When Memory Speaks: The Pain of Oct. 7 and Questions for Tomorrow

By Dr. Ahmed Yusuf
In the Palestinian memory, weighed down by catastrophes, some events refuse to be forgotten because they are imprinted on the collective conscience as both wound and lesson. The 1956 Tripartite Aggression and the 1967 war were two moments of defeat and displacement whose details remain etched in the memory of generations. Today, as we mark the second anniversary of October 7, we recall a similar tragedy in even harsher form: a war of extermination and forced displacement that has left Gaza an open wound before the world.
Political readings of what happened may differ — some see it as a heroic action that was inevitably forced upon people, others as a reckless gamble with unforeseeable consequences. In my view, the “Al-Aqsa Flood” operation was indeed bold in form, but it rested on mistaken assessments of alliances and international balances of power, and it ended in an overwhelming human tragedy that afflicted more than two million displaced people who lost both shelter and dignity.
Yet the aftermath of the catastrophe has not been all loss. The Palestinian cause has regained a place in international consciousness, recognition of a Palestinian state has increased, and a qualitative shift has emerged in Western public opinion, especially in Europe and America, where calls to end the occupation and hold Israel accountable for its crimes have grown louder. Images of mass killing also rekindled popular rejection of normalization with Israel across the Arab and Muslim worlds.
On the Israeli side, the war exposed the falsity of the “Greater Israel” project and revealed the fragility of Netanyahu’s government, which now faces domestic and international isolation; its fall seems imminent and may be decided in the courts on long-standing corruption charges.
Meanwhile, Palestinians live today in displacement camps occupying no more than 30% of the Gaza Strip, under harsh conditions that strip humanitarian aid of its meaning, turning it into “death traps” that lure young people into danger in exchange for a bag of flour or a food parcel.
The crucial question remains: after the war — what comes after October 7?
Will Hamas be erased from the political map?
Will the Palestinian Authority regain its standing?
And how serious is the American proposal to entrust oversight of Gaza to Tony Blair?
In my assessment, Egypt will play the central role in shaping the day after and in shepherding Palestinian reconciliation, given its historical experience and close ties to President Abu Mazen and to all factions. The Palestinian future, if well managed, could draw inspiration from South Africa’s experience of nonviolent struggle against the apartheid system.
The pivotal next step is to bring Palestinians together, especially within Fatah, through reconciliation between President Abu Mazen and deputy Mohammed Dahlan, restoring the movement’s balance and reviving the national project. Dahlan, with his organizational weight, wide Arab contacts, and understandings with Hamas, could serve as a balancing element in managing the coming phase of reconstruction and governance in Gaza.
Reducing external roles, foremost among them Tony Blair’s, depends on the Palestinians’ ability to unite behind the Palestine Liberation Organization as a legitimate, inclusive framework, and to rebuild the political system on the basis of partnership and pluralism. National and Islamic action factions must move from factional logic to the logic of a national political party operating under the umbrella of Palestinian legitimacy.
The anniversary of October 7 is a painful reminder of the depth of the wound, but it is also a call to reflect on the meaning of heroism and the heavy price we have all paid. The future, despite its darkness, remains open to Palestinian will if they can make the catastrophe the start of a new comprehensive national renaissance built on unity, reason, and lessons learned from suffering.
As the old saying goes: nothing makes us great except great pain.