his radical right wing father not to worry since he has raised the bar of conditions so high that Palestinians will reject it, which means Israel will not be responsible for obstructing the peace process and blame will fall solely on the Palestinians. Atallah said Ehud Barak did the same thing in 2000 when he was the leader of the Labour Party and pressured former US President Bill Clinton to hold a second Camp David summit which the Palestinians objected to in the beginning. At the time, Barak declared he “will not leave a single stone unturned to reach a settlement” to make him appear to be seeking peace. Once Barak realised that he could not reach an agreement with late President Yasser Arafat, the former proposed something that the latter would not accept, so in the eyes of the world the Palestinians were responsible for the collapse of talks. Atallah also cited that David Ben-Gurion, co-founder of Israel, accepted UN Resolution 181 on the partition of Palestine, which Arabs rejected at the time. Ben-Gurion wrote in his memoirs that he wanted more than the UN-allocated territories for the State of Israel, but accepted the resolution because he was certain Arabs would reject it and thus Israel would not be responsible for rejecting it and would continue to occupy more Palestinian territories due to Arab rejection. Atallah explained this is a very shrewd Israeli tactic, facing off with a seemingly amateur Palestinian stance that always rejects with bellicose statements without translating them into actionable policy. Grandstanding is successful in the court of public opinion, but does not make refusal a prelude for a counter plan. Atallah believes this is the predicament of Palestinian policy since it assumes that declaring a position is in lieu of a plan, and all it needs to do is state its position and move on. After every incident, Palestinians are pushed further into a corner by Israel. This has happened with Ben-Gurion, and Barak when Palestinians at Camp David seemed to miss an opportunity, which then justified killing Palestinians during the Second Intifada. “There is Palestinian consensus in rejecting the Deal of the Century, as expected,” he said, but warned that this plays into Israel's previous tactics that always push Palestinians to refuse. Atallah added that the US administration will lure Palestinians to loudly reject the deal, then blame them for its failure. This gives Israel carte blanche since it “is not to blame for failure and agreed to settle, but the Palestinians are the ones that don't want a solution”, as Netanyahu and other Israeli officials often claim. Atallah explained that Palestinian refusal this time will be used to end the issue once and for all, dismantle the Palestinian cause, and implement all of Israel's policies at once. He said Netanyahu was not deceptive this time when he spoke of a final partition between the Gaza Strip and West Bank, to complete the project of the Gaza entity and control of the West Bank. “But how can most of the West Bank be annexed?” he asked. “The Palestinians must first reject an absurd plan, which is what the US administration is making.” Hany Habib, a Palestinian writer and political analyst, said: “First as Palestinians, and second as Arabs, we must close ranks in the face of this onslaught. It's not just about making declarations and pronouncements; we must create an effective mechanism of confrontation. First and foremost, this means to stop diagnosing and warning about threats, instead taking charge and having determination to revise and evaluate. We must start with ourselves, each faction and each leadership, if we are truly determined to confront the plan. Otherwise, we will continue pointing fingers and not take responsibility. Trump's Deal of the Century plan will be rammed through without anyone stopping it.” Habib said it is important to be able to revise and adjust tactics to serve the national cause without partisanship. “We need to do more than denounce and move on,” he said. Washington has denied reports that the US “Deal of the Century” suggests creating a union between Jordan, the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Israel. The US envoy to the Middle East peace process, Jason Greenblatt, also denied reports that the deal includes allocating part of the Sinai to Gaza. An official source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the deal does not include an exchange of land since the notion of an independent Palestinian state within the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as its capital is no longer on the table. “There will be generous reparations to Palestinians who can prove their direct ownership of the land,” the source said. Regarding refugees, the deal recognises their number as between 30,000-60,000 Palestinians who will be repatriated in Palestinian self-rule areas in the West Bank or Gaza Strip if they choose. Meanwhile, a fund will be created to compensate the descendants of those “forced” to leave their homes during the 1948 war, but they will not be recognised as refugees. The deal also focuses on “economic incentives”, including building a large port in Gaza and a land corridor between Gaza and the West Bank, as well as “creative ways for air transportation to and from Gaza”, according to the source. Also, boosting technology production in Area A, which is under the PA's security and administrative control in the West Bank, based on the Oslo Accords.
