As Israel this week declared the “easing” of the four-year
blockade of Gaza, an official explained the new guiding principle: “Civilian
goods for civilian people.” The severe and apparently arbitrary restrictions on
foodstuffs entering the enclave – coriander bad, cinnamon good – will finally
end, we are told. Gaza’s 1.5 million inhabitants will have all the coriander
they want.
This “adjustment”, as the Israeli prime minister Benjamin
Netanyahu termed it, is aimed solely at damage limitation. With Israel
responsible for killing nine civilians aboard a Gaza-bound aid flotilla three
weeks ago, the world has finally begun to wonder what purpose the siege serves.
Did those nine really need to die to stop coriander, chocolate and children’s
toys from reaching Gaza? And, as Israel awaits other flotillas, will more need
to be executed to enforce the policy?
Faced with this unwelcome scrutiny, Israel – as well as the
United States and the European states that have been complicit in the siege –
desperately wants to deflect attention away from demands for the blockade to be
lifted entirely. Instead it prefers to argue that the more liberal blockade for
Gaza will distinguish effectively between a necessary “security” measures and an
unfair “civilian” blockade. Israel has cast itself as the surgeon who, faced
with Siamese twins, is mastering the miraculous operation needed to decouple
them.
The result, Mr Netanyahu told his cabinet, would be a “tightening
of the security blockade because we have taken away Hamas’ ability to blame
Israel for harming the civilian population”. Listen to Israeli officials and it
sounds as if thousands of “civilian” items are ready to pour into Gaza. No
Qassam rockets for Hamas but soon, if we are to believe them, Gaza’s shops will
be as well-stocked as your average Wal-Mart.
Be sure, it won’t happen.
Even if many items are no longer banned, they still have to find
their way into the enclave. Israel controls the crossing points and determines
how many trucks are allowed in daily. Currently, only a quarter of the number
once permitted are able to deliver their cargo, and that is unlikely to change
to any significant degree. Moreover, as part of the “security” blockade, the ban
is expected to remain on items such as cement and steel desperately needed to
build and repair the thousands of homes devastated by Israel’s attack 18 months
ago.
In any case, until Gaza’s borders, port and airspace are its own,
its factories are rebuilt, and exports are again possible, the hobbled economy
has no hope of recovering. For the overwhelming majority of Palestinians in
Gaza, mired in poverty, the new list of permissible items – including coriander
– will remain nothing more than an aspiration.
But more importantly for Israel, by concentrating our attention
on the supposed ending of the “civilian” blockade, Israel hopes we will forget
to ask a more pertinent question: what is the purpose of this refashioned
“security” blockade?
Over the years Israelis have variously been told that the
blockade was imposed to isolate Gaza’s “terrorist” rulers, Hamas; to serve as
leverage to stop rocket attacks on nearby Israeli communities; to prevent arms
smuggling into Gaza; and to force the return of the captured soldier Gilad
Shalit.
None of the reasons stands up to minimal scrutiny. Hamas is more
powerful than ever; the rocket attacks all but ceased long ago; arms smugglers
use the plentiful tunnels under the Egyptian border, not Erez or Karni
crossings; and Sgt Shalit would already be home had Israel seriously wanted to
trade him for an end to the siege.
The real goal of the blockade was set out in blunt fashion at its
inception, in early 2006, shortly after Hamas won the Palestinian elections. Dov
Weisglass, the government’s chief adviser at the time, said it would put
Palestinians in Gaza “on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger”. Aid
agencies can testify to the rampant malnutrition that followed. The ultimate
aim, Mr Weisglass admitted, was to punish ordinary Gazans in the hope that they
would overthrow Hamas.
Is Mr Weisglass a relic of the pre-Netanyahu era, his
blockade-as-diet long ago superseded? Not a bit. Only last month, during a court
case against the siege, Mr Netanyahu’s government justified the policy not as a
security measure but as “economic warfare” against Gaza. One document even set
out the minimum calories – or “red lines”, as they were also referred to –
needed by Gazans according to their age and sex.
In truth, Israel’s “security” blockade is, in both its old and
new incarnations, every bit a “civilian” blockade. It was designed and continues
to be “collective punishment” of the people of Gaza for electing the wrong
rulers. Helpfully, international law defines the status of Israel’s policy: it
is a crime against humanity.
Easing the siege so that Gaza starves more slowly may be better
than nothing. But breaking 1.5 million Palestinians out of the prison Israel has
built for them is the real duty of the international community.
Jonathan Cook is The National’s correspondent in Nazareth,
Israel. His latest book is Disappearing Palestine
Share this Article
Here is your
chance to help this article to be read by thousands more people by sharing it on your favourite social networking site. You can also email the
article from here.
