Credit, AFP
caption,
According to the plan, a “multinational task force” would bear the costs of rebuilding the Gaza Strip.
Item information
- Author: Paul Adams
- Scroll, BBC News
6 hours ago
When Hamas attacked Israel almost three months ago, Israel was unprepared. He did not foresee the attack, initially struggled to contain it, and then launched a fullscale invasion of Gaza with only one broad plan: the destruction of Hamas.
Furthermore, there was a significant vacuum. But that is starting to change.
As journalists outlined on Thursday (04/01), Defense Minister Yoav Gallant's plan for “the day after” amounts to little more than a series of bullet points, but they are nonetheless worth examining.
On the subject of security, he doesn't actually say anything that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hasn't already said Israel will “retain operational freedom of action” throughout the Gaza Strip and ensure that no one poses a threat to Israel.
When the plan addresses the socalled “four corners of Civic Square,” things get a little confusing.
Israel's strict control over the entry of goods into the Gaza Strip, which has existed for two decades, would continue.
Israel, Egypt and the United States would work together to find ways to secure the porous border between Egypt and Gaza something that would mean the final solution to the tunnel problem.
However, the plan envisions a major role for foreign actors the United States, as well as European and Arab governments in the creation of a “multinational task force” responsible for what is euphemistically referred to as the “restoration of the Gaza Strip.”
In other words, these countries are expected to rebuild the entire destroyed area. And pay for it.
For these countries, especially the European Union and the Gulf states, whose previous investments hospitals, schools and universities have been reduced to rubble in the last three months, this is far from an enticing prospect.
Even if Israel achieves its goal of eliminating Hamas as a threat, who is to say that violence will not erupt in the future and trigger another round of destruction?
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken is on his latest visit to the region his fourth since October 7th. As he travels from one Arab capital to another, how enthusiastic will he be among leaders shocked by the scenes of suffering in Gaza?
Until now, the Arab view has been that it is impossible to talk about “the day after” unless there is a ceasefire and the devastating humanitarian consequences of the war are not adequately addressed.
Credit, AFP
caption,
The plan calls for Israel, Egypt and the United States to work to secure the porous border between Egypt and Gaza
But Sanam Vakil and Neil Quilliam urge Arab governments not to wait in an article for the British think tank Chatham House.
“Without serious regional planning and investment in Gaza,” they write, “there could be a lack of law and order and a political vacuum in Palestine, coupled with the grim reality of hunger, disease and death.”
What about this “political vacuum in Palestine”?
In Gallant's “Four Corners” plan, the Palestinian component is perhaps the vaguest.
“It says that the entity controlling the territory,” it continues, “will build on the capabilities of the existing administrative mechanism (Civil Committee) in Gaza not hostile local actors.”
According to media reports, all appointments to local committees must be approved by Israel.
Hamas obviously doesn't play a role, but neither does at least for now the Palestinian Authority based in the West Bank and its President Mahmoud Abbas.
For the Palestinians, the plan reflects a fleeting Israeli attempt in the late 1970s to promote apolitical “village leagues” to manage local affairs in the West Bank and Gaza Strip (and thus reduce the influence of the Organization for the Liberation of Palestine).
“Israel cannot imagine that Palestinians have freedom of political choice,” says Amjad Iraqi, senior editor of the independent Israeli magazine +972.
“Essentially they are trying to reproduce in Gaza the model they have in the West Bank, but with someone other than an organized political faction.”
Credit, Portal
caption,
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has not publicly commented on the plan
The use of local committees made up of Gazan figures would also have the effect of politically separating the Gaza Strip from the West Bank.
Palestinians have always been suspicious of what they see as a deliberate Israeli policy of divide and rule, aimed in part at preventing the establishment of a viable Palestinian state.
Although the West Bank and Gaza have been physically separated since the founding of the State of Israel in 1948, Palestinians view both regions as integral parts of their national identity and will strongly resist any attempt to sever this connection.
“The Gaza Strip is not an independent country,” says analyst and former Palestinian Authority spokesman Nour Odeh. “They share the same aspirations for autonomy and freedom from Israeli control and occupation.”
U.S. officials, who say they are still reviewing Gallant's plan (and point out that it is not yet an official Israeli proposal), appear unenthusiastic about the plan.
For weeks, Joe Biden's administration has insisted that the Palestinian Authority has a role to play, despite opposition from Netanyahu, who argues that the Palestinian Authority disqualified itself by failing to condemn the October 7 Hamas attacks.
A senior State Department official who traveled with Blinken said the U.S. still wants the Palestinian Authority to rule the Palestinian territories — particularly the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
He also explained that it would be difficult for the US to persuade Arab partners to agree to cooperate with Israel when some members of the Netanyahu government openly called for the resettlement of Palestinians outside the Gaza Strip.
That remains the Palestinians' greatest fear, fueled by inflammatory rhetoric from some of Netanyahu's political allies and policy documents from shadowy parts of the government.
In recent days, these fears have been reinforced by reports that the government is conducting secret negotiations with African countries to accept migrants from Gaza.
With a large proportion of Gaza's civilian population now living in the southern part of the Gaza Strip, and some of them having been displaced several times since October 7, there is the idea that they may be forced to seek refuge outside Gaza without the certainty that they will are able to return is deeply worrying.
But it's not just Palestinians who are skeptical of Gallant's plan.
Some of the opponents are hardliners from Netanyahu's own turbulent coalition.
Some of them believe that Israel's withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 was a fundamental mistake. The only way to ensure security, they argue, is for Israel to reoccupy the entire area and allow Jewish settlers to return.
Gallant seems pretty straightforward about this.
“There will be no Israeli civilian presence in the Gaza Strip.”
But for hardliners, rebuilding Gaza and allowing Palestinians to stay are “just problems.”
“We will be back on October 7, maybe in two, five or 10 years,” said Ohad Tal, a lawmaker from the hardline Religious Zionist Party.
“Allowing the world’s money to flow into Gaza to rebuild the houses essentially means that they will take all the money and turn Gaza, as before, not into Singapore, but into the largest nest of terror in the world.”
The widespread disagreement at Thursday night's government cabinet meeting over the separate but related issue of when and how the Israeli army should investigate the circumstances of the October 7 attacks was clear evidence of the sharp divisions within the Netanyahu government.
These divisions are likely to deepen as Israel and the world wrestle with what to do with Gaza when this war finally ends.