The Gaza blockade has produced none of its stated aims. It has failed to provide sustainable security or resolve the legitimacy dilemma of Hamas’ continued rule. Instead, it has resulted in a population on the verge of eruption due to unbearable living conditions, and at the same time, the complete disintegration of domestic opposition to Hamas’ rule. A proactive engagement on the part of the EU is required. Accordingly, the EU should abandon the policy of humanitarian relief in favor of a much-needed developmental approach and pressure the PA to meet its responsibilities towards Gaza. The EU should envision such steps as crucial to facilitate a long-term ceasefire agreement and put an ultimate end to the Gaza blockade.
Throughout this year the Gaza Strip has been the scene for a series of grave events, starting with the brutal Israeli response to the “Great March of Return”, and culminating in the latest escalation of violence that ended in an Egypt-mediated ceasefire. The reality of the blockade of the Gaza Strip remains unchanged; a 12 year long Israeli policy justified principally in terms of Israeli security interests and the illegitimacy of Hamas’s rule over the narrow Mediterranean enclave. The international community for its part partially endorses those justifications and engages Gaza within their limitations. 12 years on, where do these justifications stand today?
On the eve of Hamas’ full control of the Gaza Strip in 2007, Israel tightened its blockade over the enclave and declared it an “enemy entity” to which the norms of international law don’t apply. This laid the ground for Israel to consolidate and formalize the blockade, largely exempting itself from the humanitarian obligations towards a civilian population directly under its military occupation as set out by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Are the justifications of the blockade valid?
Israel justifies the Gaza blockade by its intention to end Hamas’s rule over the territory. This policy persists irrespective of the humanitarian crisis it has caused. Israel has enforced policies of collective punishment against the civilian population, mainly in the shape of restrictions on the movement of goods and individuals in and out of Gaza. Combined with a series of ruthless military assaults, the outcome has been the large scale destruction of civilian infrastructure and thousands of civilian casualties. While Hamas’s rule has remained intact, it is ordinary Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, who have borne the brunt of the blockade.
As a result, the living conditions of the almost two million Palestinians residing in Gaza have been steadily deteriorating. For example, according to the latest indicators, only three percent of Gaza’s water meets WHO’s quality standards, the unemployment rate has reached 44 percent, and 39 percent of the population is food insecure.
The established Israeli narrative states that Gaza is governed by Hamas, a radical Islamist movement that does not recognize Israel’s right to exist and adheres to armed resistance as means for national liberation. Israel, therefore, justifies its blockade as a necessary measure to counter the violence of the movement. The international community is actively ratifying Israel’s policy towards Hamas, while appearing indifferent to the concerns raised by Palestinians over the violence they are subjected too.
The United States and the European Union designated Hamas a terrorist organization in 1997 and 2001 respectively. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) reinstated Hamas’s status on the EU’s terror list in July 2017 after several years of reevaluation triggered in 2014 by the annulment of the movement’s terror status by a lower European court.
Short-sighted humanitarian measures
Despite these designations, humanitarian relief efforts under the watchful eye of Israeli authorities continued to trickle into Gaza under Hamas’ rule. Led by international and national relief agencies, these short-sighted measures fall far short of genuine efforts to lift the siege, the only political step that could potentially alleviate the humanitarian crisis in the territory. At present, relief comprises, among other things, financing distribution of food packages, temporary employment projects, compensation for civilian property losses caused by Israeli military assaults and trauma-relief programs. This has created a situation in which the population has become overwhelmingly dependent on unguaranteed and often fluctuating sources of aid, adding to their already insecure condition. The UNRWA crisis in particular provides a clear example of how relief can be swiftly turned into a political tool to punish the civilian population for political circumstances beyond their immediate control.
What seems to further complicate the international community’s engagement with Gaza is the position of Hamas in domestic Palestinian politics. Hamas’ rule in the Gaza Strip lacks international legitimacy as it operates outside the overwhelmingly recognized governing body in the Palestinian territories, the Palestinian Authority (PA). Ever since its creation in 1994 under the mandate of the Israeli military occupation, the PA has been the sole internationally recognized political entity with domestic administrative and security responsibilities in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
The PA's collective punishment measures against Gazans
Although the PA today lacks any real authority in Gaza, and the prospect of its reinstallation there is slim given the difficulties of the national reconciliation process, the international community continues to engage with Gaza via the PA. For its part, the PA has resorted to collective punishment practices against Gaza’s civilian population in an effort to pressurize Hamas into conceding to its terms, according to which the PA would assume governing responsibilities in Gaza. In doing so, the PA has reneged on its obligations towards a population internationally recognized as formally under its control. The PA’s growing unpopularity in Gaza for its apparent role in the blockade has put its legitimacy in question and bolstered Hamas’ position by undermining Fatah and PLO’s other dominant political factions claim to represent all Palestinians.
Meanwhile, according to reports in recent months, Egypt’s General Intelligence Directorate has been mediating negotiations between Israel and Hamas in an effort to reach a long-term cease fire arrangement. As part of these talks, Israel appears to be using the humanitarian crisis as leverage, despite the prospect of Israeli negotiators tacitly accepting Hamas’ control over Gaza for the foreseeable future, with or without the involvement of the PA.
Hamas, in return, is growing increasingly aware of its responsibilities towards the population of the Gaza Strip without showing any signs of relaxing its grip over the territory. The movement modified its charter in May 2017, openly accepting for the first time a Palestinian state within the borders of 1967. Hamas has also shown determination to prevent attacks against southern Israel, a real and symbolic concession. Moreover, Yahya Sinwar, the commander of Hamas’ military wing and its leader in Gaza, stated in an interview with the Israeli daily Yedioth Ahronoth that the movement is willing to accept a long-term ceasefire in return for the lifting of the blockade.
The EU must adjust its approach
The way forward for the EU is to adjust its approach, realizing that humanitarian relief is a waste of resources that could be better invested into leveling up the economy of the Gaza Strip. The EU’s initiative to establishing a desalination plant is a good move in this regard, and plans to cover 30 percent of the plant’s energy needs from renewable sources could constitute a model for a sustainable resolution of Gaza’s severe electricity crisis. The EU should also seek to contribute to the alleviation of unemployment by providing incentives for the private sector and the development of local industry. The EU pressure on the PA to end its collective punishment policies against Gaza’s civilians could also go a long way, with such steps pushing Hamas in the direction of further moderation and contributing to current efforts to reach a long-term ceasefire.
Ultimately, the EU’s engagement with Gaza should heed the advice of former German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who upon witnessing the situation in Gaza first-hand in June 2015 commented: "We cannot wait until talks about a two-state solution are back on track, to improve living conditions."
