We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
BETWEEN THE BEGINNING of January and the end of October of this year, in excess of 500 rocket and mortar shell attacks were launched from Gaza into the territory of the state of Israel and, perhaps, more importantly into areas populated by civilians. Clearly, as many observers both inside and outside Israel have noted, this situation would be intolerable to any sovereign state and, under any ‘normal’ set of circumstances, a serious response would be both understandable and justified. However, the relationship between Israel and Gaza is anything but normal and the recent outbreak of violence on both sides can only be understood in the context of this broader relationship.
In August 2006, Israel unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza Strip, which, together with the West Bank, it had occupied since the June 1967 war with neighbouring Arab states. However, this ‘disengagement’ by no means put an end to Israeli control over the tiny territory. Earlier in 2006, the Islamist movement Hamas was victorious in elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council – the assembly created under the terms of the Israeli-Palestinian ‘peace process’ which Hamas largely rejected. In late 2006 conflict broke out between Hamas and the secular Fatah organisation which ultimately led to the consolidation of Hamas’ control over Gaza while Fatah took control of the West Bank.
Israel responded by blockading Gaza by land, air and sea – subjecting its population of 1.6 million to strict controls on imports, exports and the movement of people by land air and sea in a manner that the United Nations has characterized as ‘collective punishment’ of all of those living in Gaza and a denial of basic human rights in contravention of international law. According to a 2008 report of the International Committee of the Red Cross, 70 per cent of the population are food insecure, dozens of basic medicines are unavailable due to the blockade and the infrastructure of Gaza has been devastated over the past five years. In June of this year, six UN agencies including UNICEF, the UN High Commission for Human Rights and UNESCO called for an end to the blockade as a violation of international law.
One result of all of this has been recurrent outbreaks of violence between Israel and Gaza-based groups. However, such conflict is asymmetrical in nature. While Hamas is in possession of thousands of rockets with a range of less than 50 miles, Israel has one of the best-equipped armies in the world. Between December 27 2008 and September 30 2012 eighteen Israelis were killed by Gaza-based Palestinian groups. During the same period, 1,661 Palestinians were killed by Israeli forces. In the latest round of violence, around 1500 rockets were fired from Gaza between November 14 and the ceasefire eight days later. In response there were the same number of Israeli airstrikes on Gaza. During this set of exchanges five Israelis and 167 Palestinians were killed. While Israel cited attacks from Gaza as the provocation for its actions, many see a link with impending general elections in Israel, although few doubted that prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, would be re-elected in any case.
The outbreak of violence is nothing new. What is different this time is the regional context and the ways in which the ceasefire was agreed. The tumultuous changes in the Middle East over the last 22 months have dramatically altered the regional political landscape. This time around Israel negotiated in Cairo with Hamas and Islamic Jihad indirectly through the new Islamist government in Egypt. Also key to the talks were US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton and Recep Tayyip Erdogan, leader of the Islamist Turkish ruling party. Whether the ceasefire will last is open the doubt – already there have been breaches.
However, a number of things are clear. The reliance of the US on Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood leadership indicates a new willingness on the part of Washington to engage with Islamists at least for as long as they have shared objectives. The intervention of the new Egyptian Prime Minister, Mohammed Mursi, has enhanced his regional and international prestige. His decree, following the ceasefire, in which he assumed sweeping new powers drew widespread condemnation within Egypt but little by way of critical response from the international community.
But, if the regional context has changed, what appears unaltered are the underlying dynamics of the conflict. Netanyahu resists substantial negotiations with the Palestinians who remain divided ideologically between Hamas and Fatah, as well as geographically between Hamas-controlled Gaza and the Fatah-controlled West Bank. The largely uncritical support of the US for the Israeli position, as evidenced by its opposition to the vote on Palestinian statehood at the UN General Assembly, remains unwavering. Given all of this, how long will it be before we witness the latest round in the apparently never-ending but utterly unproductive cycle of violence between Israel and the Palestinians?
Dr Vincent Durac lectures in Politics of Development; Middle East Politics; the International Politics of the Middle East and Political Islam in the UCD School of Politics and International Relations. His research is focused on a number of aspects of contemporary Middle East Politics, including political reform, the role of civil society the impact of external actors in the region and Yemeni political dynamics. He is a visiting lecturer in Middle East Politics in Bethlehem University in Palestine.
Fair analysis of the recent situation but ignores Israel’s continued agitation by building settlements and complete suppression of the Palestinian people. I believe that those with the most power have the greatest responsibility and that is Israel. The US increasingly partisan position makes matters worse.
To be fair, the article is focused on particular issues relating to Gaza (separate to the West Bank and settlements, etc.).
18 Israelis to 1661 Palestinians , unbelievable how can this be justified .
Nothing short of genocide
Strange definition of genocide.
Israel knows it won’t get away with genocide, which is the only thing that stops it.
However, many prominent military and political figures have called for ‘transfer’; an appalling euphemism for ethnic cleansing of Palestinians with Israeli citizenship.
Wars are usually won by the party that kills a significantly higher number of its enemy than its enemy kills of them.
That said, both wars between Israel and Gaza have had much lower casualties than every other similar conflict and the Civilian Casualty Ratio (noncombatants to combatants) is much better than other wars. According to the Red Cross the civilian-to-soldier death ratio in wars fought since the mid-20th century has been 10:1. In the Gaza War it is believed to be 1:1 or even less. NATO operations in Afghanistan have a ratio of 3 noncombatants to every combatant.
Israel’s low casualties have come because it takes enormous efforts to protect them. Shelters, early warning and the Iron Dome protection system among them. The IDF have done a great job of catching the rocket launchers before they set them off and avoiding additional calibrating launches from the same spot. In addition, the rockets used by Hamas and islamic Jihad are much more a terrorist weapon than an accurate military one. The 1,400 rockets and mortars shot at Israel are inaccurate so they are aimed at civilian popuulation centres in the hope of randomly hitting someone.
Despite Hamas providing shelters for its top ranks and not for the average Gazan and their tactic of using human shields the actually casualty figures are low. Part of this is due to Israel sacrificing the element of surprise by warning the civilians to flee places that will soon be a target. Hamas is on record as instructing the people to ignore thaose warnings.
Agree with most of this, but if the US is no longer the key player then who is? Egypt still weak and Turkey will place limits on its involvement. Sanctioning Israel seems the only way to pressure it towards a peace settlement with the indigenous population, the Palestinians. The EU should take a lead here, and civil society, by way of a cultural and consumer boycott could apply the necessary pressure also.
There’s a very interesting piece by Hussein Agha and Robert Malley in the NYRB where he discusses the shifting alliances in relation to the Middle East (and America’s relative power): http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/nov/08/not-revolution/?pagination=false (Malley is interviewed by NPR about the same issues here: http://www.npr.org/2012/11/28/166067920/the-middle-east-a-web-of-topsy-turvy-alliances)
It really highlights Americas hypocrisy when it comes to human rights. Little wonder the middle east sees it as the enemy. Hopefully Europe will now sanction Israel and at least appear to confront the bully!
Hatred of America and much it stands for including materialism, individual freedoms, economic system, racism, brutal boxing matches, “poor” haircuts, superficiality in conversations and friendships, restrictions on divorce, enthusiasm for sports, lack of artistic feeling,[22] “animal-like” mixing of the sexes (which “went on even in churches”), the sexuality of American women and Jazz has been a feature of Muslim Brotherhood (Hamas is a branch) thinking since at least the early 1950s when Sayyid Qutb returned to Egypt. Support for Israel is only one of many reasons. Support for regimes that don’t want to bring their countries back to the 7th century is another.
ISRAEL IS THE EXCUSE NOT THE REASON. They hate ireland just as much but now isn’t the time to show it.
What about the death toll in Syria?Where’s the concern there?
Oh right,they’re not being murdered by “Jews”.
People generally comment on the deaths in Syria on the multiple threads dealing with that issue.
I love when apologists for israeli war crimes try to point at other dictatorships to try an mitigate israels crimes. Zionism is racism and it will fall just like Apartheid in South Africa.
Israel is the only democracy in the middle east. If you`re looking for racism look at her neighbours.
Paddy, Zionists and their supporters need to get over this ridiculous notion that Israel is a democracy.
Israel has 30+ laws that discriminate directly against Israeli Arabs, notably the ban on family unification and the presence of admission committees who decide where Arab Israeli citizens can and can’t live.
The fact that it is supposedly a democracy, yet is officially a “Jewish state” despite its 20% Arab population is preposterous. People need to stop falling back on this ridiculous claim of democracy to justify Israel’s war crimes.
Here`s a few examples of countries with state religions, at least four of them with sizable minorities, are you suggesting these countries are not democracies?
Malta
Greece
England
Denmark
Iceland
Norway
Btw any link to these fictitious 30 + laws discriminating against Israeli Arabs?
the US with its overwhelming bias towards one party over the other should not have any involvement in brokering any peace agreement in the region…
What I was saying is that there were far more civilians killed than militants . We all know Israel’s line on the matter ” human shields ” when in fact they are the ones who bomb indiscriminately and accuse hammas of hiding behind civilians .
Those who bless the Jews I will bless, those who curse the Jews I will curse. God. Make your choice folks.
Seriously? Bible quotes? Is that what’s actually happening here?
Could you try and find some form of reasonable debate or would you like me to start quoting excerpts from the latest Twilight book to make my point.
Another thing is we know Israel is more than capable of carrying out assassinations with a small group of Mossad operatives and leaving no trace , however when it is in gaza or the west bank they just bomb them instead , because the more dead Palestinians the better as far as they are concerned . It’s very easy for them to just come out with the old human shield line .
The Palestinians are a pawn in the wider security concerns of the USA. It needs Israel there as a bulwark of its influence in the region. So the loss of Palestinian life is tolerated.
Most of Israel’s support in the US comes from the Christian Right. 44% of Americans in a recent poll say “God” gave that land to the Jews. You can’t reason with such people. They are as dangerous as Islamic and Jewish fundamentalists, and their shrill pronouncements against Muslims echo those of Pop Urban II calling the First Crusade in 1095. It is though that 80% of these people vote Republican but it’s a 50:50 nation so every vote counts.
Hopes for for a more even-handed policy rest on the following:
- The growing secularism of the American electorate. In the CNN exit-polls in the US election this year, 20% said they have “no religion”, which is unprecedented for the US but still a small minority.
- Immigration of largely Catholic Hispanics may eventually reduce the influence of the pro-Israel Evangelical Protestants who are 26% of the electorate.
- The growth of J-Street, a new liberal Jewish lobby and rival to AIPAC, may tone down the more hawkish anti-Palestinian tendencies of Congress. Congress has massive power to force the President to bend to Israel’s will. Votes sponsored by AIPAC usually go through almost unanimously, but significantly after much lobbying by J-Street, Congress withdrew an AIPAC-sponsored vote on imposing sanctions on the Palestinians for the UN statehood vote.
- The primary-system for choosing Congressional candidates may ultimately lead to more neutral/pro-Palestinian elements getting elected. At the DNC, there was great division over the status of Jerusalem and most analysts believe that despite the declared outcome, the vote was actually won by those opposing declaring Jerusalem as Israel’s ‘undivided’ capital.
How many of that 1661 were militants and how many we’re innocent civilians .
why are you even asking that question? is it because they must be all “militants” since Israel.. the angels of the middle east.. only target these groups with their attacks ?
get real John.. if it was only 10% civilians it is still nearly 10 times the number of Israeli casualties in the same period…
also the US shouldn’t be involved as a broker in the conflict anyway since they are so obviously biased to one side…
Playing the numbers game doesn`t hold up to any scrutiny. Israel tries to protect it`s citizens whilst the fascists of Hamas fire rockets from civilian areas using the Palestinian people as human shields.
Here’s what Chomsky says about Netamyahu:
http://www.drivebyplanet.com/2010/03/noam-chomsky-netanyahus-arrogant.html?m=1
Interesting piece but the title is puzzling given what follows.
Also, I don’t think the Americans willingness to engage with Islamists is anything new. Didn’t stop then in Afghanistan when it suited their interests there.
The Muslim Brotherhood of which Hamas is the Palestinian branch have hated America since Sayyid Qutb returned from America in 1951. In an article he wrote “The America that I Have Seen.” he criticised its materialism, individual freedoms, economic system, racism, brutal boxing matches, “poor” haircuts, superficiality in conversations and friendships, restrictions on divorce, enthusiasm for sports, lack of artistic feeling, “animal-like” mixing of the sexes (which “went on even in churches”), and strong support for the new Israeli state. He disapproved of the sexuality of American women, essentially because he could see their bodies and faces. He considered Jazz music to be primitive Negro music designed to be noisy and bestial.
In short everything about America.
Now that Obama has made it clear that there is nothing militarily to fear from America; and that prior alliances mean nothing and that despite the contempt the Hamas and Islamic Jihad forms of Islam show for America the cash flow will continue is it any wonder America has no influence?
This constant babble about the intractable situation in the Middle East is so pointless. There is no logical resolution to war and there never will be. It’s a cultural hate, and ongoing religious debate, fought with bullets and bombs. Historically, this would have been resolved in an all out fight, winner takes all. And of course the weaker would grudgingly submit to the overwhelming forceful might and revisionism of the victors. It’s a fools game to pretend the west can police a world without the real means/ political will/ consensus to do so. We know somewhere deep down inside that we can only dampen the flame, but the conflagration is a certainty. What a shame. Question? Is a deep, sharp laceration better than a shallow, large wound that never heals? Answer: depends on the victim.
“….It’s a cultural hate, and ongoing religious debate….”
No it’s not. It’s a straightforward land & resources theft with a scorched earth policy toward the existing owners.
The Israeli governments of the last decade (at least) have never had any intention of accepting a two-state solution – they want the lot, minus the Palestinians.
Well said, Mike. That’s it in a nutshell.
Mike think again. Swap the positions around, Israelis for Palestinians, land, military power etc. now lets rely on historical antecedence and current political and military declarations. How would the Palestinians treat with this situation. How would the other countries in the Middle East be behaving right now? When you’ve hypothesised about it for a bit then reconsider your position and see if it holds true.
have your say