Latest news with #ShimonPeres
Asharq Al-Awsat
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Asharq Al-Awsat
Looking Back On Oslo (2)
It has become common knowledge that Benjamin Netanyahu did not hesitate to mobilize the far right, in both its nationalist and religious wings, in a campaign against the Oslo Accords and Yitzhak Rabin. The latter was portrayed wearing the uniform of a Nazi officer in an infamous poster by this campaign that eventually led to Rabin's assassination in 1995. A year earlier, a religious extremist by the name of Baruch Goldstein, an American-Israeli who had been a follower of Meir Kahane and a member of his movement, murdered 29 Palestinians in Hebron while they were praying. Rabin's assassination is considered the major turning point of the Oslo process, and it was a prologue for the slow collapse of the 'peace camp.' On the other side, the growing wave of Hamas 'martyrdom operations,' which peaked in the mid-1990s, saw a security agenda occupy the space that had been vacated by the desire for peace. This eruption of violence coincided with rising tensions on the Israeli-Lebanese front, in 1993 and even more so in 1996. In turn, this polarized climate and broad sense of insecurity paved the way for Netanyahu's narrow electoral victory over Shimon Peres, the Oslo Accords' chief architect and its second key figure. As the terrorist violence by radicals on both sides aggravated, the slur 'Osloist' grew out of 'Arafatist,' a slur that had been coined earlier by Assad's Damascus, whose sponsorship (alongside Iran) of Hamas and its affiliates' activities was no secret. Although peace achieved a second victory through the Wadi Araba Treaty that Jordan and Israel signed in late 1994, Palestinian leaders, first and foremost Arafat, failed to exhibit the degree of responsibility needed to engage in a difficult and complex peace process and meet international commitments. Indeed, such behavior did not come naturally to the Palestinian leader, who had spent most of his political life jockeying with Levantine local communities and security regimes. Moderation also receded among Palestinians, as illustrated by Arafat's flip-flopping during this period. He was torn over whether to comply with the Oslo Accords or not because of the performative bravado of Palestinian, Arab, and Iranian radicals seeking to delegitimize him, which only intensified with the onset of the Second Intifada. In 1994, Arafat made a gaffe at a mosque in South Africa, comparing Oslo to the 'Treaty of Hudaybiyyah' between the Prophet Muhammad and the Quraysh at a time when the Israelis were criticizing him for failing to do anything to curb the aggravating terrorist attacks beyond condemning them. Similarly, the elected government in the West Bank and Gaza that was supposed to replace the Palestinian Authority never emerged; corruption, nepotism, and arbitrary rule became entrenched. While opinion polls had, at one point, shown that over two-thirds of the Palestinian public supported Oslo, the number steadily dropped as the conviction that peace would achieve nothing grew. This authority born of peace was not compelling: the occupation persisted, and the checkpoints around Ramallah multiplied in parallel with the aggravation of both the frequency and scale of terrorist attacks, suffocating the Palestinians and restricting their mobility. Meanwhile, the number of Jewish settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, which had stood at 110,000 when Oslo was signed, began to rise, first by tens of thousands and then by hundreds of thousands- international law's prohibition of such settlement activity was irrelevant. Not only did the number of settlements increase, the nature of these settlements also changed: what had begun as a pursuit of functional considerations (cheaper housing and living conditions than those in the cities) was increasingly driven by an ideological, religious, and nationalist desire to acquire land. The Palestinian Authority's tenuous standing among its people went hand in hand with its weak position in the face of the Israelis, with each of these two problems feeding on the other. Because it was too weak to deter terrorist attacks, the Palestinian Authority was also too weak to force the Israelis from expanding settlements or to assert greater control over 'security coordination' with them, and this went both ways. As a result, the Palestinian Authority, focused on proving that it had not been breaching the agreement, was increasingly seen as an Israeli tool concerned only with maintaining the crumbs of a corrupt power structure on the one hand, and on the other, as complicit in the terrorist attacks against Israelis. Even so, this wounded peace had not lost all of its power, and Oslo's potential had not been squandered yet. Following Rabin's assassination, Shimon Peres continued to pursue its implementation as prime minister. Even Netanyahu, after winning the 1996 election, seemed compelled to pretend he had been adhering to it. In early 1997, he allowed the Palestinian Authority to take back control of Hebron, drawing the ire of his right-wing base. In late 1998, Netanyahu, Arafat, and Clinton met at the Wye River Summit in the United States. They agreed to resume the Oslo process: Israel would withdraw from parts of the West Bank, counter-terrorism measures would be implemented, and the Palestinian Authority and Israel agreed to develop their economic ties and continue final status negotiations. The Knesset, for its part, approved the Wye River Memorandum that came out of the summit by a large majority, and the Israeli public largely supported it. When Netanyahu tried to stall and play tricks to obstruct its implementation, his government collapsed in 1999, triggering elections that were won by the Labor candidate and 'Osloist,' Ehud Barak. With Barak's victory, the peace camp had some hope again, though it was faint in comparison to the optimism that followed Rabin's 1992 victory. Barak, amid a drop-in popular support for peace, seemed more hesitant and less decisive than Rabin or Peres. On the other side, Palestinians' confidence in the peace process declined as Israel imposed greater restrictions and set up larger numbers of checkpoints. As for the notion that all of this proves Israel had never sought peace and never will, it is extremely a reductionist assessment.
Irish Examiner
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Irish Examiner
Pope Francis's powerful call to ecological action
Values of a society shift and adjust through time. The evolution of cultural perspectives is shaped by major institutions, by scholars, rebels and civil society movements. Pope Francis has been a leader who did much to evolve the values of our society, pushing towards an eco-centric outlook in which care for all people and care for all of creation are invited back in to the core of our shared cultural values. I myself am not, and never have been, a religious person. However, I remember being intrigued when, in 2015, Laudato Si' was published. In this eloquent, philosophical and comprehensive encyclical, Pope Francis wrote with fluency about the ways in which our consumer obsessed culture has been driving Earth's planetary systems toward collapse. 'Laudato Si' — Encyclical letter of the holy father Francis on care for our common home' is a powerful call for a global ecological 'conversion', for new ways of living that take responsibility for the health and wellbeing of all creatures, as well as for the most vulnerable people on the planet. Cuidemos la creación, don de nuestro buen Dios Creador. Celebremos juntos la Semana Laudato si'. #LaudatoSi5 — Apostolica Sedes Vacans (@Pontifex_es) May 16, 2020 Pope Francis writes with stunning insight about almost every key environmental issue of the 21st century, whilst continually pairing these challenges with the intrinsic injustices that arise from ecological destruction. From the outset, 'Mother Earth' is referred to as 'sustaining and governing us', a significant shift from the perspective that creation was a gift to man, a set of resources to subdue, control and exploit. He discusses in depth the disproportionate impact of environmental degradation on the poor and vulnerable, a core moral imperative to urgently tackle to both the biodiversity and the climate crisis. There are many radical statements in the encyclical, such as how 'the cult of unlimited human power.... sees everything as irrelevant unless it serves one's own immediate interests". The encyclical is critical of how we prioritise economic growth over ecological and human well-being and states that 'the time has come to accept decreased growth in some parts of the world, in order to provide resources for other places to experience healthy growth.' Pope Francis and Israeli President Shimon Peres (R), Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas (2ndR) and Patriarch Bartholomaios I plant an olive tree during a peace invocation prayer at the Vatican Gardens in 2014. During his visit to the Holy Land Pope Francis invited Israeli President Shimon Peres and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to attend. Picture:In Laudato Si', Pope Francis also goes into the specifics of the harm and abuse we have inflicted on Earth's natural systems. There is much about living oceans, including strong critiques of practices such as fisheries discards; overfishing; and the specific means by which coral reefs are being destroyed. The encyclical calls for more countries to establish 'sanctuaries on land and in the oceans' in order to preserve and restore their ecological integrity, echoing global campaigns for Marine Protected Areas that have been gaining momentum over the past two decades. It even goes so far as to call for the shortfalls in 'the system of governance of the oceans' and how 'the lack of strict mechanisms of regulation, control and penalization' undermine these efforts to protect oceanic 'global commons'. In the encyclical, Pope Francis presents impressive detail about the deficits of environmental regulation and participation in decision making, stating how, in assessing technological innovations, 'profit cannot be the sole criterion to be taken into account'. When it comes to the global balance of power, his language is forthright, calling out the pervasive extreme inequality that now characterises the world and how this manifests in the destruction of Earths ecosystems. He refers, for example, to 'those richly biodiverse lungs of our planet which are the Amazon and the Congo basins' and how plans to further exploit these vital planetary systems 'only serve the economic interests of transnational corporations'. He states that 'politics must not be subject to the economy, nor should the economy be subject to the dictates of an efficiency-driven paradigm of technocracy', words that are at least as necessary today as they were ten years ago. Especially relevant in debates taking place currently about the role of private investment and market driven conservation is his statement that 'the environment is one of those goods that cannot be adequately safeguarded or promoted by market forces'. The role of civil society is held up as being integral to resolving the challenges of environmental and social injustice. Examples such as the power and efficacy of movements that boycott certain products are noted. This is a momentous work, packed with compelling calls for a profound transformation in the attitudes and behaviours that are embedded in our culture. Pope Francis has been loud and clear in urging wider recognition of the moral imperative to care for all life on Earth and in mass collective action required to change the status quo. In the 10 years since Laudato Si' came out, I have often asked religious lay people about its teachings and whether they are filtering in to the messages of the Church here in Ireland or elsewhere. Few had ever heard of it. Pope Francis's intended legacy, his 'urgent appeal' for a new dialogue about how we are shaping the future of our planet, does not appear to have had much of an influence on the conversations taking place at congregational level. His eloquent plea for all his followers to become strong advocates for the Earth has, however, prompted a global grassroots movement around Laudato Si', celebrating the legacy of Pope Francis. One of the movements founding members is Scottish–Irish Dr Lorna Gold, a Maynooth-based academic and author and leading voice in climate justice movement in Ireland and beyond. In January of this year, Dr Gold became the executive director of the worldwide Laudato Si' Movement. There is hope yet that the depth of compassion and ecological wisdom embodied by Pope Francis throughout his life will be capably carried forward by the Laudato Si' Movement, especially in combination with other civil society movements working to effect the transformative changes that are necessary to care for our common home. There is hope, too, that 'all people', whom Pope Francis so eloquently addressed his wisdom toward, will be able to overcome individualism, to take urgent action for justice and peace, and awaken a new reverence for life. Read More Stiff competition but Connemara is one of the most degraded landscapes in Ireland
Fox News
21-04-2025
- Politics
- Fox News
PHOTO GALLERY: Pope Francis Obituary
Israeli President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accompany Pope Francis as he visits the memorial monument commemorating victims of terrorist acts on Mount Herzl, on May 26, 2014 in Jerusalem, Israel. Pope Francis arrived in Israel on Sunday afternoon, a day after landing in the Middle East for his first visit to the Holy Land. During his visit to the West Bank the Pontiff addressed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as "unacceptable" and urged both sides to find courage in seeking a peaceful solution.
Al Binaa
16-03-2025
- Politics
- Al Binaa
Two Outdated, Hollow Equations at the Wrong Time
• The political and media landscape is awash with attempts to market certain narratives as if they reflect Lebanon's current reality in its struggle against the occupation. The first asserts that resistance as a project to confront the occupation has failed, that America dominates the world, that Israel has demonstrated absolute superiority, and that the Arab era is one of normalisation, culminating in a call to embrace it. The second claims that Lebanon is weary of fighting others' wars on its soil, that it has given more than it can afford for Palestine, and that it is time to step back and seek respite. But do these equations stand on solid logical ground, or are they mere delusions, fantasies, and wishful thinking divorced from reality? • Let's begin with the first equation. To assess it objectively, we set aside the notions of resistance as a choice, a project, or an organised fighting force. A useful starting point is the post-Cold War era, when Hezbollah had yet to lead the resistance, and Hamas had not assumed that role in Palestine. At the time, the prevailing premise was America's unquestioned dominance and power – an indisputable reality. Similarly, Israel's absolute superiority was widely assumed, particularly in the early 1990s, when Shimon Peres envisioned a 'Greater Israel'. Today, however, the idea of U.S. absolute dominance warrants scrutiny, while the notion of Israeli military supremacy is openly mocked by prominent Israeli intellectuals and dismissed by military strategists as little more than a bad joke. In parallel, the push for normalisation by Arab states is now constrained by the enduring centrality of the Palestinian cause, which has resurfaced as an issue that cannot be sidelined. Yet, back then, both the U.S. and Israel formally accepted the creation of a Palestinian state. These factors, America's unchallenged dominance, Israel's perceived military superiority, Arab aspirations for peace, and an American-Israeli compromise allowing Arab leaders to save face through the promise of Palestinian statehood, led to the Madrid Conference and the Oslo Accords. In response, the Palestine Liberation Organisation laid down its arms and recognised Israel and Hamas remained a marginal force. Yet the Madrid process collapsed, Oslo failed, and instead of the West Bank becoming a Palestinian state in 1998, as envisioned in the accords, by 2025, it has become a network of settlements housing a million armed settlers who elect figures like Ben Gvir and Smotrich. • How can we account for the failure of the peace process in the absence of any meaningful Arab resistance? Anyone who reflects on this would recognise that a golden rare opportunity was squandered – one that could have tested the viability of peace at a time when Israeli religious extremism was still a minority, yet powerful enough to assassinate Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and derail the process before it could take root. Today, that extremism has grown exponentially, ensuring the continuation of its project, after America, which once was able to wage wars, has become limited to offering financial aid, weapons, and political cover, and after the Israeli army has become incapable of boasting invincibility; and where its remaining power lies in wielding a political veto against any proposed solutions, backed by unwavering U.S. support and an Arab world that continues to insist that America holds all the cards. Only the delusional, the deranged, and the hopelessly naive still believe in peace, normalisation, or a Palestinian state, even on paper. • Faced with this political and diplomatic deadlock, one must recall the period after the Taif Agreement. There was an assumption that Israel would withdraw in accordance with Resolution 425. That dream was shattered, leaving those who rejected resistance but hoped that it might succeed, while cursing it all the same, accusing it of waging foreign wars. Yet when liberation was achieved in 2000, they were the first to rush forward, not just to offer congratulations but to bask in the victory. • As for the proponents of the 'wars of others' theory: that Lebanon has given too much for Palestine, they may find ample arguments to support their view. But they must answer two crucial questions. First, when the regional pretext for Israeli war disappears, when there is no longer a non-Lebanese force to fight, why doesn't Israel withdraw? Instead, it makes new demands that threaten Lebanese sovereignty. Is that not precisely what happened in 1982, when the PLO left but the occupation remained for 18 years until resistance drove it out? And today, hasn't the supposed Iran-Israel war theory collapsed, with Iran withdrawing from Syria, Hezbollah retreating south of the Litani, and direct military friction ending? Yet Israel still refuses to withdraw. Why? Could it be because its demands from Lebanon go beyond security concerns and include territorial ambitions, such as seizing strategic heights that support Israeli security and enhance its position while leaving Lebanon without cover and decreasing its status. Persisting with the 'wars of others' narrative long after its premise has vanished serves only to justify the occupation and propagate their reality: that Israel remains, while everything else is mere fiction. • As for the claim that Lebanon has sacrificed too much for Palestine, its proponents must also address the issue of naturalisation. Is preventing the permanent settlement of Palestinian refugees still a Lebanese national priority? If so, what alternative exists besides supporting the Palestinian cause until the right of return is realised? Or is this newfound exhaustion merely a prelude to accepting naturalisation? • These are outdated, hollow equations, ill-timed and irrelevant.
Middle East Eye
25-02-2025
- Business
- Middle East Eye
The Gaza war has not distanced Morocco from Israel, quite the opposite
"The war in Gaza and the disastrous situation in the Middle East have led to a freeze in cooperation between Arab countries and Israel," Youssef Amrani, Morocco's ambassador to the United States, told Al Hurra television on 13 February. This situation seems to be true for some countries, such as Saudi Arabia, but certainly not for Morocco, which has deepened its ties with Israel without even hiding it. The latest example is the purchase, announced in early February, of 36 Atmos 2000 self-propelled artillery systems from the Israeli manufacturer Elbit Systems. Morocco is once again turning away from one of its traditional suppliers, France, from which it had purchased in 2020 the Caesar system, which is manufactured by KNDS and is similar to its Israeli competitor. These are cannons that are especially useful in the desert thanks to their mobility. Last July, Morocco's Royal Armed Forces had already given up replacing their Mohammed VI-A and Mohammed VI-B spy satellites, manufactured by European companies Airbus and Thales, with "made in France" models. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The Moroccan army turned instead to Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) to change them. The Israeli company will provide in four years two latest-generation Ofek-13s for $1bn. This is the largest contract signed so far with Israel. Deals with Morocco are coming one after another for the Israeli arms industry, with the purchase of equipment such as Heron drones, the Skylock Dome to shoot down unmanned enemy aircraft, and the Barak MX anti-missile system. In 2023, Israel was already the kingdom's third-largest supplier (11 percent of orders), behind the US and France, according to the Stockholm Peace Research Institute. At this pace, France will soon be ousted from its second place. Business as usual Morocco and Israel have always had good relations in secret, especially since the 1980s. Shimon Peres, then prime minister, even went to Rabat in 1986 to meet secretly with King Hassan II, father of the current monarch Mohammed VI. The two countries formally re-established their diplomatic relations in December 2020, when Morocco joined the Abraham Accords at the request of US President Donald Trump. In exchange of this normalisation deal, the latter recognised Rabat's sovereignty claims over Western Sahara, a former Spanish colony that Morocco seized between 1975 and 1979. In recent months, the Moroccan authorities have made gestures that no other Arab country, nor Western states such as Spain, have allowed themselves to do towards Israel Members of the Israeli government then kept coming to Rabat to sign agreements. Defence Minister Benny Gantz visited the kingdom for the first time in November 2021 to strike a deal on defence, industrial cooperation in the field of armaments, and military training. His trip was predated by that of then Israeli chief of staff Aviv Kochavi. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was even scheduled to visit the kingdom in the autumn of 2023, but the invasion of Gaza disrupted all plans. Once the war began, Israeli visitors disappeared from Morocco or became more discreet, such as Amir Peretz, IAI's chairman, who visited the kingdom in the summer of 2024 to sign the contract for the Ofek-13 satellites. But business continued strongly. In recent months, the Moroccan authorities have made gestures that no other Arab country, nor western states such as Spain, have allowed themselves to do towards Israel. In early June 2024, the INS Komemiyut, a large landing craft belonging to the Israeli navy, which was heading from Pensacola (United States) to Haifa, made a stopover at the port of Tangier to refuel after the Spanish government had refused the vessel permission to use its ports. In December, Morocco agreed to repatriate Nassim Kalibat, a Palestinian citizen of Israel accused of terrorism and arrested in the kingdom, although there is no extradition treaty between the two countries. Strong popular opposition However, Morocco is undoubtedly the North African country - and probably the Arab country - where pro-Palestinian marches have been the most frequent and numerous. Organised by the Moroccan Front for the Support of Palestine and Against Normalisation (FSPCN), a coalition dominated by the Islamist party Al Adl Wal Ihsane (Justice and Charity), they have taken place throughout the kingdom, including in its most remote corners. In large cities such as Rabat and Casablanca, they brought together hundreds of thousands of people onto the streets. Young Moroccans are turning away from mosques over Gaza silence Read More » The demonstrators, who are still taking to the streets, are demanding in particular the repeal of the agreements with Israel. An Arab Barometer poll revealed last June that only 13 percent of Moroccans support their country's normalisation with Israel, while they were still 31 percent before the war. The protests have also reached campuses, including Mohammed VI Polytechnic University, a private institution attended by the elite, where Crown Prince Moulay Hassan studies. Last May, 1,256 students sent a letter to its president, Hicham El Habti, demanding "the severing of ties" with its eight Israeli academic partners. To no avail: these ties were maintained. Moroccan authorities have tolerated most protests and, judging by the kingdom's human rights standards, the repression of those who most strongly opposed normalisation was relatively mild. The latest to be convicted was Ismail Lghazaoui, an activist with the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement. He was sentenced to a year in prison for "incitement to commit crimes and offenses by electronic means" after calling for a boycott of Carrefour stores, accused of profiting from Israel's occupation of Palestinian lands, and asking Tangier port workers to block two cargo ships of the Maersk company, suspected of transporting military equipment to Israel. Netanyahu's government has done the Moroccan royal palace a few favours so as to save the monarchy from being in too awkward a situation with public opinion David Govrin, the former head of the Israeli liaison office in Rabat, for his part hoped that the Moroccan authorities would also prohibit demonstrations from ending with the public burning of the Israeli flag. Netanyahu's government has done the Moroccan royal palace, which is the real centre of power, a few favours so as to save the monarchy from being in too awkward a situation with public opinion. In particular, Israel authorised several shipments of humanitarian aid and medical supplies from Morocco to Gaza, which began in March 2024 with an air drop. These shipments were widely publicised in Morocco. The Palestinian Authority (PA) also helped to rehabilitate the palace. Hussein al-Sheikh, PA minister of civil affairs, recently expressed his 'great appreciation' to King Mohammed VI and the Moroccan government 'for their continuous efforts to resolve the crisis of the Palestinian funds withheld by Israel.' Since October 2023, Israel has been withholding $1bn in Palestinian tax revenues under various pretexts. What are the costs? Why has Morocco been so keen to preserve, or even strengthen, its ties with Israel, while Israel's war on Gaza is so unpopular? During the second Palestinian Intifada (2000-2005), Rabat did the opposite by breaking off diplomatic relations with Israel established in 1994. There is probably a double explanation for this. Morocco is a country at war, even if the one it is waging against the Polisario Front, a political-military movement that claims the independence of Western Sahara, is of very low intensity. Behind the Sahrawi guerrillas, however, is Algeria, Africa's leading military power. In its relationship with Israel, "the military component is very important because it goes beyond weapons," explained Intissar Fakir, director of the North Africa programme at the Middle East Institute. Rabat needs the US to consolidate its hold on Western Sahara. Trump already took a big step in 2020, but Moroccan diplomacy would like him to do more "There is a desire to share experiences and a deeper commitment in terms of military cooperation," she added. Faced with Morocco's enemies, who are also Israel's enemies, the latter is compromising itself more than the kingdom's European partners have done. The depth of ties with Israel also allows doors to be opened in Washington. Rabat needs the US to consolidate its hold on Western Sahara. Trump had already taken a big step in 2020, but Moroccan diplomacy would like him to do more. Since 2007, Rabat has proposed a succinct autonomy plan for Western Sahara within the framework of Moroccan sovereignty. Since 2022, this solution has garnered a certain amount of support, notably from Spain and recently from France. Rabat is now hoping for a "sort of definitive international blessing on 'its' Sahara" at a major conference sponsored by the United States, which should be held in the United Arab Emirates", Hugh Lovatt, policy officer at the European Council of Foreign Relations, told Middle East Eye. "Diplomatic contacts are underway to this end," he added. In December 2020, Trump made a deal with King Mohammed VI: recognition of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara in exchange for the reestablishment of relations with Israel. What would be the price to be paid by Morocco this time? Morocco accused of using Israeli weapons to kill civilians in Western Sahara Read More » Lovatt has no doubts about it: the price for Rabat is "to play a certain role in Gaza, once the conflict is over, and with the agreement of the involved parties". After all, former President Joe Biden's administration had already suggested, in May 2024, the creation of an Arab peacekeeping force including Morocco, Egypt and the UAE. The press release published by the State Department on 27 January following a phone call between Secretary of State Marco Rubio and his Moroccan counterpart, Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita, shows that the discussion mainly focused on "the implementation of the ceasefire agreement in Gaza, the release of the hostages, and Morocco's leadership in contributing humanitarian aid for Gaza." Bilateral relations have been relegated to the back seat. To preserve all its chances of success with the Trump administration, Moroccan diplomacy took four days to react to the US Republican president's plan to empty Gaza of its inhabitants to turn it into a luxury seaside resort in the Eastern Mediterranean, and to distribute the two million Palestinians between Egypt and Jordan. According to a report cited by Israeli TV channel N12, Morocco has been one of the countries considered for resettling the Palestinians, along with Puntland, an autonomous territory of Somalia, and Somaliland, a self-proclaimed republic in northern Somalia. Bourita did not dare to openly criticise the proposal, unlike other Arab or European leaders. On 9 February, he limited himself to recalling that "Morocco always supports the unity of the Palestinian people and territory as well as the creation of a Palestinian state." The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
