It is easier to enter a maximum-security prison than it is to enter the strip of land — 45km long and maybe 8km wide — that is home to Gaza’s 1.5 million Palestinians. Surrounded by a forbidding wall, watchtowers and deadly buffer zones, I entered with a hard-to-obtain visa at the Erez crossing — iron gates, an interrogation by bored young immigration officers and scanners. On the other side is a kilometer-long caged walkway that leads into this part of Palestine, trapped between Israel, Egypt, the Mediterranean and the general indifference of the international community.
The view walking — in sweltering heat — through that long cage is apocalyptic. Small groups of Palestinians smash up the remains of Gaza’s bombed industrial infrastructure — the concrete blocks that litter the sandy landscape. They pummel the blocks for gravel and the steel bars inside. The result of their labor is hauled away in carts pulled by mangy horses or donkeys. This is much of what passes for industry in Gaza.
The world periodically wakes up to the horrors of life in Gaza, and then goes back to watching the World Cup or planning summer holidays. We were awakened, for example, by the military assault of December 2008 and January last year, when more than 1,300 Palestinians (including more than 300 children) and 13 Israelis died. We noticed the long-running horror story again when the Israeli Defense Forces attacked a Turkish flotilla, carrying relief supplies, in May, with nine civilian fatalities.
Those who argue that there is a humanitarian crisis in Gaza should not compare the situation with Ethiopia or Sudan in the middle of a drought or a war. Conditions in Gaza are harsh and the population does suffer. Israel’s government has denied that people are starving and has relaxed its import restriction regime. However, the siege was not intended to starve Gazans; as Dov Weissglass, a former aide to former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon, famously observed, the aim was “to put the Palestinians on a diet.”
The intention was collective punishment, imposed partly in response to Hamas’s political control of Gaza. Hamas won the 2006 elections in the whole of occupied Palestine and formed a national unity government with Fatah. The US, Israel and much of the international community then torpedoed that arrangement. It was all very well having elections — until the wrong side won.
With the changes in the import controls on Gaza — there is now a list of what cannot be taken in, rather than of what can — more goods should arrive. However, the ability to buy the jam, muesli, balsamic vinegar and pots of lemon curd that I saw in an up-market Gazan supermarket will not do much for ordinary people, 80 percent of whom depend on emergency food rations.
Moreover, ordinary Gazans cannot rebuild their homes and schools because building materials remain proscribed or are dribbled in only for UN projects. No raw materials, which would allow the revival of Gaza’s commerce and industry, are permitted.
This is a central part of Israel’s policy, in flat defiance of international law and customary norms of civilized behavior. Israel is applying a “smarter” siege, which will keep Palestinians here isolated, poor and aid-dependent, but not starving.
When I was in Gaza before the second Intifada, there were many examples of entrepreneurial activity — factories and farms. Most of that has been stamped out. As the assault on Gaza ended last year, Israeli military bulldozers flattened factories. The imposition of a border zone has gobbled up 29 percent of the strip’s agricultural land.
However, Israel and Egypt — partners in the siege — turn a blind eye most of the time to tunnels (perhaps as many as a thousand) that snake under the Egyptian border at Rafah and bring in black-market goods, which Hamas then taxes. Decent would-be Palestinian businessmen (the potential backbone of a middle class) are destroyed. Racketeers flourish. Kafkaesque politics produces “Alice in Wonderland” economics.
You see some of the humanitarian problems stemming from the siege most clearly when visiting hospitals, as I did with the charity Medical Aid for Palestinians, of which I am president. Life-saving drugs are in short supply, and equipment often does not work because of power cuts or the absence of spare parts. Seriously ill patients require permission to be treated in West Bank hospitals, and some are reportedly pressed to collaborate with Israel’s security services in return for being allowed out. Doctors and students can leave Gaza only rarely to attend conferences or universities abroad.
I strongly opposed the international call a year ago to boycott Israel’s universities. However, the Gaza blockade means that Israel boycotts Palestinian academic life. It is time that Israel took its boot off Gaza’s windpipe.
Some in Israel, such as Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, seem to want to cut off Gaza completely from the West Bank, in contravention of the Oslo accords (and the prospect of a two-state solution), and push it in the direction of Egypt. However, Gaza remains an integral part of Palestine — and a growing part. With its population increasing at 3.5 percent a year, the number of Gazans will double in about 15 years (the same timeframe in which the WHO estimates that Gaza will run out of water for its population).
What type of world will the children you see in such prodigious numbers in Gaza inherit? Will collective punishment make them moderate, law-abiding helots? History is not on the side of this immorality.
I want to see Israel, a free, democratic society, live up to its original values and be at peace with its neighbors. It will not achieve this through its appalling Gaza policy. The world — starting with the US administration and the EU — should tell that to Israel. But don’t hold your breath.
Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong and a former EU commissioner for external affairs, is chancellor of the University of Oxford.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Former US president Jimmy Carter’s legacy regarding Taiwan is a complex tapestry woven with decisions that, while controversial, were instrumental in shaping the nation’s path and its enduring relationship with the US. As the world reflects on Carter’s life and his recent passing at the age of 100, his presidency marked a transformative era in Taiwan-US-China relations, particularly through the landmark decision in 1978 to formally recognize the People’s Republic of China (PRC) as the sole legal government of China, effectively derecognizing the Republic of China (ROC) based in Taiwan. That decision continues to influence geopolitical dynamics and Taiwan’s unique
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) said that he expects this year to be a year of “peace.” However, this is ironic given the actions of some KMT legislators and politicians. To push forward several amendments, they went against the principles of legislation such as substantive deliberation, and even tried to remove obstacles with violence during the third readings of the bills. Chu says that the KMT represents the public interest, accusing President William Lai (賴清德) and the Democratic Progressive Party of fighting against the opposition. After pushing through the amendments, the KMT caucus demanded that Legislative Speaker
On New Year’s Day, it is customary to reflect on what the coming year might bring and how the past has brought about the current juncture. Just as Taiwan is preparing itself for what US president-elect Donald Trump’s second term would mean for its economy, national security and the cross-strait “status quo” this year, the passing of former US president Jimmy Carter on Monday at the age of 100 brought back painful memories of his 1978 decision to stop recognizing the Republic of China as the seat of China in favor of the People’s Republic of China. It is an
Beijing’s approval of a controversial mega-dam in the lower reaches of the Yarlung Tsangpo River — which flows from Tibet — has ignited widespread debate over its strategic and environmental implications. The project exacerbates the complexities of India-China relations, and underscores Beijing’s push for hydropower dominance and potential weaponization of water against India. India and China are caught in a protracted territorial dispute along the Line of Actual Control. The approval of a dam on a transboundary river adds another layer to an already strained bilateral relationship, making dialogue and trust-building even more challenging, especially given that the two Asian
RSS