Disarming Resistance Only A Fantasy: Palestinian Analyst
The weapon of resistance can have two fates: either it serves the freedom and dignity of nations, or the earth is emptied of free people, Adnan Al-Sabah added, speaking in an interview with IQNA about the recent developments in Gaza and the latest moves by the Israeli regime with the green light from the United States.
“Therefore, as long as the occupation and aggression continue, the weapon of resistance is legitimate and valid,” he emphasized.
Adnan al-Sabah is a veteran Palestinian intellectual and journalist and the head of the Jenin Media Center. He was the founder and president of the International Campaign to Document War Crimes and a founding member of the Palestinian Writers’ Union in al-Quds, where he served on its board for several terms.
The interview is as follows:
IQNA: Today, some official Arab regimes are counting on the role of America and Trump’s “peace plan”. What do you think about this initiative? Can it lead to the end of war and the beginning of peace, as its supporters say?
Al-Sabah: The American project is essentially based on declaring war on the world from within the world itself. The United States seeks to build a new world; a world under its own domination and control, not by regulating equal relations, but by devouring others. This desire for domination makes sense in the context of the developments of the “knowledge-based” era, where the knowledge economy has become a tool for American epistemic imperialism.
Therefore, America should not be seen as seeking peace; on the contrary, it is laying the foundation for a network of wars with new forms and patterns. The war between Ukraine and Russia is in fact “America’s war” conducted by the tools of others: Ukraine fights on behalf of Washington, Europe pays the costs, and the final profits flow into the American treasury. The result is the weakening of Russia and, at the same time, the economic erosion of Europe.
In the Middle East, the US has also changed the form of war and created artificial conflicts between domestic actors – between the Lebanese government and the resistance (Hezbollah), between Ansarullah and mercenaries in Yemen, and between the government and the resistance forces in Iraq and Syria. The result is the destruction of the national and economic structures of the countries and the expansion of the area of direct American influence.
Washington is trying to open its land route of influence from occupied Palestine to the South Caucasus and behind the Russian and Iranian fronts with plans such as the “David Corridor” and the “Zangezur Corridor,” a plan that has been falsely called the “Trump Peace Plan”. In Iraq and Iran, it is also seeking to contain and weaken the axis of resistance by continuing sanctions and engineering internal disputes.
From Latin America to Africa and from South Asia to the South China Sea, Washington is trying to engage and wear down all competitors – from China to Europe – either by inciting conflicts (such as India and Pakistan, or Syria and Libya and Sudan) or by forming military alliances (such as AUKUS) in order to remain the undisputed leader of the global system.
Trump has clearly stated this philosophy: “The best war is the one in which you do not participate and you win.” They want peace by force and through the surrender of others. All of these plans have one goal: to destroy the axis of resistance and eliminate Iran’s role in the region, paving the way for the American empire.
IQNA: Hamas is said to be committed to implementing the ceasefire agreement in Gaza with full confidence and determination, while this ceasefire is fragile and the Zionist regime has a long history of violating agreements. How do you assess the future of this process?
Al-Sabah: I do not believe that this agreement will have a better fate than previous agreements. It is enough to look at the experience of Lebanon in November 2024 or the Syrian case; from the understandings between the Jolani group and the Syrian government to the relationship of the “SDF” with the United States and Turkey - none of them led to stability. In different regions of Syria, from the Jabal al-Arab to the east and northeast of the country, the presence of the United States and its affiliated groups has only led to an escalation of the conflicts.
Washington’s policy is the same everywhere: we do not fight, but we force others to fight each other, and we ourselves play the role of an observer and supplier of weapons. In the case of Gaza, no serious provisions of the ceasefire were implemented from the beginning: opening of crossings, entry of aid, or resettlement of refugees. The share of food in the total incoming aid may reach 15 percent; but water, electricity, shelter and reconstruction of the ruins remain unresolved.
The excuse of “(captives’) corpses” has become a tool for pressure on the resistance, while the Zionist regime’s army itself may be in possession of some of the bodies and hiding them to keep the crisis alive. In the end, only the resistance is truly committed to the ceasefire, because it considers it a humanitarian necessity to end the bloodbath. But Washington has not yet retreated from its main goals: controlling Gaza and turning it into a base for regional military operations. Trump’s words about transferring Palestinians to the deserts of Egypt and Jordan remain their main policy. The future of the agreement depends only on the persistence of the resistance and the ability to build a regional front against this project - a front that was born from the ‘Al-Aqsa Flood’ (Operation) and two years of continuous resistance.
IQNA: Part of the agreement is subject to the release of prisoners, but some fear that Israel will violate the agreement after this part is realized. Is it possible that the Zionist enemy will mess everything up again?
Al-Sabah: The Zionist regime is fundamentally not interested in the complete release of prisoners, because lies and deception are always part of its nature. It may even have found some of the bodies and hidden them in order to make the crisis permanent with the “one missing person” scheme. On the other hand, there is no sign of a desire for a real withdrawal from Gaza. The entry of 200 American officers into the occupied territories under the title of “Civil-Military Coordination Center” is not to monitor the ceasefire, but to establish a permanent presence. More than sixty ceasefire violations have been recorded and no practical clause has been implemented by the regime.
Contrary to the propaganda about the “Palestinian state,” there is no sign of its realization in the current plan. The goal is the complete separation of Gaza from the Palestinian territory and the elimination of the role of al-Quds, and in the West Bank, de facto domination is also being pursued without a formal declaration of annexation. In Gaza, there is also a systematic effort to create mercenary and paramilitary groups against the resistance; the same ones that are supposed to be supported by the US under the name of the “Gaza Stability Force”. This plan is designed to incite internal conflict and deny the responsibility of the occupier. If the Palestinian forces cannot achieve real unity, a single management, and a common national vision, all the achievements of the last two years are at risk of being destroyed.
IQNA: After the ceasefire, will the Zionist regime really adhere to a complete withdrawal from Gaza? And can Washington or Trump be considered a neutral mediator and guarantor of an agreement?
Al-Sabah: The United States has never been a neutral mediator in any war. Just as it had assumed the role of mediator in the Ukraine war while directly intervening, it plays exactly the same role in the Palestinian issue. This is the country that provided deadly weapons to the occupying regime, saved it from any condemnation in the United Nations with its veto, and officially confirmed the occupation of al-Quds, the Golan, and the Mount of Olives as an “accepted fact”.
Read More:
The United States remained silent about the occupation of Lebanon and Syria, and even made threats in the name of Israel against the Beirut government in the five-party joint committee on Lebanon. The fact is that the final decision is made not in Tel Aviv but in Washington. No other country can be found where its president, defense minister, and foreign minister attend the meetings of another country’s war council; but this happened in Israel’s recent war. Figures like Kushner and Witkoff were present at the meetings of the Tel Aviv war cabinet and played a direct role in planning military operations. Therefore, the US is neither a mediator nor a guarantor of peace; rather, it is the main employer of the “mercenary killer”, namely the Zionist regime. This country owns a project of war, destruction, and plunder in the Middle East; a project whose ultimate goal is to dominate the Middle East and, through it, the entire world.
IQNA: Some believe that the current stage has created a new balance between the axis of resistance and the axis of compromise. How do you picture the future of this situation?
Al-Sabah: Today, the world is faced with two fronts: the resistance front on the one hand, and the Zionist-American front and its allies on the other. The recent war has fundamentally changed the composition of these fronts and the political map of the region. Two new axes have emerged in the Middle East; the first axis is the so-called “guarantor” countries, namely Egypt, Turkey and Qatar, which, although they have balanced relations with the United States, have become closer to the resistance due to the increasing threat from the Zionist regime. Opposite them is another axis that includes Saudi Arabia, the Emirates and parts of the official Lebanese structure and is trying to expand its influence in the reconstruction of Gaza with financial support.
Jordan’s role in this is decisive, because the fate of this country is as tied to the West Bank as the fate of Egypt is to Gaza. The Omanis’ hesitation or change of position could determine whether the Palestinian Authority will lean towards the Cairo axis or Riyadh. A similarly complex situation is unfolding in Syria: will the armed groups led by Jolani join the Saudi axis or Turkey? Alongside these changing alignments, the Palestinian resistance has today become a constant pillar of the resistance axis. Its connection with Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Iran is no longer merely political, but a human one.
Read More:
The blood of martyred commanders and fighters in common fields clearly demonstrates the depth and meaning of this unity. Moreover, from Latin America and Africa to Asia, nations and governments are joining a humane and just front against US hegemony. If Iran can express its philosophy and discourse of resistance - which is based on justice, eliminating oppression, and defending the oppressed - in a global language, then we will witness the formation of a new phenomenon: not a bipolar world, but a world with two opposing fronts; one on the axis of resistance and the other on the axis of American domination. In this case, Russia, China, and even parts of Europe can also stand on the side of the front of global justice. The future of the battle is no longer simply regional; it has taken on a civilizational form.
IQNA: The United States and Israel are trying to disarm the Islamic resistance in the region. What strategy is Iran adopting in these circumstances, and is it possible that the weapon of resistance will be destroyed?
Al-Sabah: In my opinion, talking about ‘disarming the resistance’ is nothing more than a fantasy, because it means stripping the people of their will and identity. Has the United States been able to take the weapon of the Yemeni revolution during a decade of war? A poor and besieged country that has lived in the fire of war for years, but is still standing. Or was it able to bring Iran to its knees in the twelve-day war (in June)? Never. Therefore, disarming the resistance in practice means destroying the people of those lands. As long as the people of Gaza, Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen exist, the resistance and its weapons also exist; the two are inseparable.
The weapon of resistance can have two fates: either it becomes a free and independent national weapon, a weapon serving the freedom and dignity of nations, or the earth is emptied of free people. Therefore, as long as the occupation and aggression continue, the weapon of resistance is legitimate and established. The day when freedom, independence, and full rights of nations are realized, the same weapon will be at the service of the free homeland. But if the enemies can crush the people and make them surrender, then the weapon will become an instrument of domination. As long as the nations are alive, their weapon is also alive; because it is a weapon of freedom, not of war.
4313471
