Gaza: The jailed state

The world cannot afford to stand by while the Israeli army and Palestinian militias fight their unwi

By Zaki Chehab Published 28 May 2007

As hundreds of Israeli families leave the town of Sderot in southern Israel to escape Hamas-designed Qassam rockets and mortars, Palestinians in turn are fleeing the wrath of Israeli air strikes on Gaza, which in the past week have killed more than 30 people, many of them civilians. This latest bloodshed in the besieged Gaza Strip comes hard on the heels of deadly inter-Palestinian battles between Hamas and Fatah that Palestinian security forces have been unable to contain.

These events leave the impression that the political leadership within the unity government has neither the will nor the capability to enforce a ceasefire and maintain its effectiveness. Some within Hamas are even saying that it would be in the interests of the Palestinian people to dissolve the Palestinian Authority here and now, because it has proved incapable of alleviating the Palestinians' misery or finding an enduring solution to the conflict with Israel.

While leaders of Fatah and Hamas are united in making strides towards reconciliation, the resistance shown by their supporters has forced Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh and President Mahmoud Abbas to order the training of large numbers of police and army to secure the borders and bring order to the unruly state.

The government of national unity had been seriously weakened by the resignation of the Palestinian interior minister, Hani al-Qawasmi. Selected for the key post because he was independent of both groups, Qawasmi believed he had been rendered powerless to implement measures agreed in Mecca on 8 February 2007 in a signed deal between Fatah and Hamas sponsored by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.

The emergency summit had been called by King Abdullah following heavy fighting between Hamas and Fatah factions that had claimed about a hundred Palestinian lives.

During the Mecca summit, the king asked Khaled Meshal, the Damascus-based Hamas leader, why his movement couldn't recognise the State of Israel. Meshal's response was that this standpoint was not that of Hamas, but of the higher leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood, the worldwide Islamist movement. Hamas is a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, which believes that the land of Palestine is held under an Islamic waqf - meaning that no Palestinian, whatever his position, has the right to relinquish any part of it to non-Muslims. For this reason, Hamas has always spoken of relations with the Israelis in terms of a long truce, or what in Arabic is called a hudna.

When the obdurate non-acceptance of Israel led the international community to enforce sanctions against the Hamas-led government, the Palestinian population paid a high price. Some 70 per cent live below the poverty line and many rely heavily on handouts from the United Nations and international aid organisations. Many had been clinging to the hope that the recently formed unity government would revive international confidence in Palestinian governance and lead to the lifting of sanctions.

But Hamas's landslide victory in January 2006 had empowered its leaders to assume that they were not obliged to listen to other voices within Palestinian society. Cronyism and favouritism were the selection processes by which unqualified people were appointed to plum jobs. Freih Abu Middein, a former minister, well-known lawyer and leader of one of Gaza's largest clans, described the level of corruption within the Hamas movement after one year in office as being on a par with that of the much-maligned Fatah administration.

There was no improvement in services or lifestyle. Salaries were paid only in the first two or three months, and then they dried up. This alienated many Palestinians who felt that Hamas was not taking on board their concerns about the movement's handling of the Arab-Israeli conflict. They believed Hamas had to deal with the reality on the ground - that Israel, like it or not, exists. This is borne out each day as Palestinians undergo rigorous checks at the border. European observers may control the checkpoints, but Israelis monitor from a distance. And Israel has overall authority for the checkpoints, which are being closed several times a week.

As if all this weren't enough, al-Qaeda has emerged in the theatre of Gaza. In a video released and broadcast by al-Jazeera, al-Tawhid wa'al-Jihad - an al-Qaeda affiliate and the kidnap group that has held the BBC correspondent Alan Johnston in Gaza for more than two months - demanded the release of al-Qaeda activists. Its list included Abu Qatada, the militant Palestinian-Jordanian imprisoned in the UK and described as Osama Bin Laden's man in Europe, and Sajida al-Rishawi, the Iraqi woman who played a role in the bombing campaign that targeted Jordanian hotels in late 2005.

Johnston's kidnappers gave a glimmer of hope to family and friends when they used the password "Mombasa", the name of Johnston's cat. It appears he is being held by the same group that held two Fox News journalists to ransom in 2006. They were released after two weeks.

But the demands made for Johnston's release, the style of the video and other tactics bear the hallmarks of al-Qaeda's operations worldwide. The video has confirmed fears that al-Qaeda is taking advantage of the chaos and lawlessness to extend its reach into the Palestinian territories, and specifically the Gaza Strip.

A likely point of entry is the sprawling secret tunnel network connecting Egypt with Gaza. More than a year ago, Mahmoud Abbas sounded warning bells that al-Qaeda was becoming active in small cells in Gaza. Palestinians do not welcome the idea of extreme elements on their soil, as they wish their fight to remain within the boundaries of the Palestinian territories.

One name widely talked about in connection with the kidnapping of the British journalist is that of Dagmoush, a clan once allied to Hamas. But, according to sources, Mumtaz Dagmoush, one of the clan's leaders, has recently switched allegiance to Bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri. His close relationship with Hamas was severed after a Hamas activist killed a member of his immediate family. In revenge, Dagmoush threatened to reveal information about the dirty jobs carried out on behalf of Hamas, including the murder of Moussa Arafat, head of Palestinian military intelligence, killed in a raid on his house in Gaza in 2005.

The government of national unity has been much criticised for its response to the Johnston kidnapping, in particular its failure to make make Dagmoush feel under any kind of pressure. In the light of both this and the deteriorating relationship between Hamas and Fatah, Mahmoud Abbas is likely to feel that he has no option but to dissolve the parliament and call an election for both parliament and the presidency. Such a move would have to be approved by both Fatah and Hamas, otherwise Gaza and the West Bank could all too easily face a situation similar to the one in Somalia, where clans and warlords hold sway and determine the daily life of the people.

This places a heavy duty on the international community to address the chaos. The effects of the situation in Gaza could reach far beyond the confines of the Palestinian territories. There is considerable peril in allowing al-Qaeda's newest recruits to operate in Gaza.

The Palestinians urgently need international financial support and a just solution to their crisis. Recent fighting in northern Lebanon between the Lebanese army and affiliates of al-Qaeda (led by a Palestinian) has already claimed the lives of nearly a hundred civilians and soldiers. Al-Qaeda's new allies in Gaza are banking on the desperation of Palestinians inside the occupied territories to spread throughout the region.

Zaki Chehab is the author of "Inside Hamas" (published by I B Tauris in the UK and by Nation Books in the US)

Key dates in history of the Gaza Strip
Research by Shabeeh Abbas

1949 Egypt occupies strip following 1948 Arab-Israeli War

1956 Occupied by Israel after Suez War, in which Israel, France and Britain attack Egypt. International pressure forces Israel to withdraw in 1957

1967 Recaptured by Israel in Six Day War. United Nations calls on Israel to withdraw

1970 First Jewish settlement in Gaza

1987 First Intifada. Hamas is formed

1993 Oslo Accords. First Intifada ends. Palestinian Authority takes control of strip

2000 Ariel Sharon visits al-Aqsa Mosque, sparking the Second Intifada

2005 Israel withdraws troops but maintains control of the strip's borders and airspace

2006 Hamas wins elections. Crippling economic sanctions imposed on new government because of its refusal to renounce violence and recognise Israel. Clashes between Hamas and Fatah militants become commonplace

2007 Fatah and Hamas form unity government but fail to prevent factional fighting. Israeli air strikes continue to kill civilians

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Gaza in crisis

View the discussion thread.

48 comments

Wed, 2007-06-06 13:13 — Amihai

If the intent is to reach an accommodation of peaceful coexistence between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs, which Israelis are very eager to reach, the Hamas based Palestinian Authority must adhere to three simple requirements of the entire international: 1) adhere to previously negotiated and signed agreements between the Palestinian Arab leadership and the state of Israel; 2) accept in principle Israel's right to exist, that is not just the fact that Israel exists, but rather its right to do so; and, 2) cease all acts of terror and violence towards Israel and Israelis and the preparation for such acts. These three requirements are at the very core of every relationships including of course proper international relations.

The question is often asked: Has Israel met these three requirements? The answer is clearly yes, although some would interpret reality differently. But the UN, EU, US and Russia are the entities that have concluded that it is the Hamas based government that has not met these pre-requisites and they are the entities, within the context of the Quartet, that demanded the Hamas based PA's government to meet these pre-requisites.

Since nearly a year and a half has passed since this request has been place, the Hamas based government has refused to meet these requirements. To the average Israeli that I am the message is clear: The Hamas based government has concluded to adhere to its charter which calls for the actual annihilation of the Jewish state of Israel and the use all, yes, all means by which to achieve this goal, including the mass murder of Jews of all ages and walks of life as a clear violation of all the fundamental negotiated and signed agreements between the Palestinian Arab leadership and Israel. This approach obviously does not bode well for Israel's high interest in reaching an accommodation of peaceful coexistence between Arab and Jew, between the Jewish state of Israel and an independent Palestinian Arab political entity.

Fri, 2007-05-25 05:42 — Michael LeFavour

The last thing in the world we need is to support a murdering death cultist society based on racism and religious bigotry. Allowing a totalitarian tyranny to form is surrendering moral legitimacy. No free nation has the right to stand by and allow it to happen. We must all oppose the creation of a terrorist sanctuary on Israeli land. It will reward barbarism and further the cause of violence over justice.

fact 1 the vast majority of displaced Arabs were landless to begin with, many were registered as refugees to receive handouts even though they were never even displaced. Some did lose their homes, but if they had accepted UN 181 none of them would have lost anything. Who is to blame? Not the Israelis.

Fact 2 The vast majority of Arabs left at the request of their own leaders. Hostile to the Jews British newspapers did not report any forced evictions for any of the weeks while the evacuees were leaving or any time shortly after, the myth of Arabs being forced off their land is just that, a myth. Most left without ever seeing an armed Jew and thousands were begged to stay, those that did were not put into refugee camps...that was the fate of those evacuees on the Arab side of the cease fire line.

Fact 3. Not satisfied with 77% of Palestine, the Arabs launched a war of genocide in 1948 to massacre the defenseless Jewish community in what remained of the Palestine territory not stolen from the Jews. If they had accepted UN 181 much of the 23% of the territory left would have been attached to transJordan. It is not likely they would have been satisfied with anything short of complete subjugation and a return to dhimmi status of the Jews because in 1963...before Judea and Samaria were liberated from Hashemite occupation the Palestine Liberation???? Organization was formed.

Fact 4. There is no occupation. Israel fought a defensive war with Jordan. When Jordan crossed the ceasefire line in 1967it voided the cease fire and the line. When Israel liberated the land it became in dispute. When Jordan and Israel signed a peace agreement the center of the Jordan river became the accepted border. What the Arabs now demand is irrelevant. At best it is an unallocated portion of the Mandate for Palestine. Israel and it's citizens are in Judea and Samaria legally and there is nothing the Arabs can site to prove otherwise.

Fact 5 The Arabs living in disputed territory had never had better lives or more freedom as when Israel liberated the land from the Hashemite occupiers. For the first time in history women were allowed to vote in local elections, non land owners were allowed to vote in local elections, Israel built, at the expense of it's Jewish tax payers 5 institutions of higher learning where none had existed, the economy soared as it switched to the NIS, and life expectancy rose. Any restrictions in place are to combat terrorism. Unable to face men, Arabs chose to target women and children, so men had to impose restrictions on them to prevent it. On the other hand, terrorism is brutal and disgusting, as are those that ignore it, justify it's use, or make apologies for those who engage in it.

Fact 6. the Palestinians held an election which was judged to be a farce by rational observers. Further, a vote is not the same as freedom. Without a bill of rights to protect personal liberty and individual rights an election is meaningless. Two starving men stranded on a deserted island could vote to eat a third, but the decision would hardly be fair to the man to be eaten. Gays, women, and religious minorities will lose if a terror sanctuary is allowed to be formed. As free men we are honor bound to oppose it.

Fact 7 American leadership is criminally negligent for giving away one dime of our money to terrorists. Aid has increased during the so called embargo on the so called Palestinians.The world provides the majority of money to the Arabs. The Arabs hate us despite our kindness. meanwhile real people are actually starving all across Africa and the weapons and bombs keep pouring into Gaza.

Laviniam you need to wake up. The people you deem as the victims are in reality a macabre death cult determined to sacrifice all their children over Arab racism and religious bigotry.

Fri, 2007-05-25 07:55 — William1

The assertion that Israel is an Apartheid state is a misnomer. Today, within Israel, Jews are a majority, but the Arab minority are full citizens who enjoy equal rights. Arabs are represented in the Knesset, and have served in the Cabinet, high-level foreign ministry posts and on the Supreme Court. Under apartheid, black South Africans could not vote and were not citizens of the country in which they formed the overwhelming majority of the population. Laws dictated where they could live, work and travel. And, in South Africa, the government killed blacks who protested against its policies. By contrast, Israel allows freedom of movement, assembly and speech. Some of the government's harshest critics are Israeli Arabs who are members of the Knesset.
The situation of the Palestinians in the territories is different. The security requirements of the nation, and a violent insurrection in the territories, forced Israel to impose restrictions on Arab residents of the West Bank and Gaza Strip that are not necessary inside Israel's pre-1967 borders. The Palestinians in the territories, typically, dispute Israel's right to exist whereas blacks did not seek the destruction of South Africa, only the apartheid regime.
If Israel were to give Palestinians full citizenship, it would mean the territories had been annexed. No Israeli government has been prepared to take that step. Instead, through negotiations, Israel agreed to give the Palestinians increasing authority over their own affairs. It is likely that a final settlement will allow most Palestinians to become citizens of their own state.
As for the assertion the Jews have no claim to the land they call Israel, the Jewish people have maintained ties to their historic homeland for more than 3,700 years and they base their claim to the land on at least four premises: 1) the Jewish people settled and developed the land; 2) the International community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people; 3) the territory was captured in defensive wars and 4) God promised the land to the patriarch Abraham.
Palestine was never an exclusively Arab country, although Arabic gradually became the language of most of the population after the Muslim invasions of the seventh century. No independent Arab or Palestinian state ever existed in Palestine.

Wed, 2007-06-06 14:05 — Amihai

Having stated the above, I would still wish to ask a fundamental question: Do the Palestinian Arabs have the ability or even the will to govern themselves within a unique and independent Palestinian Arab political entity?

The Arabs of Eretz Israel (Land of Israel)/Palestine is by all accounts a relatively very young people that began to evolve largely as a result of and in opposition to the growing Jewish community in the Land in the in the beginning of the 20th century, and has come to a degree of maturity as a people only in the 1960s.

Having been recognized as a unique community, the British Peel Commission has offered it to establish an independent state on the overwhelming majority of Eretz Israel/Palestine, 1937. The local Arab leadership rejected this offer. It has also rejected the offer of the UN made ten years later, 1947. The Palestinian Arab leadership could have demanded the establishment of an independent state on the entire area of Judea-Samaria (west bank), the Gaza Strip and Jerusalem between the years 1948 to 1967 when these areas were under exclusive Arab control, but it has not done so. When in 1979 Menachem Begin and Anuar Saadat offered it autonomy that in time would evolve into statehood, the Palestinian Arab leadership rejected that offer as well. It has rejected Ehud Barak offer for statehood on 97% of the disputed territories of Judea-Samaria, Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, based on the Oslo Accords, 2000, and it has done all by not adhering to basic requirements in achieving an accommodation of peaceful coexistence with Israel based on what is presently on the table, the Roadmap to Peace.

In addition, the few times the Palestinian Arab leadership has been given all the support by Israel, the Arab world and the international community to govern the territory and people under its control, e.g. 1994-2000, 2005 to present in Gaza, this leadership exhibited both lack of will and lack of ability to do so.

The question that I, an average Israeli, ask is: Do the Palestinian Arabs either want or can govern themselves, and if not, perhaps any future approach to resolving the Palestinian Arab problem should come about as an integral part of Israel's peaceful relationships with both Jordan and Egypt from whose countries Israel took control of the disputed territories in the first place in its defensive Six Day War, 1967?

Wed, 2007-06-06 14:37 — Mick

"We all have seen Israeli children sending messages of death to the children of Palestine on Israeli rockets." - Where??? In your dreams?
What we actually do see is the Palestinian educational system continuing to indoctrinate children from kindergarten upwards to die as martyrs for the cause of a Middle East without Israel. Farfur is the Palestinian version of Micky Mouse, who reminds the thousands of children watching in every show, that they must never accept Israel's existence and that the ultimate ideal is to die for Allah. Sick or what!

"Jenin massacre is still fresh in our minds." What massacre? "I see no evidence that would support a massacre took place." - Colin Powell, US Secretary of State, whose view was subsequently confirmed by the United Nations, Human Rights Watch and an investigation by European Union. The Palestinians own Review Committee reported a final death toll of 56, including 34 combatants. No women or children were reported missing.

I am very concerned with the welfare of Palestinian civilians, because believe me, we all want a lasting peace in this region. I believe that they have had a very raw deal from their original "occupiers" (Egypt "occupied" Gaza and Jordan "occupied" West Bank between 1948 -1967) and that they continue to be extremely ill served by their leadership and by the terrorist groups who continue to deliberately operate from their midst. Billions of dollars in international aid have been spent on weapons for the various competing factions, or simply stolen by the Leadership for their own purposes, rather than on improving the lives of the civilian population. Arafat was worth tens of millions of dollars when he died and his widow continues to live the good life in Paris, all on money stolen from his own people! As soon as their leadership is prepared to accept a genuine lasting two state solution (something they were never of course offered under their previous "occupiers") rather than hold out for a Middle East without Israel,the sooner life will improve for them.

I certainly never advocated or believe in carpet bombing. If you re-read the relevant post, I am clearly saying that other States whose civilians were subjected to continual rocket attacks over a 7 year period would have resorted to this. The Israelis go further than any other Army in similar circumstances to try and minimise the loss of civilian life, to the point where they often endanger the security of their own troops. In contrast, witness the current battering of the Palestinian civilian population in Lebanon by the Lebanese Army in persuit of the terrorist factions inside the camps. I don't see much World outcry about these Palestinian human rights though?

Fri, 2007-05-25 12:23 — comay

Your time-line has 3 major inaccuracies:
1 The UN call for Israel to withdraw in 1967 was met with the "3 No s of the Arab League: "No negotiation, no recognition, no peace with Isreal". Their stance has not changed
2 As admitted by seeral Palestinian leaders, Sharon's walk did not trigger the 2000 intifada, which had been planned by Arafat even before he went to Camp David;
2 in August 2005 Israel withdrew not ony troops but also civilians. It ony re-established control of the borders with Gaza when the rockets began being launched from Gaza into Israel

Fri, 2007-05-25 13:38 — ikotubo

Actually, it is Palestine that is perpetuating a brutal occupation of Israel and humiliating ordinary Israelis on a daily basis. It is stone-throwing, 5-year old Palestinian kids that commit war crimes daily against innocent Israelis. And it is Palestinian troops that prevent Israeli women in labour from getting medical assistance, and are demolishing Israeli homes as I write. These, after all, are what you'd be made to believe by the global media if you'd just arrived from planet Mars.

Fri, 2007-05-25 16:46 — Irony

And they are getting away with it...

Mon, 2007-06-18 22:31 — Mick

Michael Halpern - The Israel Palestine conflict is actually about the Arab refusal to come to terms with a Jewish State on one sixth of one percent of the Middle East. You seem to forget that if the Arabs had accepted the 1947 UN partition plan, there would have been no Middle East conflict. The Arabs who remained in Israel, resisting other Arab rulers' exhortations to flee, were granted full citizenship and enjoy a greater degree of rights and higher living standards than ordinary citizens of most Arab countries. Go to any Israeli hospital to see Arab patients receiving exactly the same treatment and service as Jews.
What flies "in the face of justice and morality" is your blind refusal to accept that the only democracy in the Middle East is a totally legitimate Country with exactly the same rights as the Countries around it.

Fri, 2007-05-25 22:35 — PeaceNow

Abe - Mr Chehab's is accurate to a point. Mr Chehab want us to believe that if Hamas recognised Israel, Palestinian would be better off and Israel will give the Palestinian their freedom. The PLO recognised Israel and the Palestinian are no closer to Statehood. Recognition of Israel is not the issue. The issue is the brutal occupation and Israel's unwillingness to recognise a Palestinian State anywhere in the occupied territories. the building of the apartheid wall commenced under a Fatah led government. The colonies expansion policy started after the Oslo accords. Jews only roads expanded under the Road Map. the killing, house demolitions, closures, checkpoints etc were and still the norm under Fatah led Authority and under Hamas. there is no difference in the Israeli violent behaviour against the Palestinian under Fatah or Hamas led Authority. let us not kid ourselves that Israel will be any different tomorrow under a Fatah led authority. Israel want land without people no less.

About Al-Qa'eda in Gaza, are they any different than Dahlan and Co.