Palestine and the map of the Middle East two decades after 9/11
Interview with Martín Martinelli
By Santiago Montag
Twenty years after the attack on the Twin Towers, the subsequent US invasion of Afghanistan on October 7, 2001, the recent US withdrawal from the country, and the Taliban's return to power, we sought to understand the impact of these events on the Palestinian struggle. To this end, we spoke with Martín Martinelli, historian and professor at the National University of Luján, and co-coordinator of the Special Group "Palestine and Latin America" of the Latin American Council of Social Sciences.
Tell us from your perspective what the geopolitical and historical place of the Palestinian people is in the context of the last few decades?
After the fall of the Berlin Wall, in the post-Cold War era, Israel's co-imperial role intensified, and the use of the concept of terrorism became more pronounced. In this way, the Soviet enemy was replaced by another: the "Arab-Muslim" enemy. This "new imperialism" manifests itself in the US ambition to reconfigure this region both symbolically and materially (which could be established in North Africa, the Middle East, and Central Asia—a region with an "Arab and Muslim" majority). And it materializes in the destruction we have witnessed in recent decades: the occupation of Afghanistan (2001–2021); the invasion of Iraq (2003), continuing the pattern established in 1991; the bombing of Libya (2011–present); and support for the destruction of Syria (2011) and Yemen (2015).
That is, to implement an imperial redesign, starting from a “constructive chaos,” which generated a scenario of political decay. However, in recent years, this has been overshadowed by the Russian resurgence, the rise of China, and the persistence of Iran and the Arab rebellions, which were later suppressed.
The United States, followed by Great Britain, France, and Germany, along with NATO, turned their attention to a region that holds approximately 65% of the world's proven oil and gas reserves and is also strategically important due to its proximity to China and Russia. It also encompasses key passages for international trade and shipping, such as the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf, the Suez Canal, and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait, as well as the Turkish Straits. Furthermore, the region has seen one of the largest acquisitions of armaments and military logistics in recent memory, with exponential growth over the last three decades.
The Palestinians, for their part, are seeking to reorganize and continue their political outreach, as well as their daily resistance. However, given the unconditional US-Israeli alliance, they have not perceived any improvement in their situation despite this retreat by the hegemonic power in the region. Several events have affected them, including the relocation of the US Embassy to Jerusalem and the attempted annexation of settlements in the West Bank. Furthermore, Israel pursued diplomatic “normalization” with Arab countries such as Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Sudan, and Morocco, building on the precedents of the US-brokered treaty between Egypt and Israel of 1978-1979 and the 1994 treaty with Jordan. However, even though these governments have moved in this direction, their populations have embraced the Palestinian cause as their own.
What impact did the battery of US neoconservative policies against Muslim Arabs, expressed in the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 and then Iraq in 2003, have on the Palestinian struggle that was then going through the Second Intifada?
The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) advocated for global hegemony and the American capacity to wage multiple wars simultaneously. In 2001, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), led by China and Russia, was proclaimed, and a few months later Bush announced the “war on terror,” and in October he attacked Afghanistan under a series of unproven pretexts.
There, among other objectives, a pincer or butterfly effect was attempted against Iran, originating from Iraq and Afghanistan. It is crucial to understand how these three countries went from being aligned with Western policy to becoming its enemies in three consecutive decades: Iraq in 1979, Afghanistan in 1991, and Afghanistan in 2001, the latter two through direct invasion. This illustrates the fluctuations of alliances and how countries can be attacked shortly after becoming allies. Added to this is the constant instigation of minority factions to oppose central state powers.
Some mainstream media outlets justified these incursions. They attempted to portray the conflicts in the region as religious or cultural in nature, through the "clash of civilizations" theory. They intentionally omit the fact that the invasions, or even the confrontations in the area, stem from political and economic issues, where religion is also a factor, but not the most dominant one. Furthermore, there is a double standard: some countries with these characteristics are considered enemies, while others remain allies.
This situation, which once again transformed the Arab-Muslim world into a group of enemy countries, harmed the Palestinian people. At that time, suicide attacks were tragically used against Israel, in an exchange of asymmetrical violence. The Second Intifada once again demonstrated the power of local resistance through massive mobilizations that showcased an active stance against the occupation. This was also seen, for example, in the Great March of Return in 2018-2019.
In 2006, the last legislative elections were held in Palestine, which Hamas won, but the results were later invalidated by international commissions. Following this, internal divisions within the Palestinian territories increased among political factions, coinciding with a shift to the right within Israeli politics. This shift aimed, among other things, to further divide and deepen the political fragmentation of the Palestinians, a trend that was further solidified when Israel built the Wall.
After 20 years, how does the US withdrawal affect the situation amidst recent events that have brought the Palestinian cause back to the forefront (such as the struggle of Sheikh Jarrah's residents and the resistance at the Temple Mount in Jerusalem that led to the bombing of Gaza and then a general strike led by young people), and on the other hand, a new far-right government in Israel?
Israel (which the United States assures of a “qualitative military advantage” in the region), along with Saudi Arabia (the backbone of the petrodollar), underpins Anglo-American policies toward the region. These policies are divided between a “globalist” position that would support pacification and a “Americanist” position that persists in a warmongering approach, along with the management of NATO and the revival of the QUAD (alliance between Australia, Japan, India, and the United States) and now AUKUS (Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States). The post-Soviet space is central to the global competition for spheres of influence and resources. Under NATO, the Anglo-American alliance seeks to militarily encircle the USSR and then Russia. However, the United States' quagmire in Central Asia and the Middle East demonstrates that military supremacy does not necessarily translate into the results of interventions.
In the Palestinian case in particular, the general strike demonstrated a Palestinian reunification across its diverse geographical realities (the West Bank, Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem, Israel itself, and the neighboring countries of Syria, Jordan, and Lebanon), which could mark a new course for Palestinian society. However, it remains to be seen how this will resolve a situation that, over time—and this is a crucial point—has worsened. This is evidenced both by the growth of settlements and by Israel's 2018 law on a Jewish state, which seeks supremacy and aims to deny Palestinians the right to join Israel or to enjoy the attributes of a sovereign state of their own.
The recent changes in Israeli administrations have not altered the stance of the expansionist “Greater Israel,” which pursues three policies toward Palestine. Master plan To Judaize Jerusalem, a process of de-Arabization. Second, an attempt to annex the West Bank; here the demographic and political majority issues arise, given that there are almost seven million Palestinians and Israelis within the territory corresponding to British Mandate Palestine. This is based on structural racism, similar to what we see in the Black Lives Matter movement. And third, it is supported by a policy of blockade and recurring invasions of the Gaza Strip since 2006. Meanwhile, the enclosure of the bantustans and the Wall are increasing, along with checkpoints and routes that confiscate land and resources, while the various Palestinian settlements in the West Bank are being subdivided.
What scenario do you see for the Palestinian people in this context of the United States withdrawing not only from Afghanistan but from the entire Middle East to concentrate on Asia Pacific?
The Palestinian people continue their struggle for self-determination, regardless of whether a binational or two-state solution is possible. While acknowledging the decades-long and steadily intensifying occupation, the possibility remains that the elections scheduled for this year could be revived. At the same time, the application of a [unspecified] [constitutional framework] is internationally recognized. apartheid about its population, but that has not yet substantially changed its reality.
Among the forms of Palestinian resistance and international solidarity with their cause, we find the BDS campaign, Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (related to the South African one), which opposed the declarations of the International Remembrance Alliance. Holocaust, to reject the assimilation between Judeophobia (anti-Semitism) as a form of racism and anti-Zionism, as a rejection of Israeli policies towards the Palestinians.
The US withdrawal is visible in some aspects, such as the withdrawal from Afghanistan, or the potential withdrawal from Iraq, but we cannot yet speculate on how it will readjust its approach to the entire region. What we can observe is a change in the landscape of military interventions, which may include a reduction in bases, economic sanctions (such as those against Iran), and alliances (such as those with Israel or Saudi Arabia), where regional actors and popular mobilizations have played a role. This could not prevent the destruction of several countries, from Libya to Afghanistan, with the terrible consequences for their populations and the refugees this entailed.
It remains to be seen whether the United States will dismantle the military machine deployed in the Middle East, given its connection to maintaining the dollar and its aim to combine force and consensus with the sub-imperialist powers of Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, as well as Israel's co-imperial role, and to intimidate rival powers. The last 20 years of this new imperialism and direct intervention can be divided by China's deployment following the announcement of the Belt and Road Initiative in 2013, which initiated an almost opposite form of hegemony in the region, within a different type and timeframe of development.
This new scenario of systemic chaos has been taking shape since the 2008 capitalist crisis and Obama's "Asian pivot" proposal, along with several undeniable facts of geopolitical shifts. A triangular axis between Russia, Iran, and China, which in 2013 opposed US proposals to bomb Syria, has emerged. In 2015, Russia became decisively involved, with China's tacit support.
The changes that have occurred and become visible over the last decade show that economic "Asianization" is vying for power with two representatives of the triad, Western Europe and Japan, and with a relative decline in the United States across several economic indicators. Recent tectonic shifts highlight the growing importance of the Indian and Pacific Oceans, compared to the previous dominance of the Atlantic; this is evident, for example, in the world's busiest ports.
The US strategy of encircling the Asian giant is countered by the Russian-Chinese alliance, which partially encompasses Central Asia (post-Soviet space), leans towards Pakistan, and incorporates Iran (embodied in the recent 25-year treaty with China and its incorporation into the SCO). It remains to be seen what role Turkey will play according to the planning of the Silk Road (Tehran-Istanbul) with which it is trying to reach Europe via the economic corridors.
This confirms that a series of different networks and relationships operate in Asia, which the United States does not subscribe to (or, according to some, makes no effort to understand). Russia and China maintain relations with Israel, but not on the scale or in the manner of the United States. The former two are drawing closer, shaping a new Eurasia and a new world map, to safeguard stability in Central Asia, and could potentially influence the Palestinian question.
Originally published in: https://www.laizquierdadiario.com/Palestina-y-el-mapa-de-Medio-Oriente-a-dos-decadas-del-11S
MMartin Martinelli He is co-coordinator of the Special Group Al Zeytun Magazine/CLACSO Palestine and Latin America.
