| News | |
About Us | |
GP Editors | |
Get Published | |
Newsletter | |
Contact Us |
Home >> Middle East >> Arab-Israeli Relations Israel Should End Occupation Of Gaza Ted Belman - 2/7/2008 In October ‘04, I asked What will “disengagement” accomplish? and referred to a DEBKA Report which said,
Pursuant to American demands, Israel signed the Rafah Agreement giving up control of the Rafah crossing. I argued The Rafah Agreement is against the law, common sense and prudence Now, two years later with the Rafah Border breached, arms and terrorists are flowing in freely. In addition, Hamas now has access to an airfield and a deep sea port in adjacent Egypt . The High Court in Israel just ruled that Israel is within its rights to reduce the supply of power and fuel so long as she still meet the humanitarian needs of the population. But the reporting of the decision leaves me with many questions
If Israel is not an occupier why must it “supply essential humanitarian aid”? Dr Bell, Director of the International Law Forum at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs , just published a major article on International Law and Gaza. In his opinion “there is no legal basis for maintaining that Gaza is, occupied territory”. Having stated that, he does acknowledge that many claim it is. In any event, whether occupied or not, everything Israel has done to stop the rockets is not in contravention of any law. He doesn’t comment on how far Israel can go to stop the rockets entirely. It is time to revisit the question of “occupation”. The only reason to maintain the “occupation” is to restrict importation of arms, munitions and terrorists and to prevent attacks on Israel . But since Israel wasn’t doing that before the breach and has no intention of doing it now, Israel should totally wash their hands of Gaza and her obligation to supply humanitarian needs. She should make a major public relations effort to establish that she is not an occupier of Gaza . Thus there will be no restriction on Israel ’s self defense flowing from being considered in occupation, should attacks continue. Sooner or later Gaza will be bombed by Israel just as Lebanon was bombed. Gazans will flee to Egypt just as the Lebanese fled to the north side of the Litani River . In both cases the distance is about 20 miles. Then Israel will invade and reoccupy and we will have a whole new ball game. Dr Gabriel Dekel, in Sharon’s Endgame argued in July ‘05,
If the legal position of Israel as an occupying force in Gaza ceases, the rules of engagement will irrevocably change. Israel will no longer resort to “target assassinations” and pinpointed aerial strikes in response to Qassam missile attacks. These policing tactics would be futile since Israel would lack the required local intelligence, and unnecessary because post Disengagement conditions will create the legal and political climate for Israel to take more decisive defence measures.[..] Attacks of Qassam missiles would provoke artillery retaliation as a self-defence measure. Artillery retaliation to hostile fire is by definition imprecise. Israeli strikes would take the shape of a lengthy stop-go process as international pressure would force a temporary cessation. In view of images of mass Israeli refugees fleeing the border towns, the shooting will resume under counter-pressures by the Israeli public. In a matter of a few months the Gazan population would flee to the south-west corner of the Strip, away from Israeli fire. While I didn’t agree with Dekel at the time as to Sharon ’s endgame, I do believe that Israel should end the occupation of Gaza now in preparation for a new invasion.
|
Email
Print