Appreciate this article? +972 depends on your support -- click here to help us keep going

Analysis News

The three truths the U.S. needs to accept about Gaza

Israel and its U.S. allies perpetuate a number of mistruths about Gaza, its role in the conflict and its centrality moving forward. If they are not challenged, violence will continue and the U.S. risks losing even more credibility in the region.

By Samer Badawi

A Palestinian farmer walks through fields near Gaza's eastern border, Al Montar, February 17, 2014. An Israeli military post is seen in the distance to the left, with the border indicated by the dark green areas passing through it. (photo: Ryan Rodrick Beiler/Activestills.org)

A Palestinian farmer walks through fields near Gaza’s eastern border, Al Montar, February 17, 2014. An Israeli military post is seen in the distance to the left, with the border indicated by the dark green areas passing through it. (photo: Ryan Rodrick Beiler/Activestills.org)

Fewer than 16 months after the ceasefire agreement that ended Israel’s last full-scale attack on Gaza—nine days of constant bombardment by air, land, and sea—Palestinians there are once again trapped and feeling the brunt of Israeli air strikes.

They have every reason to be worried. On March 12, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, citing “a barrage of more than 50 rockets,” called for his country to re-occupy Gaza. The same day, the U.S. State Department, instead of urging calm, issued a statement, by now familiar, backing Israel’s “right to defend itself.”

Predictably, the statement failed to mention Israel’s murder of seven Palestinians in the prior 24 hours, its dozens of deadly violations of the November 2012 ceasefire agreement with Hamas, and its routine killing of unarmed Palestinians along Gaza’s border.

Left unchallenged, these omissions will lead to more sins of commission. More civilians will die. And Israel’s chest-beating will lead to ever more violence, further eroding America’s diplomatic stature in the region and beyond.

To avoid this scenario, policymakers must challenge three underlying assumptions behind the U.S. position, which currently aligns with the pointedly undiplomatic threats of Israel’s chief diplomat: 1) that Israeli-Palestinian peace can be forged without Gaza, 2) that Israel’s stranglehold on Gaza ended in 2005, and 3) that Israel’s threats are aimed only at Palestinian “militants.”

No peace without Gaza

According to Israeli journalist Amira Hass, Yitzhak Rabin famously declared after signing the Oslo Accords that he wished Gaza “would just sink into the sea.” Reprehensible as it was, Rabin’s brutal logic was more than a rhetorical indiscretion.

Gazans represent roughly one-third of the Palestinian population in the Occupied Territories, including East Jerusalem. Beyond demographics, though, Gaza also commands enormous symbolic value for the Palestinian struggle. That a majority of its population trace their origins to villages inside Israel means that their fate will gauge how the Palestinian refugee crisis will be resolved. This stands to reason: Of the approximately 1.5 million Palestinian refugees who live in UN-administered camps throughout the Arab world, more than one-third live in Gaza.

Any agreement that excludes Gaza would  lack credibility and therefore be unsustainable. Proof of that lies in the failure of the Oslo peace process itself. For seven of the 20 years since that process was launched, Gaza has been subjected to a suffocating land, sea, and air blockade—the correlative of Rabin’s homicidal wish.

The myth of ‘withdrawal’

Israel’s much-flaunted “withdrawal” from Gaza nearly nine years ago involved the removal of some 8,000 Jewish settlers who controlled Gaza’s prime agricultural land and shoreline—an area roughly equal to 40 percent of the 25-mile-long strip.

That they might enjoy beach resorts and golfing greens, these settlers—whose numbers represented less than one percent of the indigenous population whom they controlled—had erected a menacing system of humiliation, night raids, and barricades. Endowed by U.S. largesse and Kafkaesque in its brutality, the settlement enterprise in Gaza was particularly pernicious.

The reputational costs of maintaining this apartheid system were too high, though, and then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s decision to dismantle it was driven by necessity, not compromise. In fact, Sharon’s senior advisor at the time, Dov Weisglass, told the Israeli daily Haaretz that the so-called Gaza disengagement “supplies the amount of formaldehyde that is necessary so there will not be a political process with the Palestinians.” More to the point, said Weisglass, “this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda.”

He was right on both counts. Palestinians are certainly no closer to having their own state. And nearly a decade after the “disengagement,” Israel continues to control nearly half of Gaza’s agricultural land and nearly all access to the sea. According to Harvard scholar Sara Roy:

Israeli-imposed buffer zones—areas of restricted access—now absorb nearly 14 percent of Gaza’s total land and at least 48 percent of total arable land. Similarly, the sea buffer zone covers 85 percent of the maritime area promised to Palestinians in the Oslo Accords, reducing 20 nautical miles to three, where waters are fouled by sewage flows in excess of 23 million gallons daily.

Israel’s ‘enemies’

Palestinians have the right, enshrined in international law, to challenge the ongoing siege of Gaza and to truly dismantle the legacy of Israel’s racist settlement enterprise there. At the vanguard of Gaza’s resistance, though, are young, nonviolent activists—not rocket-launching militants.

Largely ignored in Western media, these activists have been organizing weekly protests within the so-called “buffer zone,” planting trees and engaging in other forms of peaceful protest aimed at reclaiming, if only symbolically, Palestinian farmers’ lands.

Yet to approach the buffer zone is to enter what amounts to an Israeli shooting gallery, where soldiers—too distant to be seen—fire at will and kill with impunity. (The Palestinian Center for Human Rights has documented Israeli shootings of civilians up to 1.5 kilometers inside the Gaza border.) Consider the case of 57-year-old Aminah Atiyeh Qudeih, who was killed on March 1 by a sniper’s bullet while mistakenly walking within the buffer zone. Weeks earlier, 27-year-old Odeh Hamad was gunned down while, according to the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem, he was collecting scrap metal with his brother. Both were unarmed and both were left bleeding for hours before an ambulance could reach them. Perhaps most important, both leave behind families with no way of holding their loved ones’ murderers accountable.

As those families mourn and seethe, along with the rest of Gaza’s 1.7 million trapped Palestinians, they dread the prospect of yet more violence, more Israeli impunity, and more sins of omission from U.S. policymakers who, despite two decades of on-again, off-again attempts, have yet to facilitate any progress toward peace in the Holy Land. To change that, these policymakers must be willing to challenge long-held assumptions about the conflict, including on Gaza.

Samer Badawi is a freelance writer based in Washington, DC. He is the former DC correspondent for Middle East International and last visited Gaza in December 2012.

Related:
In escalations of violence, Gazans pay the price
PHOTOS: Life and death in Gaza’s border zone

For additional original analysis and breaking news, visit +972 Magazine's Facebook page or follow us on Twitter. Our newsletter features a comprehensive round-up of the week's events. Sign up here.

View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • COMMENTS

    1. Bar

      “Palestinians have the right, enshrined in international law”

      Only insofar as they remain within the bounds of international law. Shooting rockets at Israeli civilians violates international law.

      That the author of this piece can write an entire article excoriating Israel re Gaza without any mention of what Egypt is doing to the Gazans, indicates the level of dishonesty present here. Extremist rhetoric and willful blindness are nothing more than warmongering and it would be nice if 972 didn’t promote this type of talk.

      Reply to Comment
    2. Chris Harrison

      “Predictably, the statement failed to mention Israel’s murder of seven Palestinians in the prior 24 hours, its dozens of deadly violations of the November 2012 ceasefire agreement with Hamas, and its routine killing of unarmed Palestinians along Gaza’s border.”

      Predictably, you failed to mention that the IDF targeted members of the Al Quds brigade who were in the process of setting up rockets that would be fired at civilian areas.

      Reply to Comment
      • sh

        “… were in the process of setting up rockets that would be fired …”
        That’s what was said, yes. It’s going to be hard to check of course.

        A Jordanian was killed as he entered Israel through a border crossing with that country a few days ago. The reason given by the army was that he’d tried to grab a gun from a soldier. Turns out there was only a verbal altercation. But a soldier took pot shots at him nevertheless, for which Israel had to later officially apologize. http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/1.580322

        Reply to Comment
        • williambilek

          Liar!
          From your same link to ha’aretz you can see that there has been a joint investigation established, and that the final findings have not yet been elucidated.

          But don’t let facts get in the way of your hatred.

          Reply to Comment
          • sh

            Eejit, next time keep your ad hominems to yourself! If apologies from our leaders were issued prior to the result of that inquiry, you can be sure that the 38 year-old judge did not try to grab the 20 year-old soldier’s weapon as originally claimed by the IDF. Also, conducting an inquiry into your own misconduct is not the way to arrive at truth or achieve justice.

            Reply to Comment
    3. george smiley

      “…rockets that would be fired at civilian areas.”

      And which would land, time after time, in open ground, with no casualties or damage reported. Let’s not forget this point.

      Reply to Comment
      • Chris Harrison

        Then lets also not forget suicide bombers,backpack bombs and the rockets that have injured or killed people. Lets also not forget the jihadist tactic of launching rockets from within crowds for the purpose of drawing Israeli response. Don’t forget, the reason they don’t get far enough in is b/c the IDF doesn’t give them the opportunity. When they are close enough to where it would actually cause damage or injuries, the IDF takes them out.

        Reply to Comment
        • sh

          If we’re already remembering, let’s also remember the innocent victims of Cast Lead and Pillars of Fire or whatever it was called, and wonder for how long we’re going to play this infantile tit for tat game with people who have no country, no army, no supply lines and nowhere to run to.

          Reply to Comment
          • shachalnur

            The preposterous name of the operation was “Pillar of Cloud”.

            Exodus 13:21 , “And HaShem went before them by day in a pillar of a cloud,to lead them the way; and by night in a pllar of fire,to give them light.To go by day and night.”

            Obviously trying to make people believe their work is backed by Hashem.

            An often repeated theme in order to get support from the American Christian Zionists,who love that narrative.

            Reply to Comment
          • Chris Harrison

            Yeah, and those military engagements had no precursor. It was just a full blown military offensive for no reason other than to “oppress the Palestinians.” They have no country b/c they don’t want to have a Jewish/Secular government. They have no army b/c they allowed the Arab league armies to fight for them. They do have militias and jihadist groups though. No supply lines? Good thing Egypt keeps destroying those smuggling tunnels.

            Reply to Comment
          • sh

            They allowed? OK, let’s say they wouldn’t have allowed. Would that have stopped the Arab League Armies who had their own axes to grind and didn’t hesitate to dump them when the going got tough?

            Reply to Comment
    4. The Trespasser

      Three truths about Gaza:

      1. No peace. With or without Gaza. Ask any decent Palestinian Arab.

      2. Since Gaza strip is controlled by forces which had declared war on Israel, it is perfectly legal to blocade Gaza, excersize restricted areas and destroy any targets deemed militarily worthy.

      3. Palestinians have no “right, enshrined in international law, to challenge the ongoing siege of Gaza” because Gaza is ruled by Hamas which, in terms of your beloved international law, is recognized as a terrorist organization.

      Reply to Comment

    LEAVE A COMMENT

    Name (Required)
    Mail (Required)
    Website
    Free text

© 2010 - 2014 +972 Magazine
Follow Us
Credits

+972 is an independent, blog-based web magazine. It was launched in August 2010, resulting from a merger of a number of popular English-language blogs dealing with life and politics in Israel and Palestine.

Website empowered by RSVP

Illustrations: Eran Mendel