Terrorism, in any form, is unequivocally condemnable. To maintain credibility in this stance, it is imperative that acts of civilian bombing, whether perpetrated by Hamas or Israel, are deemed unacceptable. A critical distinction in terms of form and responsibility lies in the fact that the latter represents a state, subject to distinct obligations. Another conspicuous disparity is that the state of Israel not only has a history of bombing civilians but is also actively pursuing a policy of forced evictions, displacing a million innocent Palestinians from the northern reaches of the Gaza Strip. This is being carried out under the pretext of reprisals, as a means to further extend its occupation of the area. With dwindling food, fuel, and water supplies due to the Israeli siege of Gaza, UN spokespersons in the region are warning of “severe humanitarian consequences” stemming from this forced evacuation, as Israel prepares for a brutal ground invasion.
For Palestinians, oppression is tragically not a novel experience. More than half a century of indescribable, dehumanizing repression in what is often referred to as the ‘world’s largest open-air prison’ has resulted in numerous ‘nakbas’ and forced expulsions of Palestinians from this beleaguered region through decades of state-sanctioned violence. The current expulsion effort appears to be part of a larger plan for several weeks of bloodshed and evacuations, akin to a ‘final solution’ for Palestinians who have been denied statehood and basic rights. The UN Secretary-General has described the area as a veritable “hell on earth.” It seems that David of the Israelites has now become Goliath.
Impunity for Israel is not a novel issue. While efforts to establish limits on unchecked power have historically fallen short, global order defines the rule of law based on moral purpose. What is perilous in the current conflagration in the Middle East is the normalization of international law’s foundations as fundamentally ‘nasty and brutish.’ The counterpoint to this is neither complex nor novel: when rights cease to be applied universally, their legitimacy erodes. In this context, what is regarded as a casus belli, or a cause for war, for one side is not perceived as a cause for the other. This sets the stage for a profound global disorder where law becomes a hostage to the unchecked whims of power. The cases of both Kashmir and Palestine, among the oldest disputes on the UN’s agenda, were meant to be exceptions, testaments to the international order’s ability and will to uphold universal norms. Yet when these exceptions threaten to become routine features of how states and systems are reordered in the 21st century, fresh dangers loom.
As the crisis escalates, it is not just the region’s strategic stability that is at risk. Despite numerous global actors investing military resources and power in containment efforts, the situation is already altering the diplomatic and military landscape worldwide. With the ubiquity of smartphones and instantaneous media coverage, while military containment of a conflict is achievable, controlling the narrative is not. Thanks to the courageous reporting by Al Jazeera’s journalists positioned at the heart of the turmoil, the narrative is not entirely one-sided or devoid of historical context. Now, outrage is directed at more than just Hamas for its attacks on Israel. Given the scant condemnation by Western media of the Israeli military’s brutal oppression, the sentiment on the Muslim street worldwide is largely in the opposite direction. While Gaza’s population is not an army, the Muslim world broadly sees Hamas’ armed assault on Israel as a response to Israel’s decades-long, violent occupation of the land where Palestinian refugees once welcomed Jewish settlers fleeing Nazi persecution in Europe.
History, in one of its many forms, provides a broader context. Much of the Palestinian issue, as it has come to be known, is rooted in the arbitrary division of land by the Allied powers after World War I. The collapse and dismemberment of the mighty Ottoman Empire culminated in this war, resulting in the creation of new successor states, including Ataturk’s modern Turkey, now known as Turkiye. A League of Nations mandate included provisions for a Jewish national homeland in Palestine, disregarding the views of the Palestinian population. The indigenous Arab people who had long called this region between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River home never accepted the arbitrary partition in 1948, and the Arab-Israeli war, involving five Arab states – Jordan, Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and Lebanon – led to even more extensive territorial changes and Palestinian discontent by 1949.
In brief, Israel evolved into a state backed by powerful nations, while Palestine was left to be invaded, occupied, and gradually reduced in size over decades of violent occupation, marked by the planned expansion of Jewish ‘settlements’ in what was once the homeland of millions of indigenous Palestinians. The Six-Day War in 1967, in which Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian forces engaged Israeli forces, resulted in significant territorial gains for Israel in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, and the Sinai Peninsula. Jews, who claimed ancient ties to this land, where three of the world’s major monotheistic religions originate, no longer wanted to share the land with their Arab neighbors. They celebrated their right to return from Europe while denying any Palestinian’s right to return.
After many ‘Intifadas,’ the struggle for resistance continues. This is the ongoing tragedy in Gaza, where women, children, and injured Palestinians are enduring a cruel and inhumane blockade imposed by Israel. For years, it has been possible to starve an entire population of their rights, humanity, and land, but the prolonged deprivation of food, water, electricity, and medical aid from an entire civilian population will have profound repercussions in the theater of conflict surrounding this war. The United Nations, which has been reluctant to intervene significantly in areas like Occupied Kashmir and Palestine, has now been compelled to denounce the Israeli Defense Forces’ merciless siege of Gaza as unlawful and inhumane.
What could this latest twist in events foreshadow? The now entirely Zionist state, under the leadership of Prime Minister Netanyahu, enjoys support from Western capitals, even as it deploys overwhelming force against the fleeing and starving Palestinian population. Netanyahu’s decision to escalate the situation into a full-scale war and his derogatory comments about Gaza’s people will only further inflame armed groups like Hamas. Regardless of potential retaliatory actions by non-state actors in the region, such as Hezbollah, there is unlikely to be a clear triumph for any party involved. The United States, a pivotal player in this scenario, has numerous options at its disposal, but its current stance, both militarily and politically, is resolute. The U.S. Secretary of State is actively engaged in shuttle diplomacy in the region, seeking a diplomatic solution, but the American position continues to align with Israel’s agenda.
Nonetheless, the region will not easily revert to its previous, uneasy ‘normal.’ The changes initiated by the Abraham Accords, which found acceptance in some GCC countries, may struggle to gain widespread acceptance in this atmosphere of trauma. In the Muslim world, Pakistan has expressed solidarity with the Palestinians, but the response of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is of paramount importance. So far, Saudi Arabia has unequivocally condemned all forms of violence while standing with the Palestinian people during this critical juncture. They have also advocated for a two-state solution. According to media reports, the Kingdom has conveyed its reluctance to continue negotiations backed by the Biden administration for normalizing Riyadh’s relations with Tel Aviv.
Arming combatants will not contribute to a resolution. Quite the opposite. The primary priority is to establish a ceasefire, and various erstwhile adversaries are now actively working to make this happen, with Iran and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia serving as a notable example. Reports also indicate that Turkey and Qatar are exploring ways to mediate an end to the violence. However, the skies over Gaza continue to darken with the specter of bombs, bloodshed, and suffering. Sustainable peace in the Middle East cannot be achieved unless Israelis and Palestinians are directly engaged in the process. People who lack states and the means to shape their own futures often carry the enduring memories of dispossession, death, and deprivation. Their responses can become generational acts of desperation that undermine regional stability and global security. This paradigm must change for the world to shift its focus toward the urgent, existential challenges of the 21st century. Ultimately, a just and inclusive peace remains the only viable path forward.
The writer is a former federal minister for climate change and environmental coordination.
Comments
Post a Comment