Once again in the past week the headlines have been dominated by the cycle of violence in the Middle East. The same day as a gunman attacked the Merkaz Harav seminary a coalition of international groups released a report into the worsening conditions for ordinary Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. If nothing else this report should provide the clues necessary as to why some Palestinians were prepared to celebrate the brutal attack on the seminary.
“Man-made and completely avoidable”
The report opens with frank language saying that the situation in Gaza is “man-made, completely avoidable and with the necessary political will can be reversed”. Naturally, it stops short of directly attributing blame (although in response to the report, Israel was not so candid). However, it does say that the situation has worsened “exponentially” since Israel’s blockade against Gaza began.
Critics of the report will focus on the reports condemnation of the actions of the Israeli state but, in the interests of balance, it is only fair to note that the report acknowledges the blockade began in response to “indiscriminate” rocket attacks on Israel. It should go without saying that Israel’s current strategy has not stopped these attacks nor has it significantly improved it’s security status; one need only switch on any newscast on any given day to see that much.
However, it’s main focus is the desperate plight of Gazans. Among it’s main findings are;
* Economic collapse; 95% of Gaza’s industrial operations are suspended due to the blockade. Private enterprise has pretty much ceased to exist or function; “entire sectors including construction and agriculture have ground to a halt”. Starkly, the report says that it is no longer a question of Gaza’s economy “collapsing” but having already “collapsed”.
* Crippling poverty; the report cites rising prices of essential goods like wheat and flour coupled with an unemployment rate of 40% which is expected to rise to 50%. Household incomes are projected to fall by 22% so, even if a Gazan is employed, they are squeezed in a vice of rising prices and a rising inability to pay those prices.
* Collapse of basic service infrastructure; not only does the Israeli blockade restrict the flow and fuel and electricity into Gaza but it also prevents the “repair and maintenance of the electricity and water service infrastructure by prohibiting the import of spare parts”. The net result is hospitals which can’t function and “40-50 million tonnes of sewage” which “continues to pour into the sea daily”.
* Dependency; “In 2008, there are over 1.1 million people – some three-quarters of the population of Gaza – who are dependent on food aid”. This statistic speaks for itself, and coupled with the data above it is one that is unlikely to change in the near future.
New Strategy
It should be blindingly obvious that a population so ground under the heel is embittered as well as impoverished. Life would be hard enough without Israel’s regular military incursions into the Strip which add on top of the daily hardships the bitterness of seeing friends and loved ones caught in the crossfire as Hamas and Israel slug it out. Gazans have been deprived of that most crucial element of living, hope, and in that atmosphere it is unsurprising that Hamas’s bile-drenched message finds willing listeners.
We all rightly deplore the terror Hamas inflicts on Israeli civilians but we seem to spare little thought or consideration for what produces conditions where groups like it flourish and find succor and support. Put plainly; how would you feel about a country that deprived your family of food and occasionally sent it’s troops across the border to wreak havoc?
The report calls for a new strategy of engagement by Israel and the international community and also calls for an end to the blockade which it correctly describes as ‘collective punishment’ which is, of course, illegal under international law. However, the ability of both communities to engage in constructive and meaningful moves to peace is severely hampered by the entrenched bitterness engendered by the suffering of both communities at the hands of agencies (either Hamas or the Israeli state) acting in their name. Neither of these parties is likely to abandon their entrenched position willingly unless there is a sea change in the feelings of Israeli’s and Palestinians and in the current tit-for-tat environment such a change is unlikely to say the least.
So, the onus in moving the Middle East towards a lasting peace falls upon the shoulders of the international community. Leaving aside the obvious gains in terms of bringing stability to a troubled region (and thus undercutting one of the key ideological appeals of the likes of Al Quaeda ) the international community also has much to gain in the terms of being eventually able to reduce aid to the embattled region.
Specifically the report calls for both the European Union and the UK to begin to exert pressure on Israel to end it’s blockade of Gaza. It also calls on both the Israeli government and Palestinian groups to end attacks against civilians. However, this is unlikely to occur for the reasons mentioned above so the only obvious alternative would be for the international community to establish a significant military presence in the disputed regions alongside its brokerage of a diplomatic solution.
At this point in time the international community is however hamstrung by the lack of serious will on the part of some of it’s key players to impose international law, especially on Israel which the United States and the United Kingdom see as it’s natural friend and ally in a hostile region. The lack of even-handedness in the approach to this process is well-documented as is it’s severely detrimental effect on the credibility of the international community as being honest brokers.
Peace processes are invariably long and painful ones; sacrifices have to be made on both sides which leave neither side happy but have to be acceptable. Debate on Israel-Palestine is often bedeviled by a frankly useless one-sidedness which paradories the bitter divide in the region itself; extremists on both sides are the only ones that benefit with no voice being left for the voiceless, the moderates who want to see real progress being made towards peace. Appeals to governments across the globe are likely to fall on deaf ears, appeals must be made directly to people across the Western political sphere for whether they realise it or not we all have a stake in this conflict and an awful lot to lose.
An international movement, calling for an end to the Israeli blockade would send a serious message to the Palestinian people that there are other agencies beside Hamas willing to defend their interests. This movement would have as it’s central concern, after the ending of the blockade, the pressuring of the international community to apply international law justly and even-handedly to both sides. It would no doubt inspire people on both sides of the divide to pressure their own governments to establish once and for all a lasting peace.
* Darrell Goodliffe is an applicant member from Peterborough. All quotes from The Gaza Strip; A Humanitarian Implosion.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
How Chancellor Reeves torpedoed the economy
The Disneyfication of Haley Mills
Survation now put Andy Burnham 10 points ahead in Makerfield
Michael Meadowcroft: A Liberal of Intellectual Rigour and Uncommon Integrity
Chris Cory
Ruth Bright
BigTallTim
Daniel Walker
Richard Good
12 Comments
A very good post.
I made some further comments but this issue is so value laden and mired in history that I decided to delete them rather than be pilloried for my thoughts…which kind of says it all.
It kinda does wit sadly…if you criticise Israel then the pro-Israel lobby tries to paint you as anti-semitic which is intellectually dishonest…and if you criticise Hamas then you are criticised for being indifferent to the suffering of the Palestinians…or else ‘siding’ with Israel which is equally intellectually dishonest…
I would find it a lot easier to feel sorry for the Gazans if it were not for this policy of lobbing bombs at Israel which seem designed solely in order to attract a murderous disproportionate response, so that they can wail at us and try to make us feel sorry for them …
Well it is worth pointing out that it is Hamas lobbing the bombs……people voted for Hamas because, put simply desperate people do desperate things…
That is not to condone the attacks on Israel, far from it but you have at least to understand why Hamas’s message is so popular to undercut and beat it…wouldn’t you hate the country that deprived your family of food or worse killed your children in the throes of one of these responses….?
It’s all very well to sit here in the West and frown at the Gazans and say tut-tut; alot different if it was you or me on the ground…to be serious about peace means addressing the legitmate grivences on *both* sides…Gazans have alot of legitimate grivences…so do Israelis who have the right to live free from fear for their and their famlies lives….
The Israeli blockade has failed to accomplish its task of stopping terrorism, while the humanitarian situation inside the blockaded area has simultaneously worsened.
If it is assumed logic that the horrendous social conditions in Gaza create the violence and terror tactics, then the Israeli policy is either incompetent, or it is implicated in starting what it says it wants to stop – in either case the policy needs to be reversed.
One must ask why the Israelis are so intent on enforcing a doomed and impossible policy of separation, which not only doesn’t work, but is counterproductive.
There is a solution, but only one: mutual cooperation on all issues of shared interest (eg security, economic development, environmental issues etc).
So the question must be can the Israelis separate the issue of defense of their state from the defence against terrorist attacks?
If Israeli politics can, then there will be nothing to fear, if it cannot the cycle of violence will continue and terror will have prevailed.
As a statelet, Gaza isn’t viable. What it amounts to is a collection of overcrowded shanty towns crammed into one of the few bits of Palestine the Israelis don’t actually want for settlements.
There are plenty of moderate, secular Israelis who are willing to compromise for peace, but the extremists always win out because no-one is prepared to rein them in.
The extremist will always tell the secular Israeli that the state was founded on the belief that Palestine had been given to the Jews by God, so if he doesn’t accept that, what is he doing living there? And there isn’t an answer to it, I’m afraid.
Israel is held on the leash by the United States. All that is preventing Olmert launching a bloodbath in Gaza is Cheney telling him “don’t you dare”.
The prospects are gloomy.
Who will ask the extremist which is more important – the state of Israel or the survival of Israelis?
If your extremist answers “the former”, nobody need be surprised at the number of lives sacrificed on all sides.
If your extremist answers “the latter”, you are talking to a person who is no extremist.
“wouldn’t you hate the country that deprived your family of food or worse killed your children in the throes of one of these responses….?”
Yes, so you lob another bomb and get the same again – which you knew you would. Sorry Darrell, but this excuse for macho violence doesn’t hold. Little boys of all ages love lobbing bombs and don’t care about the consequences. Darrell, what I am saying is that this is really STUPID behaviour, and as a consequence I find it much harder to feel sorry for the Gazans and their plight than I otherwise would do. And, yes, when the people of the country voted for those who engage in this behaviour, they do collectively share the blame. I always find the excuse “it isn’t us, it’s our politicians” (who we voted for) to be hypocritical.
Exactly the same excuse for violence can – and is – used by the Israelis “We’re scared and desperate, it’s natural that we respond in this way, isn’t it?”.
So what do we see in the Middle East conflict – two sides who inflict appalling violence on each other, get the same back, and then both weep in our faces “Wah, wah, it isn’t fair look what these nasty people did to us”.
I would hope that if we were to tell these people we find their behaviour juvenile and it doesn’t cause us to give them any sympathy, it might encourage them to think outside the block and try something different and more grown up.
I write as someone who boycotts Israeli products because of the behaviour of Israel towards the occupied territories. Except when I hear of another piece of pointless macho violence from the Palestinians, when I make a point of buying something Israeli.
Matthew, you neglect to note that many more Palestinians have died than Israelis as a result of political violence.
This is the product of (1) Israel’s superior armoury, and (2) the Moshe Dayan dictum that X number of Gentiles have to die in reprisal for the killing of Jews (I cannot recall the precise quantum).
Religious Zionists maintain that God has commanded Israel to kill Gentiles who get in the way (and point to the Old Testament).
Now, it used to be the case that Palestinian resistance was secular and based on the premise that Palestinians were entitled to have their land, property and country back. Increasingly, however, it has become religious in tone, the object of the exercise being to liberate Palestine, not for the Palestinians, but for Allah.
Sesenco, the point I made does not depend on the point you made. When bombs are lobbed from Gaza which have no purpose but to attract a violent response back, I find it hard to feel sorry for those who then wail “Wah, wah, look what the bully did”. If the bully did it without being provoked, I would be horrifed and would most certainly feel very sorry for the victims.
Well I can kind of see your point Matthew but the point is that neither the Israelis nor Gazans see this violence as ‘designed to get a response’. It is easy for us to sit here and say that is what will happen but both sides see it in terms of self-defence…and some in terms of an eye-for-an-eye. So it is not conscious provocation I am afraid.
Gazans see it as a legitimate way to fight back against which is a vastly superior force and Israelis see their response as the only means of protecting themselves and the point I was trying to make at the end, with the suggestion of an international military presence was the undercutting of both points of view and ensuring that the security and material needs of both sides are attended too fairly.
ps, id like to clarify what i said above by ackowledging that some within ***BOTH*** leaderships might have an agenda of conscious provocation but they can get away with masking that by the actions of the other under the cover of a self-defence argument…and I am sure that is how the majority of the people on both sides preceive it…