Report of United Nations Special Rapporteur

Richard Falk
United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories
Posted January 2, 2009 11:00 AM (EST)
Understanding the Gaza Catastrophe

Quoted:

For eighteen months the entire 1.5 million people ofGaza experienced a punishing blockade imposed by Israel, and a varietyof traumatizing challenges to the normalcy of daily life. A flicker ofhope emerged some six months ago when an Egyptian arranged truceproduced an effective ceasefire that cut Israeli casualties to zerodespite the cross-border periodic firing of homemade rockets that fellharmlessly on nearby Israeli territory, and undoubtedly caused anxietyin the border town of Sderot. During the ceasefire the Hamas leadershipin Gaza repeatedly offered to extend the truce, even proposing aten-year period and claimed a receptivity to a political solution basedon acceptance of Israel's 1967 borders. Israel ignored these diplomaticinitiatives, and failed to carry out its side of the ceasefireagreement that involved some easing of the blockade that had beenrestricting the entry to Gaza of food, medicine, and fuel to a trickle.Israel also refused exit permits to students withforeign fellowship awards and to Gazan journalists and respected NGOrepresentatives. At the same time, it made it increasingly difficultfor journalists to enter, and I was myself expelled from Israel acouple of weeks ago when I tried to enter to carry out my UN job ofmonitoring respect for human rights in occupied Palestine, that is, inthe West Bank and East Jerusalem, as well as Gaza. Clearly, prior tothe current crisis, Israel used its authority to prevent credibleobservers from giving accurate and truthful accounts of the direhumanitarian situation that had been already documented as producingsevere declines in the physical condition and mental health of theGazan population, especially noting malnutrition among children and theabsence of treatment facilities for those suffering from a variety ofdiseases. The Israeli attacks were directed against a society alreadyin grave condition after a blockade maintained during the prior 18months.As always in relation to the underlying conflict,some facts bearing on this latest crisis are murky and contested,although the American public in particular gets 99% of its informationfiltered through an exceedingly pro-Israeli media lens. Hamas is blamedfor the breakdown of the truce by its supposed unwillingness to renewit, and by the alleged increased incidence of rocket attacks. But thereality is more clouded. There was no substantial rocket fire from Gazaduring the ceasefire until Israel launched an attack last November 4thdirected at what it claimed were Palestinian militants in Gaza, killingseveral Palestinians. It was at this point that rocket fire from Gazaintensified. Also, it was Hamas that on numerous public occasionscalled for extending the truce, with its calls never acknowledged, muchless acted upon, by Israeli officialdom. Beyond this, attributing allthe rockets to Hamas is not convincing either. A variety of independentmilitia groups operate in Gaza, some such as the Fatah-backed al-AqsaMartyrs' Brigade are anti-Hamas, and may even be sending rockets toprovoke or justify Israeli retaliation. It is well confirmed that whenUS-supported Fatah controlled Gaza's governing structure it was unableto stop rocket attacks despite a concerted effort to do so.What this background suggests strongly is that Israellaunched its devastating attacks, starting on December 27, not simplyto stop the rockets or in retaliation, but also for a series ofunacknowledged reasons. It was evident for several weeks prior to theIsraeli attacks that the Israeli military and political leaders werepreparing the public for large-scale military operations against theHamas. The timing of the attacks seemed prompted by a series ofconsiderations: most of all, the interest of political contenders, theDefense Minister Ehud Barak and the Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, indemonstrating their toughness prior to national elections scheduled forFebruary, but now possibly postponed until military operations cease.Such Israeli shows of force have been a feature of past Israelielection campaigns, and on this occasion especially, the currentgovernment was being successfully challenged by Israel's notoriouslymilitarist politician, Benjamin Netanyahu, for its supposed failures touphold security. Reinforcing these electoral motivations was the littleconcealed pressure from the Israeli military commanders to seize theopportunity in Gaza to erase the memories of their failure to destroyHezbollah in the devastating Lebanon War of 2006 that both tarnishedIsrael's reputation as a military power and led to widespreadinternational condemnation of Israel for the heavy bombardment ofundefended Lebanese villages, disproportionate force, and extensive useof cluster bombs against heavily populated areas.Respected and conservative Israeli commentators go further. For instance, the prominent historian, Benny Morris writing in the New York Times a few days ago, relates the campaign in Gaza to a deeper set offorebodings in Israel that he compares to the dark mood of the publicthat preceded the 1967 War when Israelis felt deeply threatened by Arabmobilizations on their borders. Morris insists that despite Israeliprosperity of recent years, and relative security, several factors haveled Israel to act boldly in Gaza: the perceived continuing refusal ofthe Arab world to accept the existence of Israel as an establishedreality; the inflammatory threats voiced by Mahmoud Ahmadinejadtogether with Iran's supposed push to acquire nuclear weapons, thefading memory of the Holocaust combined with growing sympathy in theWest with the Palestinian plight, and the radicalization of politicalmovements on Israel's borders in the form of Hezbollah and Hamas. Ineffect, Morris argues that Israel is trying via the crushing of Hamasin Gaza to send a wider message to the region that it will stop atnothing to uphold its claims of sovereignty and security.There are two conclusions that emerge: the people ofGaza are being severely victimized for reasons remote from the rocketsand border security concerns, but seemingly to improve electionprospects of current leaders now facing defeat, and to warn others inthe region that Israel will use overwhelming force whenever itsinterests are at stake.
That such a human catastrophe can happen with minimal outsideinterference also shows the weakness of international law and theUnited Nations, as well as the geopolitical priorities of the importantplayers. The passive support of the United States government forwhatever Israel does is again the critical factor, as it was in 2006when it launched its aggressive war against Lebanon. What is lessevident is that the main Arab neighbors, Egypt, Jordan, and SaudiArabia, with their extreme hostility toward Hamas that is viewed asbacked by Iran, their main regional rival, were also willing to standaside while Gaza was being so brutally attacked, with some Arabdiplomats even blaming the attacks on Palestinian disunity or on therefusal of Hamas to accept the leadership of Mamoud Abbas, President ofthe Palestinian Authority.The people of Gaza are victims of geopolitics at itsinhumane worst: producing what Israel itself calls a 'total war'against an essentially defenseless society that lacks any defensivemilitary capability whatsoever and is completely vulnerable to Israeliattacks mounted by F-16 bombers and Apache helicopters. What this alsomeans is that the flagrant violation of international humanitarian law,as set forth in the Geneva Conventions, is quietly set aside while thecarnage continues and the bodies pile up. It additionally means thatthe UN is once more revealed to be impotent when its main membersdeprive it of the political will to protect a people subject tounlawful uses of force on a large scale. Finally, this means that thepublic can shriek and march all over the world, but that the killingwill go on as if nothing is happening. The picture being painted day byday in Gaza is one that begs for renewed commitment to internationallaw and the authority of the UN Charter, starting here in the UnitedStates, especially with a new leadership that promised its citizenschange, including a less militarist approach to diplomatic leadership.