A Long History of Peace Deal Deceit

Trump’s “Peace 2025” plan continues the pattern of the “Deal of the Century” in 2020 and the “Oslo Accords” of 1993 — using the language of peace to prolong Palestinian occupation and land theft.

In light of Donald Trump and the entire Western empire gaslighting the world with yet another “peace deal” in the Middle East — one that offers neither peace nor the long-sought freedom of the Palestinian people — I want to remind you of the numerous “peace deals” this same gang of criminals has pushed before, including the latest one in Egypt just days ago.

Simultaneously, one year ago today, Yahya Sinwar was killed in the most legendary fashion imaginable — fighting the occupation to his last stick. These two events collide perfectly, demanding to be on your consciousness radar today.

The lastest was the so-called peace plan pompously called — “Deal of the Century” cooked up by Trump and his partner in crime Benjamin Netanyahu (or perhaps it’s the other way around) in 2018, and officially released in 2020.

The plan was as insulting to anyone’s intelligence as the one they’ve cooked up today. It allowed Israel to annex up to 40% of the West Bank, including all existing Israeli settlements and the Jordan Valley. Jerusalem would remain the undivided capital of Israel. Palestinians would be forced to accept Israeli security control over the entire region — and, of course, to demilitarize. The plan also effectively eliminated the right of return for Palestinian refugees to their homes inside Israel and sought to dissolve the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), which provides aid to Palestinian refugees.

So you see — this criminal gang has been at this for a long time, starting with the one behind the Oslo Accords, which served only as a Nobel Peace Prize grab, just as Trump now hopes to do. No one cares about the actual rights or lives of the Palestinian people. No one. It’s all political theater — then and now.

The Interview.

Francesca Borri from La Reppublica did a rare interview with Yahya Sinwar, published on October 5th, 2018, that I find fascinating. He discusses the “Deal of The Century.” There is no better material to read to fully understand the nuances of the Palestinian people and their resistance, than this interview. Especially after what we have witnessed for the past two years.

The face-off between Francesca’s Western mindset and his exhausting sarcasm and self-deprecation traits only possessed by those who have endured the toughest lives — plays out like a theater.

This is a must read. Not only because he laid his life for his people, but because it fills in so many blind spots you might have about why Palestinian resistance exists.

His answers are a fascinating read:

Francesca: I know next to nothing about you. You’re said to be quite private. A man of few words. You rarely speak with journalists. Actually, this is your first time with Western media. But you have been leading Hamas for more than a year. Why speak now?

Yahya: “Because now I see a real opportunity for change.”

F: An opportunity? Now?

Y: “Now. Yes.”

F: To be honest, what looks most likely here is rather a new war. I was in Gaza last June, and it was just as usual. Flying bullets, tear gas. Wounded everywhere. And then airstrikes, rockets. Other airstrikes. A golden opportunity to get shot. Since April, since the start of this latest wave of protests, you’ve had nearly 200 dead.

Y: “While on the other side, there was only one dead. And so, first of all, I would say that ‘war’ is quite a misleading word: it’s not that there is a war, and on other days we have peace. We are always under occupation. It’s a daily aggression. It’s just of varying intensity. But anyway: the truth is that a new war is in no one’s interest. For sure, it’s not in ours. Who would like to face a nuclear power with slingshots? But if we can’t win, for Netanyahu, a victory would be even worse than a defeat. Because it would be the fourth war. They should take over Gaza. And they are trying their best to get rid of the Palestinians of the West Bank, and keep a Jewish majority: I don’t think they want another two million Arabs. No. War achieves nothing.”

F: It sounds a bit odd, from someone who comes from the military wing of Hamas.

Y: “I am not the leader of a militia. I’m from Hamas. And that’s it. I am the Gaza leader of Hamas. Of something much more complex than a militia: a national liberation movement. And my main duty is to act in the interest of my people: to defend them, and their right to freedom and independence. You are a war correspondent. Do you like war?”

F: Not at all.

Y: “And so why should I? Whoever knows what war is, doesn’t like war.”

But you have been fighting for all your life.

Y: “And I am not saying I won’t fight anymore, indeed. I am saying that I don’t want war anymore. I want the end of the siege. You walk to the beach at sunset, and you see all these teenagers, on the shore, chatting, and wondering what the world looks like across the sea. What life looks like. It’s heartbreaking. And should break everybody. I want them free.”

F: Borders have been basically sealed off for 11 years. Gaza doesn’t even have water anymore. Only seawater. Salt water. How is living here?

Y: “What do you think? 55 percent of the population is under 15 years old. We are not speaking of “terrorists”: we are speaking of kids. They have no political affiliation. They have just fear. I want them free.”

F: 80 percent of the population depends on aid. And 50 percent is food insecure - 50 percent is hungry. According to the UN, shortly, Gaza will be unfit for life. But in these years, Hamas has found resources to dig its tunnels.

Y: “And luckily. Otherwise, we would all be dead. The way you see it, it’s the way the Zionist propaganda tells it. The siege didn’t follow the tunnels. It wasn’t a reaction to tunnels. It’s the other way round. There was a siege, and a humanitarian crisis, and to survive, we had no other option than to dig tunnels. There were times when even milk was banned.”

F: You know what I mean. Don’t you think you bear some responsibility?

Y: “Responsibility is on the besieger. Not on the besieged. My responsibility is to work with whoever can help us to end this deadly and unjust siege, and I am thinking especially of the international community. Because Gaza can’t go on like this. The situation here is unsustainable. And in this way, an explosion, an escalation is unavoidable.”

F: And so why didn’t you buy milk, rather than guns?

Y: “If we hadn’t bought guns, we wouldn’t be alive by now. We’ve bought it, don’t worry. We’ve bought milk, and much else: food, medicine. We are 2 million. Do you have any idea what does it mean to get food and medicine for 2 million people? Tunnels are used only minimally for resistance, and because otherwise you may not die of hunger, but you would die of airstrikes. And Hamas pays for resistance out of its own pocket, not with public funds. Out of its own pocket.”

F: So Hamas has been doing well in government.

Y: “What do you think? That being in power in Gaza is like being in power in Paris? We have been in power for years in many municipalities, exactly because of our reputation for efficiency and transparency. Then in 2006 we won the general elections: and we were blacklisted. There is no electricity, it’s true. And this affects everything else. But do you think that we have no engineers? That we are unable to build a turbine? Of course we are. But how? With sand? You can have the best surgeon in town: but you are expecting him to operate with fork and knife. Look at your skin: it’s already peeling away. Here if you arrive from outside, if you arrive from the world, you get sick straight away. What should grab your eye, is that we are still alive.”

F: And so now, Hamas is apparently thinking of a ceasefire. Negotiators are working around the clock. What do you mean by ceasefire?

Y: “I mean a ceasefire. Quietness. The end of the siege.”

F: Quietness for quietness.

Y: “No, wait. Quietness for quietness, and the end of the siege. A siege is not quietness.”

F: “And quietness... For how long?

Y: “That’s not the main issue, honestly. What really matters is rather what happens on the ground. Because if the ceasefire means that we don’t get bombed, but still we have no water, no electricity, nothing, still we are under siege, it makes no sense. Because the siege is a type of war: it’s just war through other means. And it’s also a crime, under international law. There’s no ceasefire under siege. But if we see Gaza returning to normalcy, on the contrary, if we see not only aid, but investments, development, because we are not beggars, we want to work, study, travel, like all of you — we want to live, and to stand on our own. If we start to see a difference, we can go on. And Hamas will do its best. But there is no security, no stability, neither here nor in the region, without justice. Without freedom and justice. I don’t want the peace of the graveyard.”

F: Ok, but... Maybe it’s just a trick to reorganize yourself. And in six months, to go back to war. Why should Israelis trust you?

Y: “First of all, I never went to war: war came to me. And my question, in all truth, is the opposite. Why should I trust them? They left Gaza in 2005: and they simply reshaped the occupation. They were inside: now they block borders. Who knows what’s really going on in their mind? And yet, that’s what trust is all about. And perhaps, that’s our mistake. We always think in terms of: the first step. Who’s gonna do the first step, you or me?”

F: Ok, but... Again. Should the ceasefire not work…

Y: '“But for once, can we imagine instead what happens, if it works? Because it might be a powerful motivation for doing our best to make it work, no? If for a moment we imagined Gaza as it actually was, not a long time ago — have you ever seen some photos of the 1950s? When in summer, we had tourists from everywhere?”

And Gaza had plenty of cafés, shops. Palm trees. I’ve seen those photos. Yes.

Y: “But today as well, have you seen how brilliant our youths are? Despite it all. How talented, how inventive, dynamic they are? With old fax machines, old computers, a group of twenty-somethings assembled a 3D printer: to produce the medical equipment that is barred from entry. That’s Gaza. We are not only destitution. Barefoot children. We can be like Singapore. Like Dubai. And let’s make time work for us. Heal our wounds. I have been in jail for 25 years. He lost a son [Sinwar points at one of his advisers, Ed.], killed in a raid. Your translator: he lost two brothers. The man who served us tea: his wife died from an infection, no big deal, a cut: but there were no antibiotics. And that’s how she died. For something any pharmacist could treat. Do you think it’s easy, for us? But let’s start with this ceasefire. Let’s give our kids the life we never had. And they will be better than us. With a different life, they will build a different future.”

F: You are giving up?

Y: “We’ve been struggling all our lives to get a normal life. A life free from occupation. From aggression. We are not surrendering. We are persisting.”

F: And during this ceasefire, Hamas would keep its weapons? Or you would accept, I don’t know, an international protection, like the blue helmets?

Y: “Like Srebrenica?”

F: I guess it’s a no.

Y: “You guessed right.”

F: Sorry if I persist at it, but should this ceasefire not work? Not to jinx it, but the past is not really encouraging. So far, hardliners have knocked down any deal attempt.

Y: “First of all, you seem to be quite confident; but there is no agreement yet. We are ready to sign it, Hamas and nearly all Palestinian groups, we are ready to sign it and comply with it; but for now, there is only the occupation. But having said that — if we will be attacked, that’s obvious, we will defend ourselves. As always. And we will have a new war. But then, in a year, you will be here again. And again I will be here to say — war achieves nothing.”

F: You have an iconic weapon: rockets. Quite makeshift rockets, actually, which are usually stopped by the Iron Dome. And to which Israel replies with its much more powerful missiles. Thousands of Palestinians have been killed. Have rockets been useful?

Y: “Let’s be clear: armed resistance is our right, under international law. But we don’t have only rockets. At all. We have been using a variety of means of resistance. Always. Such a question, honestly, is more for you than for me: for all of you journalists. We achieve the headlines only with blood. No blood, no news. But the problem is not our resistance: it is their occupation. With no occupation, we wouldn’t have rockets. We wouldn’t have stones, molotov cocktails. Nothing. We would all have a normal life.”

F: But do you think they have fulfilled their purpose?

Y: “Certainly not. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be here. But so, what about the occupation? What was its purpose? Raising killers? Have you watched the video where a soldier shoots at us as if we were bowling pins? And he laughs, and laughs. They were people like Freud, Einstein. Kafka. Experts of maths, of philosophy. Now they are experts of drones. Of extrajudicial executions.”

F: You now have a new iconic weapon: arson kites. They are driving Israel crazy. Because they elude the Iron Dome. And neither can they be shot down one by one.

Y: “Kites are not a weapon. At most, they set some stubble on fire. An extinguisher, and it’s over. They are not a weapon, they are a message. Because they are just twine and paper, and an oil-soaked rug, while each battery of the Iron Dome costs 100 million dollars. Those kites say: you are immensely more powerful. But you will never win. Really. Never.”

F: West Bank Palestinians face the same occupation, and yet they opted for quite a different strategy. Appealing to the UN. To the international community.

Y: “And that’s crucial. All is crucial. It’s all means of resistance. But, if I may say so, sorry, when it comes to Palestine, the international community is a part of the problem. When we won the elections, and we won a free and fair election, the reaction was a blockade. Immediately. We’ve proposed a government with Fatah, and not one time, a hundred times: nothing. The only reply has been the blockade. If it turned out the way it did, it is also your fault [of the international community]. And now, too. You warn Hamas: We’ll deal with you only if there is Fatah. Then you warn Fatah: We’ll deal with you only if there isn’t Hamas. The rift we have been so criticized for is also an effect of the blockade. Of your pressures. Those are, sometimes, nothing but threats.”

F: The blockade is because Hamas is viewed as an antisystemic movement. As an unconstitutional movement, so to speak. That doesn’t abide by the rules of the game.

Y: “Which game? The occupation?”

F: You know. Oslo. The two-state solution.

Y: “But Oslo is over. I think that’s the only point everyone agrees upon, here. It’s been simply an excuse to distract the world with endless negotiations, and in the meantime, build settlements everywhere, and physically erase any feasibility of a Palestinian state. 25 years have come and gone. And what did we get? Nothing. But most of all, why do you insist on always mentioning Oslo? Why do you never speak of what happened later? Like the National Unity Document, for instance. Based on the well-known 2006 Prisoners’ Document. And that outlines our current strategy, I mean, Hamas, Fatah, all of us, all together: a state along 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital. And with the right of return for refugees, of course. 12 years have come and gone. And you keep on asking: Why don’t you accept the 1967 borders? I’ve got the feeling that the problem is not on our side.”

F: The international community spends a million dollars on the Palestinians.

Y: “Spends. Exactly. It simply spends. Wrongly. You honoured the Oslo Accords with a Nobel Peace Prize, and you vanished. Nobody monitored their implementation. The key question is: Was it the right strategy to help establish our own state, and all its institutions? And among other things, I have to remind you that the 4th Geneva Convention is clear: the cost of the occupation is on the shoulders of the occupier. It’s not your job to build roads. Schools. And above all, to rebuild again what they demolished. Instead of opposing the occupation, you make it easier.”

F: Anyway, the staunchest opponent of this ceasefire seems to be not Israel, which is now focused on Iran, but Fatah. Which fears it might be a Hamas success.

Y: “A success? This ceasefire is not for Hamas or Fatah: it is for Gaza. And then, look. For me, what matters is that you finally realize that Hamas is here. That it exists. That there is no future without Hamas, there is no possible deal whatsoever, because we are part and parcel of this society, even if we lose the next election. We are a piece of Palestine. More so than that, we are a piece of the history of the entire Arab world, which includes Islamists as well as seculars, nationalists. Leftists. All that said, let’s avoid the word success, please. It’s outrageous for all the terminally ill patients who are right now at the border, waiting for it to open. For all the fathers who won’t dare to look at their kids tonight, because they won’t have a meal. What success are we talking about?”

F: You went to jail when you were 27. And when you got out, you were 50. How was readjusting to life? To the world?

Y: “When I entered, it was 1988. There was still the Cold War. And here, the Intifada. To spread the latest news, we printed fliers. I came out, and I found the internet. But to be honest, I never came out. I have only changed prisons. And despite it all, the old one was much better than this one. I had water, electricity. I had so many books. Gaza is much tougher.”

F: What have you learned from prison?

Y: “A lot. Prison builds you. Especially if you are Palestinian, because you live amid checkpoints, walls, restrictions of all kinds, and only in prison you finally meet other Palestinians, and you have time for talking, for thinking. Thinking about yourself, too. About what you believe in, the price you are willing to pay. But it’s as if now I ask you: what have you learned from war? You would say: A lot. You would say: War builds you. But for sure, you would not like to have ever been in a war. I have learned a lot, yes. But I don’t wish prison on anybody. Not even to those who today, across that barbed wire, knock us down like bowling pins and laugh, and don’t realize that they might end up for 25 years in the Hague.”

F: In the International Criminal Court.

Y: “Of course. Because again: there’s no future without justice. And we’ll seek justice.”

F: But you know that some Palestinians, too, might end up in the Hague.

Y: “Under international law, we have the right to resist the occupation. But the Court is the Court, of course. And it will work on whatever it has to work on. And yet, its role is essential. And not only because to stop crimes, it’s essential to punish criminals. Its role is essential for the victims as well. Because only a trial allows a reconstruction of what happened, and in this way, its processing, somehow. When it comes to grief, no third party can replace the victims. No political deal whatsoever can overcome their loss. And move on. That’s up to the victims.”

F: You were released in the Gilad Shalit swap. And Hamas currently has two Israelis, plus the remains of two soldiers killed during the last war. In a ceasefire deal, I guess the prisoner swap for you would be an essential clause.

Y: “More than essential. A must. It isn’t a political issue: for me, it is a moral issue. Your readers probably believe that if you are in jail, you are a terrorist or somehow an outlaw. A car thief. No. We all get arrested, sooner or later. But literally. All of us. Take a look at Military Order 101. Without an army authorization, it’s a crime even to wave a flag, or be in more than ten people in the same room for a tea, chatting about politics. Imagine, for example, you are just chatting about Trump, but you can be sentenced to up to 10 years. Somehow, it’s a rite of passage. It’s our coming of age. Because if there is something we are united by, something that really makes us all equal, all Palestinians, it is prison. And for me, it is a moral obligation: I will try more than my best to free those who are still inside.”

F: In some way, you achieved more through kidnappings than through rockets.

Y: “Which kidnappings?”

F: Like Gilad Shalit’s.

Y: “Gilad Shalit wasn’t a hostage; he was a war prisoner. You see why we rarely speak with journalists? A soldier gets killed, and you publish a photo where he is on the beach, and your readers think that we shot him in Tel Aviv. No. That guy wasn’t killed while wearing Bermuda shorts and carrying a surfboard, but while wearing a uniform, carrying an M16, and firing on us.”

F: And with the ceasefire?

Y: “With the ceasefire, no one will fire on us, right? And so no one will be captured?”

F: You were talking of prison. Of coming of age. Hamas turned 30. How did you change?

Y: “How did you see all this, thirty years ago?”

F: Thirty years ago, I was 8 years old.

Y: “And that’s it: we changed as you changed. As everybody changed. It was 1988: and as I told you, we still had the Cold War. And the world was much more ideological than today. Much more in black and white. Friends and enemies. And our world, too, was a bit like that. Then, over time, you learn that you can find friends, and enemies, also where you wouldn’t expect.”

F: Hamas Charter is still quite black and white.

Y: “That’s our first document. And perhaps, what do you think, the last ones matter more? Why do you ask me about a Charter of 30 years ago, and not the one that followed it? And the one that shows all our evolution? Dozens and dozens of documents. It’s all there. Our relationship with civil society, and with other political groups, the regional context. The international context. And the occupation, of course. The answer to all your questions is there. And truthfully, we expected you to see that, get the signal, and start a dialogue with Hamas. Because again, we are not a transitory phenomenon. There is no future without Hamas. And yet you keep asking about something from 30 years ago. And about Oslo. And so, as for Oslo, I’ve got the feeling that the problem is not on our side.”

F: And whose is the problem?

Y: “Of all those who still view us as an armed group, and nothing more. You don’t have any idea of what Hamas really looks like. Just a glimpse: half of our employees are women. Would you ever guess that? You focus on resistance, on the means, rather than the goal, which is a state based on democracy, pluralism. Cooperation. A state that protects rights and freedom. And where differences are faced through words. Not through guns. Hamas is much more than its military operations. It’s in our DNA. We are first and foremost a social movement. Not just a political movement. We set up soup kitchens, schools, hospitals. To do your part, you don’t need to be the Minister of Welfare. If you are Hamas, you are a citizen before being a voter.”

F: Most of my readers, yet, think of Hamas, and don’t think of charities. They rather think of the Second Intifada. Of suicide attacks. And for Israelis, you are a terrorist.

Y: “And that’s what they are for me - in light of their crimes against us.”

F: But for your children, what kind of life do you hope for?

Y: “A life as Palestinians, of course. Head high. Always. Despite it all, I hope they will be strong and keep on struggling till the day they get freedom and independence. I want my kids to dream of becoming doctors, not to treat only the wounded, but cancer. Like all the kids in the world. I want them to be safe as Palestinians, so that they can be much more than just Palestinians.”

F: I forgot to ask you about the Deal of the Century. Of Donald Trump’s peace plan. Even though it’s not very clear what it’s all about. There’s nothing on paper.

Y: “It’s actually a very clear obliteration of any of our prospects of freedom and independence. There’s no sovereignty, no Jerusalem. No right of return. There is only one stance: our NO. And that’s not only Hamas’ position. That’s something we all agree about. No.”

F: And so, for now, you will go on with protests. With the demonstrations that you started in April. Every Friday. Along the fence. You’ve been seen there quite often.

Y: “And I’ll tell you two names only: Ibrahim Abu Thuraja and Fadi Abu Salah. They were both 29. And they were both in wheelchairs. Just two of the many amputees of the last wars. And that’s when you realize that here you don’t get killed because you are a danger, because what a danger you are, in a wheelchair, for an army that is across a barbed wire, hundreds of meters away from you? No. Here, you don’t get killed for what you do, but for what you are. You get killed because you are Palestinian. You don’t stand a chance.”

F: Should you sum up all this in one sentence? All that you said. In one sentence only. What’s the message you would like readers to remember the most?

Y: “It’s time for a change. It’s time to end this siege. End this occupation.”

F: And do you think you will be believed?

Y: “Look. You were here in June. Together with hundreds of other journalists. And your reportage was the toughest one, with us. And you are also translated into Hebrew. And yet you are here. Again. Because you deeply respect us, and we deeply respect you. Sometimes, somehow, the messenger is also the message. You will leave now and write it all. Will you be read? Will you be listened to? I don’t know. But we have done our part.”

F: “You seem to be quite confident.”

Y: “I’m just realistic. It’s time for a change.”

Before you go.

I want you to marinate on this interview. Before October 7th and everything you’ve witnessed since, before your friends or colleagues try to sway you with statements like “but they won the land in the fair war of ‘67”—know the history, understand the context, and know what preceded the last two years of a genocide you’ve witnessed, livestreamed on your phone:

Haifa Massacre 1937, Jerusalem Massacre 1937, Haifa Massacre 1938, Balad al-Sheikh Massacre 1939, Haifa Massacre 1939, Haifa Massacre 1947, Abbasiya Massacre 1947, Al-Khisas Massacre 1947, Bab al-Amud Massacre 1947, Jerusalem Massacre 1947, Sheikh Bureik Massacre 1947, Jaffa Massacre 1948, Deir Yassin Massacre 1948, Tantura Massacre 1948, Qibya Massacre 1953, Khan Yunis Massacre 1956, Jerusalem Massacre 1967, Sabra and Shatila Massacre 1982, Al-Aqsa Massacre 1990, Ibrahimi Mosque Massacre 1994, Jenin Refugee Camp April 2002, Gaza Massacre 2008-09, Gaza Massacre 2012, Gaza Massacre 2014, Gaza Massacre 2018-19, Gaza Massacre 2021, and Gaza Genocide 2023-24-25.

“But, it’s complicated.”

I have no better closer than Ta-Nehisi Coates, when he was told that the conflict in Palestine was “complicated”, he called that word “horseshit.”

He answered: “Complicated was how people had described slavery and then segregation. It’s complicated when you want to take something from somebody.”