لحظة ادراك

 The Camel’s Load Killed It

This ancient Arab proverb tells the story of a camel famed for its strength and endurance. Over time, its owners, impressed by its capabilities, kept piling more burdens on its back until the day came when the camel collapsed and perished under the weight. This camel’s tale mirrors the current reality of Jenin Camp in the West Bank and, simultaneously, the situation in Gaza, particularly Jabalia Camp in the north. While there are differences in the origins of the chaos and the accumulation of deadly burdens, both reflect a shared path toward destruction. The gap between the folklore of our popular hero Yasser Arafat's saying, "From Jenin locusts to Jabalia locusts," and today spans nearly a quarter-century, during which circumstances have changed, driven by many actors.

According to the logic of academic studies and the invader's research centers, to destroy a heroic image and symbolic locations of your adversaries, you only need to encourage them to pile on more burdens, leading to their inevitable downfall. This is often achieved through propaganda, exaggeration, and shining a spotlight on them, creating a collective euphoria among Arab and Palestinian minds, unknowingly driving them toward what their enemies desire—by their own choices and free will.

One of the main reasons behind the failure of attempts to replicate the Palestinian struggle lies in the uniqueness of each successful phenomenon. It is impossible to recreate the exact context that allowed Yasser Arafat’s phenomenon to emerge, with its leadership vision, awareness of time and place, and the dynamics of that historical moment. These factors were thoroughly analyzed by invaders' research centers to derive lessons and develop strategies to counter such phenomena, while on the opposing side, there was ignorance—no research, no reviews, and no learning from history. This guaranteed failure.

Arafat’s principles—such as the assertion that "Our rifles are not for hire," the idea that an unpoliticized gun becomes a highway robber’s tool, and the sanctity of Palestinian blood—are no longer the prevailing ideology. They have been replaced by new concepts rooted in alliances, entanglements, and shifting from one sinking ship to another about to sink. The transition from nationalistic and pan-Arab options to Islamist ones under the shadow of Anglo-Saxon dominance has led to a time where "the ends justify the means," disregarding sanctities like blood, kinship, or national symbols.

What does it mean to insist on stockpiling arms exclusively in refugee camps? From a scientific and logical perspective, this invites adversaries to focus their efforts on specific locations. In the logic of alliances, it creates isolated armed factions outside the general national framework. Even the enemy, before the allies, recognizes that such efforts are strategically futile. Still, they are encouraged to persist, serving the broader adversarial project. Daily incursions, mass killings, and destruction of infrastructure continue, perpetuating a cycle of action and reaction that justifies these aggressions.

After the widespread destruction in Gaza and the leveling of Jabalia Camp, it’s hard to believe that Netanyahu’s government and its military would refrain from demolishing Jenin Camp, along with other camps in the West Bank, displacing their inhabitants and annexing large parts of the West Bank.

Some might argue that this critique suggests surrendering to the enemy’s project. To them, the response lies in a broader review of the Palestinian experience. This review must be grounded in science, not myths or vague rhetoric. Let’s simplify the discussion for the reader and avoid philosophical debates by comparing realities observed by every Palestinian—educated or not, inside or outside Palestine—focusing on the conditions in Gaza as the primary battleground.

The trajectory of military operations in Gaza, particularly in Jabalia, raises questions about concentrating resistance efforts in one area. This has led to unprecedented destruction and thousands of civilian and military casualties. Proponents of this strategy cite reasons like the area’s infrastructure, its dense population of fighters and their supporters, and its urban density. However, such justifications clash with military science, which emphasizes dispersion and avoiding concentrated enemy efforts on one location.

The stark disparity in capabilities between the resistance and its adversary is undeniable, and the cost of such concentration has proven devastating for the resistance and its civilian base. The resistance appears to have fallen into the trap of the so-called "generals’ plan," deliberately leaked by the Israeli media to provoke a response. Such plans, when publicized, often serve broader strategic goals. In this case, they led to the resistance’s catastrophic decision to concentrate in Jabalia, culminating in the separation of northern and southern Gaza and rendering northern areas uninhabitable.

While military mistakes during intense battles like in Jabalia might be understandable, the open gathering of armed groups in Jenin Camp is perplexing. Israeli forces have invaded and surrounded the camp multiple times since the October Hamas onslaught, each time leaving destruction and displacing residents for days. This recurring scenario raises critical questions. Can the armed groups defend the camp against the vastly superior Israeli forces? The logical answer is no. Do these groups still believe they can stand alone against Israel’s military might, given the fractures in their regional alliances? Again, the answer is no.

Thus, the logic driving these groups becomes apparent. They, along with their backers, are aware of these realities. Yet these groups represent the last card for shattered regional alliances, reluctant to dissolve because doing so would mean relinquishing the last semblance of power. This refusal sustains a dangerous illusion, keeping these groups active in the Palestinian political scene, regardless of the immense cost in blood and suffering.

Anyone who believes that societal settlements and local initiatives can resolve the situation in Jenin and other camps is delusional. The conflict’s projects are existential: to be or not to be. The sole beneficiary of this chaos is undoubtedly Israel.

In conclusion:

• The Middle East, and at its core the Palestinian issue, is becoming clearer. The decline of Iranian influence is evident, except to those clinging to illusions. The emerging regional order unequivocally rejects these proxies in decision-making circles, given the immense harm they have caused.
• Palestinian public opinion is gradually and voluntarily withdrawing its support for such factions after witnessing the catastrophic outcomes firsthand. However, this realization often comes only after paying a heavy price—a persistent flaw in Palestinian political thought, for which its intellectuals bear primary responsibility. Many have chosen silence or cautious neutrality, further compounding the tragedy.