By Henri Astier BBC News
Israel has suggested that the long-term aim of its military campaign in Gaza is to sever all links with the territory.
Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said that once Hamas had been defeated, Israel would end its “responsibility for life in the Gaza Strip”.
Before the conflict, Israel supplied Gaza with most of its energy needs and monitored imports into the territory.
…
Destroy people’s homes, utilities, food, etc, then pulling out and saying “not my problem” while people die from lack of basic necessities and medical care as a result of Israel’s destruction and Israel does a pikashocked face while continuing to do whatever they can to limit aid getting in still seems pretty bad. Like, better than stealing the Territory…
It is a long term goal, not immediate goal. Having Palestine state (without Hamas) responsible for itself is a good thing.
Seeing promising things about a 2 state solution being discussed at the Cairo peace summit. Let’s hope after the violence cooler heads prevail and we can see a lasting peace in the region.
I would just expect another militant group to take their place. Every bombing essentially creates a new radicals. Would you really expect Palestinians to just forget about all their dead realitives?
I hope they will remember why they have dead relatives. A lot of Germans died too during WW2, but they did make right conclusions.
Funny how you compare them to the Germans when the Palestinians are the ones being ethnically cleansed.
This is more like the Afghan war. Everytime you bomb a civilian you create a new enemy.
Do you know what ethnic cleaning means? That it is different from genocide. Genocide is a method of ethnic cleansing, but not all ethnic cleansing is genocide. For example, Gaza did experience ethnic cleansing when Israel agreed to demilitarize the area and remove all settlements. All the Jews were forced out and it became essentially completely Arab.
A peace deals that involves land swaps can be considered ethnic cleansing. But it doesn’t involve killing anyone. What is happening is a fucking war. It is between an underdeveloped region and a very developed nation, but it is war. And you can absolutely bring up war crimes, rules of engagement, etc. But at least know what those things mean.
See people always say this, but it isn’t some universal truth. Often people get exhausted and would prefer a shaky peace with a compromise over writing about random bombs and rockets.
The IRA and Ireland (I’ve often seen people comparing Hamas to the IRA situation, but just imagine if the IRA had been demanding not only a united Ireland, but they also wanted England, Scotland, and Wales too). ETA and basque country. Although there are a lot more extremist groups in that region that could take hold, I will admit. Which is why Israel is likely planning on a wider more strict dmz until peace can be agreed upon and sustained. And if it cannot, then Gaza should probably work on their Egyptian diplomatic relations and a 3 state solution is more likely here.
Because even if you want to think bad things about Israel’s government, they are working hard on diplomacy in the region and do not want repeated war with Gaza to sidetrack it. They were supposed to have diplomatic talks with Saudi Arabia until Hamas attacked them. Already have them with several Arab league nations. A large dmz, Hamas removed from power, and Gaza being forced to work with Egypt might accomplish that.
They’ll steal the territory after they’ve starved out anyone who was able to resist it.
They had complete control of Gaza and the whole Sinai Peninsula. Which quadrupled the size of land Israel controlled. But they gave control back to Egypt to make peace in 1978. Then in 2004-05 they completely withdrew from Gaza and dismantled and (sometimes forcefully) removed all settlements and settlers in an attempt at making peace.
Now in the first situation since for 45 years, the two groups have maintained peace. The other Arab nations were less peaceful with Israel, however. Islamic jihadists even assassinated Sadat. But there has been peace with Israel.
In the second, they used it an opportunity to essentially become a terrorist controlled territory. And increased the attacks. And reject any peace negotiations.
So what should Israel do? What solution might you suggest.
If they want to make Gaza a independent state, then let them have unrestricted maritime trade access with the world. Build them enough water and power capability to self sustain - then they can truly say ‘we did all that we could do, our responsibility is over’
This escape from new york style prison city with no trade, no water, no electricity, and no imports, isn’t going to make peaceful neighbors.
Populations that co-depend on each other for economic success are more peaceful, trade, and integration are keys to long term stability.
deleted by creator
It’s only responsible that any decolonization process have the colonizer ensure basic services exists at the time of independence. In this circumstance the colonizer has prevented any imports of technology which could be used to create energy and water independence. Not to mention the bombing of infrastructure over time. They had more power generating capacity, but it’s been bombed.
So if you want to get to a clean slate, clean hands, you need to provide the bare minimum so that there’s not an immediate humanitarian crisis when you give them full independence, and you’re no longer responsible.
That being said I’m sure the Palestinian people would value independence over water and electricity, as long as they’re allowed to trade with other countries, they will take independence and a humanitarian emergency any day over no independence. It’s just not a good look for the colonizer
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
Removed under Rule 4. We aren’t going to let people call for the dissolution of a state or people. It doesn’t matter if they’re Israeli or Palestinian.
Okay but you have to understand that by doing so you are decidedly and actively shifting the discourse to favour the Israelis, right?
Not if the discussion moves towards the Israeli talking points of the Palestinians are animals who need to be exterminated.
Atticles exposing that outlook are definitely allowed, comments advocating it are not.
No my point is that in an asymmetrical situation like this actions banning speaking out over “both sides” really only favours one side.
Like if we have an issue with a large group of homophobes who have systemic power calling for the death of gay people, and in return those gay people making similar statements about those homopohbes because the homophobes want them dead, then by giving those two opinions equal value and banning them both you are intrinsically favouring the homophobes as they both hold the power and are morally in the wrong.
Why would they do that? They pulled out of the territory in 2004 in an attempt at peace. Every Jew who wanted to live there has been forced out.
Really? No settlers on Palestinian land since 2004? Really?
They are talking about Gaza.
Palestine is more than just Gaza. You think they are going to be okay with Israel stealing their land as long as they are notstealing land from the giant open air prison?
If the government of the West Bank was organizing this violence I’d be a lot more understanding of the violence.
0 in the Gaza Strip. 0 in the land that Hamas administers. 0 amongst the people that started the conflict.
Ah yes, “Israel continues to maintain direct control over Gaza’s air and maritime space, six of Gaza’s seven land crossings, maintains a no-go buffer zone within the territory, controls the Palestinian population registry, and Gaza remains dependent on Israel for its water, electricity, telecommunications, and other utilities.”
I guess Gazans should have been really grateful for that…
Edit: responded to the wrong comment.