Gaza War and the Gap Between Arab Street and Regimes

Highlighting the growing gap between the Arab street and official regimes amid rising normalization with Israel.

Gaza War and the Gap Between Arab Street and Regimes
Gaza War and the Gap Between Arab Street and Regimes

In the midst of what has been described as a genocide, the confrontation is no longer limited to the military field but has extended to the realm of narrative and global awareness. For the first time, Israel appears to be in a losing position regarding its image and legitimacy.

With rising international condemnations and expanding protests in the West, a heavy official Arab silence reflects the fragility of the political reality and the fragmentation of positions. This report is part of the episode 'Falling Masks' from the 'Boycott' program, where the full episode can be viewed via the following link (Video - Al Jazeera 360).

Event Details

Former Jordanian Minister of Industry and Trade, Jawad Anani, believes that the talk of a 'unified Arab world' is no longer realistic, given the lack of homogeneity among Arab countries. He emphasized that what remains of a common Arab identity is limited to language and culture, calling for a revival of this spirit as a means to regain at least a minimum of unity.

In the Arab street, as the report indicates, there are hearts yearning and tongues speaking of Palestine, that deep wound in the consciousness of the peoples. However, political calculations are moving in a different direction, as countries avoid engaging in uncalculated conflicts or paying the price of confrontation with a merciless power. Here, the contrast between suppressed popular anger and cautious official positions becomes evident.

Background & Context

Opposition journalist Hossam Abdullah points to a clear gap between the popular stance in solidarity with Gaza and the official position, attributing this to the absence of democracy and mechanisms for expression in the Arab world. According to the report, the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel in 1979 is widely viewed as the beginning of the disintegration of the Arab strategic position. This was followed by the Madrid negotiations in 1991, which brought Arab countries together with Israel despite the ongoing settlement expansion.

With the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, core issues were postponed to a 'final solution' that has not materialized. Then came the Wadi Araba Agreement in 1994, leading to the Abraham Accords in 2020, which expanded the normalization track without putting an end to the occupation or paving the way for the establishment of a Palestinian state, amid a gradual decline in the status of the Palestinian cause in the Arab political scene.

Impact & Consequences

In this context, the Secretary-General of the Palestinian Initiative Movement, Mustafa Barghouti, stated that the justifications offered by some Arab governments for their positions remain unconvincing, clarifying that what is required is not sending armies to fight Israel, which is unrealistic, but rather taking more effective political stances. He confirmed that this demand will remain, supported by the rising popular pressure in several Arab countries.

For his part, Mohammed Nwajaa, coordinator of the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) movement, asserts that normalization remains confined to the level of regimes, while it has failed to penetrate Arab societies. He pointed out that the aftermath of October 7 revealed how far these agreements are from the concept of 'real peace.'

Regional Significance

With the escalation of violence, the boycott has emerged as a tool of popular pressure. Omar Barghouti, founder of the Boycott movement, believes that the most dangerous forms of normalization are cultural and scientific, due to their direct impact on awareness. In this context, Mustafa Barghouti noted that Arab governments remain hesitant to adopt the boycott, while the people are actively practicing it, pointing to clear examples in Jordan, Morocco, and Egypt, where communities reject normalization despite the existence of official agreements.

According to Anani, the popular stance is freer and more influential than the official one, which remains constrained by international pressures, especially from the United States. On the Palestinian front, Nwajaa points out that the weakness of political will within the Palestinian Authority represents a major challenge, especially regarding the economic disengagement from the occupation, despite the necessary capabilities being available.

Internationally, South Africa's experience in resisting apartheid is recalled, as activist Naomi Tutu sees the similarities between the two experiences, making her country's support for Palestine a natural extension of its historical path. In the West, popular protests against government support for Israel are rising, with activist and singer Kareem Dennis (Loki) asserting that popular movements have proven their ability to influence despite repression, noting that this struggle requires increasing sacrifices.

The debate also extends to the sports field, with accusations of double standards, where swift sanctions are imposed in other international crises, while Israel faces no similar measures. Ehabb Maharmeh, a researcher at the University of Sussex, indicates that sports boycotts have played an important role in many political conflicts, where international championships have served as a platform for expressing competition and hostility between countries, whether during the two World Wars or the Cold War period.

He points out that the pivotal moment in the sports boycott against the apartheid regime in South Africa and Rhodesia was linked to two major events: the first was the International Olympic Committee's decision to expel the apartheid regime in South Africa from participating in the Tokyo Olympics in 1964, in response to pressure from over 50 African countries that demanded this. The second event was the expulsion of the Rhodesian regime from the Olympics during the 1970s, after similar pressures from African countries, which contributed to imposing international isolation on those regimes.

According to him, what is lacking in the Palestinian case today is a similar official Arab decision, based on pressure within international sports institutions, including the threat of suspending Arab participation if Israel's participation continues. In a growing expression of rejection of normalization with Israel, from stadiums to streets, and from factories to universities, the boycott is rising like a tidal wave in a battle of awareness, with more people joining every day.

What is the gap between the Arab street and the regimes?
The gap reflects a disparity in positions between popular support for the Palestinian cause and government stances that avoid confrontation.
How does the boycott affect normalization?
The boycott is a tool of popular pressure that reflects people's rejection of normalization with Israel and helps raise awareness of the Palestinian cause.
What lessons can be learned from international boycott experiences?
Experiences like the resistance against apartheid in South Africa provide lessons on how to use boycotts as an effective means for change.

· · · · · · · · ·