Nicolas Henin, a reporter’s blog

Only few weeks ago, an Israeli crackdown in the Gaza strip rised controversy as more than a hundred poeple, mostly civilans, were killed – purportedly to prevent activists to launch rockets on Israel.

What about today ?

After a short opening of the Egyptian border, the Gazans are living isolated again. And the international community fails to define a clear policy to engage the results of the Hamas’ victory in the pollstwo years ago.

International Crisis Group Gareth Evans published recently in The Chrisitan Science Monitor a column (posted below) that enlights the Western diplomatic failure in dealing with Hamas.

« Maintaining extreme pressure on Hamas in the hope of undermining its rule or stopping the rockets has gone nowhere, he writes. A new direction is needed – one that attempts to stabilize the situation by engaging the movement with the immediate goal of reaching a mutual cease-fire and the opening of Gaza’s border crossings. »

To be noticed, as well (the column does not treat the issue), the recent agreement signed in Sanaa between Hamas and Abbas’ PLO. A major step towards unity on the Palestinian side. Maybe the kind of step necessary to prevent a Palestinian civil war. But nor Israel nor the Americans want the Palestinian authority to reconcile with Hamas –at least not at this stage, before it has acknoledged the state of Israel. Ehud Olmert called this agreement a ‘bad move’ on the road to peace. But how could he believes that the Palestinians could make peace with anyone as long as they are fighting one another ?

“Punishing Hamas Has Backfired”,
Gareth Evans in The Christian Science Monitor
27 March 2008
The Christian Science Monitor

Want leverage? Then engage the Islamist regime.

The policy of isolating Hamas and applying sanctions to Gaza has been a predictable failure. Violence to both Gazans and Israelis is rising. Economic conditions are ruinous, generating anger and despair. The credibility of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and other pragmatic forces has been grievously damaged. The peace process is in tatters.
Meanwhile, Hamas’s hold on the Gaza Strip, purportedly the principal target of the policy, has been strengthened. Since Hamas assumed full control in June 2007 the already-tight sanctions, imposed following the Islamists’ January 2006 electoral victory, have been tightened further. Israel – upon which Gazans depend almost entirely for relations with the outside world – even curtailed cross-border passenger and goods traffic.
Israel has hardly been alone. The West Bank-based Palestinian Authority, seeking to undermine Hamas’s standing, has done its part to cut off Gaza and prevent the normal functioning of government. Feeble protests aside, the international community has at best been a model of passivity.
The logic behind the policy was that by putting pressure on Hamas, they could prevent rocket launches into Israel. This would demonstrate to the Palestinian people that Hamas could not deliver and ought not be trusted. The hope was that the West Bank, buoyed by economic growth, a loosening of Israeli security measures, not to mention a revived peace process, would serve as an attractive countermodel. But the theory has not delivered on any of these counts.
Within Gaza the debate about whether the sanctions have helped or hurt Hamas’s efforts to consolidate power is, for all intents and purposes, over. The Islamist movement has come close to establishing an effective monopoly on the use of force and a near-monopoly on open political activity. It has refashioned the legal and legislative systems. And it enjoys freer rein to shape society through management of the health, education, and religious sectors.
By boycotting the security, judicial, and other government sectors, the Palestinian Authority turned an intended punitive measure into an unintentional gift, creating a vacuum that Hamas has filled. The absence of any international involvement has meant the absence of leverage. The closure of the crossings has caused the private sector to collapse, eroding ordinary citizens’ traditional coping mechanisms, increasing their dependence on those who govern, and weakening a constituency traditionally loyal to the Palestinian Authority.
Some will argue that the isolation policy is working because Hamas has lost popularity, which even its leaders acknowledge. But intense public frustration in the Gaza Strip cannot be the measure of success. Gazans may not be satisfied with Hamas, but their anger continues to be directed at Israel and the West, as well as at Fatah, which many see as complicit in the siege.
As the sanctions hit the most vulnerable, Hamas finds ways to finance its rule and invokes the siege to justify its more ruthless practices. Growing poverty and hopelessness are boosting the appeal of jihadi groups, particularly among Gazans under 16 years old, who make up half the population.
It’s time to stop digging this hole. Maintaining extreme pressure on Hamas in the hope of undermining its rule or stopping the rockets has gone nowhere. A new direction is needed – one that attempts to stabilize the situation by engaging the movement with the immediate goal of reaching a mutual cease-fire and the opening of Gaza’s border crossings.
Of course, Israel has legitimate concerns about a cease-fire, as does the Palestinian Authority about how a shift of direction would affect its credibility. Hamas will not accept an end to hostilities if the closures remain in place. To address these competing interests, the cease-fire should entail reciprocal commitments to stop all attacks, an opening of the crossings that recognizes Hamas’s role while restoring a Palestinian Authority presence in Gaza, and a credible international monitoring effort to prevent arms smuggling from Egypt into Gaza.
While the continuation of the current policy may be easier to envision, so are its consequences. The status quo is untenable. Israel cannot be expected to accept rockets targeting its civilians. Hamas will not sit idly by as Gaza is choked.
If current trends continue, we will see increased attacks against Israeli towns and cities as well as the resumption of bombings and attacks inside Israel, like the recent ghastly murder of the eight yeshiva students. Israel will intensify its military incursions, targeted assassinations, and attacks on key installations. And the peace process will vanish entirely, discrediting pragmatic Palestinian leaders. The conflict could then spread to the West Bank or even Lebanon.
Avoiding that worst-case scenario means sharply changing policy course. Engaging Hamas may provide the Islamists with greater international recognition, but acknowledging its role also could mean increasing leverage on it. As it stands, Hamas has nothing to lose. Not surprisingly, it is behaving that way.

Gareth Evans is president of the International Crisis Group. It’s recent report on Gaza and Hamas can be found at www.crisisgroup.org.

As I was in Northern Iraq, the situation substantially worsened in the Gaza strip. Isreali answer to rockets fired on the south of the country was an intensive campaign that costed over a hundred lives. According to local and international sources, many of these victims were obviously civilians, including 25 children. Around 250 persons were injured.

British human rights groups issued a press release saying that the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip has reached its worst point since Israel captured the territory in 1967.

According to their 16-page report, more than 1.1 million people, about 80 percent of Gaza’s residents, are now dependent on food aid, as opposed to 63 percent in 2006. It said that overall unemployment is close to 40 percent.

Amnesty International UK Director Kate Allen acknoledged Israel must protect its citizens, “but as the occupying power in Gaza it also has a legal duty to ensure that Gazans have access to food, clean water, electricity and medical care.”

In a separate statement, Malcolm Smart, director of Amnesty International’s Middle East and North Africa Programme writes : “Israel has a legal obligation to protect the civilian population of Gaza. These attacks are disproportionate and go beyond lawful measures which Israeli forces may take in response to rocket attacks by Palestinian armed groups.”

French speakers can read an excellent post on Alain Gresh’s blog dedicated to the situation in Gaza (English readers will find references and links to articles in English). In English, you can read Gaza’s future, by Henry Siegman, in the London review of books. Read also the Vanity fair article about how the US administration backed an armed force lead by Muhammad Dahlan, due to crush the Hamas and that eventually contributed igniting the Palestinian civil war. “Part Iran-contra, part Bay of Pigs”, the magazine says.

Thanks to Alain Gresh’s blog, I read the editorial of the Lebanese Daily Star daily, dated 14th of Feb. It was published after the assassination of the Hezbollah leader Imad Mughniyeh.

It is interesting to notice that this newspaper, being read mainly among the Sunni and Christian communities in Lebanon, is rather close to the Western position.

I’m not trying to advocate any crime or defend any violent action (and this article does not either) but one must recall the local context before issuing quick judgments.

Here is an extract :

‘Whether one chooses to condemn or praise Mughniyeh, it is worth recalling the context in which he arose to become one of the most wanted men in the world. Mughniyeh had not yet been born in 1948, when Israeli forces entered Lebanon and killed dozens of civilians in the village of Hula, and he was just a toddler when the Jewish state sent commandos to Beirut International Airport to blow up 13 passenger planes. During Mughniyeh’s childhood and early adolescence, Israel systematically destroyed dozens of Muslim, Christian and Druze villages in Lebanon, making much of the South of the country uninhabitable and forcing scores of civilians to flee from their ancestral homes to the southern suburbs of Beirut. Whether one agrees or disagrees with Mughniyeh’s response to the criminal brutality that he witnessed in his formative years, one cannot deny the role that these events played in making him the man that he eventually became: Mughniyeh, like Hizbullah itself, arose as a direct response to Israeli aggression.’

I republish this column, from Le Monde’s yesterday issue, on the recent events in Gaza (source here).

This text was written by two directors of the French NGO Médecins du monde. It enlights the inefficiency of the European diplomacy in Gaza -and, by the way, of the Israeli policy.

I remember last year, when I met Hamas executive Khaled Meshaal in Damascus, he was ready to discuss (a true discussion, an actual bargain, not a green light to everything, but though) to find solutions to the conflict on Gaza, and to set up an issue with Israel. He just handed over through intermediates a list of Palestinian prisonners to be exchanged against the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. Nowadays, even Israel seems to have forgotten Shalit. And Nicolas Sarkozy, always ready to show off in foreign politics, doens’t promise to go to Gaza to free the soldier, who is also a French national.

I don’t have time enough to translate the full article, but the conclusion is eloquent: “What is this European diplomacy that prohibits to itself contacts and discussions? Many regimes with nauseous practices receive a much more pragmatic treatment.”

Plusieurs milliers de détenus ont réussi à s’évader, mercredi 23 janvier, d’une prison palestinienne. Les évadés, des hommes, des femmes et des enfants, se sont précipités à travers des brèches ouvertes à l’explosif dans le mur d’enceinte sud. Il s’agit pour la plupart d’entre eux de “prisonniers politiques” résidant dans ce qui constitue aujourd’hui le plus grand centre pénitentiaire au monde, puisqu’il accueille, sur une bande de 40 km sur 10 km, 1,4 million de personnes. Ce territoire se caractérise par un environnement où les armes sont omniprésentes, où le Fatah et le Hamas se disputent le pouvoir, alors même que bon nombre de leurs leaders sont emprisonnés. La question religieuse s’y radicalise en même temps que le monde arabo-musulman sacralise la question palestinienne pour en faire un théâtre emblématique de ses conflits avec l’Occident.

C’est la grande prison à ciel ouvert de Gaza. La population y purge une punition collective au motif que le rapport de force a basculé en faveur du Hamas. A la suite de la victoire de ce parti aux élections législatives de février 2006, un embargo économique et financier a été mis en place. La population gazaouie a été la première victime des mesures de restriction instaurées depuis cette date. L’Union européenne, au sein du Quartet (Russie, Nations unies, Etats-Unis et Union européenne), fait partie, avec Israël, des geôliers.

Durant l’été 2006, Médecins du monde avait publié un rapport à partir de deux enquêtes réalisées sur le terrain, montrant les difficultés d’accès à l’eau, à l’alimentation et aux soins des Gazaouis. Il décrivait en particulier l’omniprésence d’habitants souffrant de troubles psychologiques et de dépression. Nous insistions sur la nécessité de donner des gages à cette population, afin de lui permettre de reprendre espoir et de ne pas lui laisser comme seule solution la spirale de la violence.

Depuis cette époque, rien ne s’est amélioré, au contraire. La bande de Gaza s’enfonce dans le chaos. Sur le terrain, nos équipes sont les témoins de la dégradation des conditions sanitaires. Sur une liste de 400 médicaments dont l’usage est essentiel, 105 ne sont aujourd’hui plus disponibles, parmi lesquels des antibiotiques, des anesthésiques, des antidiabétiques et des psychotropes. Les laboratoires de biologie sont dans l’incapacité de fonctionner faute de réactifs. Les hôpitaux ne sont plus approvisionnés de façon continue et satisfaisante en électricité.

L’offre de services en matière de médecine générale est affectée. Les centres de santé primaire se trouvent conduits à interrompre certaines de leurs activités telles que les vaccinations ou le traitement des maladies chroniques par défaut d’approvisionnement en médicaments. Sur les 4 000 demandes d’autorisation de soins hors de Gaza, 713 ont été refusées, 62 patients sont morts de ces défauts de soin depuis juin 2007. Le prix des produits de base flambe. Le prix du pain et de la farine a ainsi augmenté de 60 % en six mois.

POUR QUE CESSE L’HYPOCRISIE

L’univers carcéral dans lequel vit la population de Gaza depuis trop longtemps n’est plus acceptable. Il est pourtant encore possible d’éviter le basculement de ces territoires dans une violence généralisée. Nous sommes en droit de penser que l’opinion internationale a pesé sur la fin du blocus total de ces derniers jours. De nombreuses associations s’organisent en Israël et aux Etats-Unis pour contrer le système de blocage récurrent. Il serait juste qu’en Europe, nous fassions de même. Pesons sur nos élus et nos diplomates pour que cesse l’hypocrisie actuelle.

L’Europe peut faire pression sur le gouvernement israélien afin de permettre le rétablissement de l’ensemble des flux économiques et financiers qui prévalaient avant l’embargo de 2006. L’UE peut amorcer un dialogue direct avec les représentants du Hamas, dialogue sur lequel reposent les seuls espoirs d’évolution des positions de ce parti. Elle pourrait ainsi négocier l’arrêt des tirs de roquettes sur le nord d’Israël. Ils entretiennent l’effroi de la population civile de ce pays et permettent à Israël de justifier sa stratégie actuelle.

Quelle est donc cette diplomatie européenne qui s’interdit la rencontre et la discussion ? Beaucoup de régimes aux pratiques nauséabondes font l’objet d’un traitement plus pragmatique. La volonté d’accès et de soutien aux populations civiles constitue alors la priorité. Après plusieurs heures d’escapade en Egypte, de nombreux évadés de Rafah sont revenus sur leur lieu de détention avec des provisions de première nécessité. Décidément, les détenus de Gaza restent attachés à leur prison…