Understanding
the Gaza catastrophe
The
people of Gaza have been victimised for
reasons remote from rockets and Israel's border security concerns,
says Richard Falk. That such a human catastrophe can happen with
minimal outside interference shows the weakness of international law
and the UN, says this UN Human Rights Special Rapporteur on the Occupied
Palestinian territories.
FOR
18 months the entire 1.5 million people of Gaza
experienced a punishing blockade imposed by Israel, and a variety of traumatising
challenges to the normalcy of daily life. A flicker of hope emerged
some six months ago when an Egyptian-arranged truce produced an effective
ceasefire that cut Israeli casualties to zero despite the periodic cross-border
firing of homemade rockets that fell harmlessly on nearby Israeli territory,
and undoubtedly caused anxiety in the border town of Sderot. During the ceasefire
the Hamas leadership in Gaza repeatedly
offered to extend the truce, even proposing a 10-year period, and claimed
a receptivity to a political solution based on acceptance of Israel's
1967 borders. Israel
ignored these diplomatic initiatives, and failed to carry out its side
of the ceasefire agreement that involved some easing of the blockade
that had been restricting the entry to Gaza
of food, medicine, and fuel to a trickle.
Israel also refused exit permits to
students with foreign fellowship awards and to Gazan journalists and
respected NGO representatives. At the same time, it made it increasingly
difficult for journalists to enter, and I was myself expelled from Israel
a couple of weeks ago when I tried to enter to carry out my UN job of
monitoring respect for human rights in occupied Palestine, that is,
in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, as well as Gaza. Clearly, prior
to the current crisis, Israel used its authority to prevent credible
observers from giving accurate and truthful accounts of the dire humanitarian
situation that had been already documented as producing severe declines
in the physical condition and mental health of the Gazan population,
especially noting malnutrition among children and the absence of treatment
facilities for those suffering from a variety of diseases. Could this
have been part of pre-attack planning?
As
always in relation to the underlying conflict, the facts bearing on
this latest crisis are murky and contested, although the American public
in particular gets 99% of its information filtered through an exceedingly
pro-Israel media lens. Hamas is blamed for the breakdown of the truce
by its supposed unwillingness to renew it, and by the alleged increased
incidence of rocket attacks. But the reality is more clouded. There
was no substantial rocket fire from Gaza during the ceasefire until
Israel launched an attack on what it claimed were Palestinian militants
in Gaza, killing a half dozen persons. Also, it was Hamas that on numerous
public occasions called for extending the truce, with its calls never
acknowledged, much less acted upon, by Israeli officialdom. Beyond this,
attributing the rockets to Hamas is not entirely convincing either.
A variety of independent militia groups operate in Gaza, some of which,
such as the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade, are anti-Hamas, and may even be
sending rockets to provoke or justify Israeli retaliation. It is well
confirmed that when moderate Fatah controlled Gaza's
governing structure it was unable to stop rocket attacks despite its
efforts to do so.
What
this background suggests strongly is that Israel launched its devastating attacks,
starting on 27 December, not to stop the rockets or in retaliation,
but for a series of other reasons. It was evident for several weeks
prior to the Israeli attacks that the Israeli military and political
leaders were preparing the public for large-scale military operations
against Hamas. The timing of the attacks seemed prompted by a series
of considerations: most of all, the interest of political contenders,
the Defence Minister Ehud Barak and the Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni,
in demonstrating their toughness prior to national elections scheduled
for February. Such Israeli shows of force have been a feature of past
Israeli election campaigns, and on this occasion especially, the current
government was being successfully challenged by Israel's notoriously militarist politician,
Benjamin Netanyahu, for its failures to uphold security. Reinforcing
these electoral motivations was the little-concealed pressure from the
Israeli military commanders to seize the opportunity in Gaza to erase
the memories of their failure to destroy Hezbollah in the devastating
Lebanon War of 2006 that both tarnished Israel's reputation as a military
power and led to widespread international condemnation for the heavy
bombardment of undefended Lebanese villages and extensive use of cluster
bombs in heavily populated areas.
Respected
and conservative Israeli commentators go further. For instance, the
prominent historian, Benny Morris, writing in the New York Times recently,
relates the campaign in Gaza to a deeper
set of forebodings in Israel
that he compares to the dark mood of the public that preceded the 1967
War when Israelis felt deeply threatened by Arab mobilisations on their
borders. Morris insists that despite Israeli prosperity of recent years,
and relative security, several factors have led Israel to act boldly
in Gaza: the refusal of the Arab world to accept the existence of Israel
to any convincing degree; the inflammatory threats voiced by Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad together with Iran's supposed push to acquire nuclear weapons,
the fading memory of the Holocaust combined with growing sympathy in
the West with the Palestinian plight, and the radicalisation of political
movements on Israel's borders in the form of Hezbollah and Hamas. In
effect, Israel is
trying, via the crushing of Hamas in Gaza,
to send a wider message to the region that it will stop at nothing to
uphold its claims of sovereignty and security.
There are two conclusions that emerge: the people of Gaza
are being severely victimised for reasons remote from the rockets and
border security concerns, but seemingly to improve election prospects
of current leaders now facing defeat, and to warn others in the region
that Israel
will stop at nothing if its interests are at stake.
That such a human catastrophe can happen with minimal outside interference
also shows the weakness of international law and the United Nations,
as well as the geopolitical priorities of the important players. The
passive support of the United States
government for whatever Israel
does is again the critical factor, as it was in 2006 when it launched
its aggressive war against Lebanon.
What is less evident is that the main Arab neighbours, Egypt,
Jordan, and Saudi
Arabia, with their extreme hostility toward Hamas
that is viewed as backed by Iran,
their main regional rival, were also willing to stand aside while Gaza was being so brutally
attacked.
The people of Gaza are victims of geopolitics
at its inhumane worst: producing what Israel
itself calls a 'total war' against an essentially defenceless society
that lacks any defensive military capability whatsoever and is completely
vulnerable to Israeli attacks mounted by F-16 bombers and Apache helicopters.
What this also means is that the flagrant violation of international
humanitarian law, as set forth in the Geneva Conventions, is quietly
set aside while the carnage continues and the bodies pile up. It additionally
means that the UN is once more revealed to be impotent when its main
members deprive it of the political will to protect a people subject
to unlawful uses of force. Finally, this means that the public can shriek
and march all over the world, but that the killing will go on as if
nothing is happening. The picture being painted day by day in Gaza
is one that begs for renewed commitment to international law and the
authority of the UN Charter, starting here in the United States, especially with a new
leadership that promised its citizens change, including a less militarist
approach to diplomatic leadership.
Richard
Falk, professor emeritus of international law and practice at Princeton University,
is the United Nations Human Rights Special Rapporteur on the Occupied
Palestinian Territories.
*Third
World
Resurgence No. 221/222, January-February 2009,
pp 20-21
|