[R-G] Watered-Down Resolution Stands on the Backs of the People of Gaza

[Anthony Fenton]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(((( T h e B u l l e t ))))~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A Socialist Project e-bulletin ... No. 177 ... January 12, 2009
_______________________________________________

Watered-Down Resolution
Stands on the Backs of the People of Gaza

Shourideh Cherie Molavi

There is no safe place in Gaza. A statement by the United Nations  
Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs reads: "This war  
is unique in the way that the civilians have no place to go and no  
place to hide." On Saturday evening, one week after the launch of  
Operation Cast Lead, Israel's ground operation began and civilian  
casualties increased rapidly. The UN grimly reports that one-third of  
the over 850 dead and 3300 injured were children. Entire families were  
buried under the rubble of houses that were hit, and starving children  
were later found sitting next to their dead parents and other corpses.

Amnesty International, the International Committee of the Red Cross,  
and the UN Agency in Gaza are just a few voices in the chorus of  
condemnation against Israel's blatant disregard for human life, with  
accusations ranging from denying food and aid to injured children, to  
deliberately targeting and using civilians as human shields. The  
global community is realizing what voices on the ground asserted 14  
days ago: there is no such thing as surgical operations in Gaza.  
Civilians cannot be separated from so-called military targets in an  
area as congested and densely populated as Gaza.

Diplomatic Squabbles

Recognizing that the ground assault "complicated" efforts to broker a  
cease-fire, regional and international figureheads, from the Middle  
East Peace Envoy Tony Blair to Turkey's Foreign Minister Ali Babajan,  
began a series of diplomatic muscle-flexing. Keen on rejecting what  
they deemed an "unbalanced" and "one-sided" draft resolution  
circulated by Libya on behalf of the 22-member Arab League on January  
1 – before the ground invasion – that demands a halt in the military  
attacks on Gaza, the United States and its allies initiated a series  
of marathon meetings to issue an alternative resolution.

To their delight, French President Nicholas Sarkozy drew a plan for a  
truce on humanitarian grounds between Israel and Hamas with Egyptian  
President Hosni Mubarak. What is essentially Israeli terms with an  
Arab face, the much touted Franco-Egyptian resolution conditions  
Israel's military pullout both on the permanent cessation of rocket  
attacks and closure of underground tunnels, a relatively new invention  
used by Hamas to smuggle in arms, but also basic goods and supplies  
denied to the Gazan population after the Israeli imposed siege in June  
2007. However, this plan was rejected by Defense Minister Ehud Barak  
who feared that admitting a humanitarian crisis existed in Gaza "would  
undermine Israel's offensive in the Strip."

Egypt, who suffered widespread criticism on the Arab street for its  
closure of the Rafah crossing throughout the Israeli imposed siege and  
current military invasion, is seen as a defunct player to many. Its  
role as mediator has been shaken by accusations of complicity in  
Israel's military campaign, given a shared interest in "toppling the  
Hamas government." In addition to placing political demands on Hamas,  
the Cairo-sponsored resolution is a favorite of the United States  
given its call for an international presence on the Egyptian side of  
the Gaza border, and a potential naval presence to monitor the shore  
of the Strip.

Knowing that Hamas is unlikely to accept international presence along  
the Gaza Strip – particularly if it is ostracized from the entire  
diplomatic process – and facing mounting pressure at home through  
coordinated grassroots campaigns and massive demonstrations, the Arab  
League continuously voiced its intention to get a resolution passed.

On January 6, virtually every Arab speaker denounced the failure of  
the Security Council to adopt a legally binding resolution to halt the  
Israeli offensive. Even voices from staunch U.S.-allies such as Saudi  
Arabia were disapproving, asserting a "deafening silence" by the  
council which placed "a big question mark over its credibility." To  
bypass the procrastination of the Security Council, Libya even  
circulated a modified draft resolution calling for an "immediate and  
permanent ceasefire in the Gaza Strip" and adding an "end to rocket  
firing into Israel by Palestinian militants" as part of its demands.  
But this had little chance of survival as it failed to meet U.S. and  
Israeli terms for border monitors to destroy Hamas's underground  
tunnels. Indeed, throughout the diplomatic squabbles, the U.S. was  
steadfast on ensuring a resolution gets passed that "does not allow  
the rearmament of Hamas."

Desperate for an international response and weary of returning empty- 
handed to an outraged population, Arab nations decided to put aside  
their proposed Security Council resolution, instead negotiating on a  
rival document proposed by Britain, the United States and France. This  
was prompted by the realization on part of Arab nations that these  
veto-holding powers would block any resolution imposing strict  
measures on Israel to end its brutal attacks.

In the end, the diplomatic showdown on January 8 resulted in the Arab  
League's week-long request for a legally binding and enforceable U.N.  
resolution that condemns Israel and calls for an immediate halt to the  
Gaza blitzkrieg failed, miserably.

Resolution Lacks Form

The resolution passed by the Security Council is a political farce for  
two main reasons:

Hamas was not included in the diplomatic process.

Paradoxically, Hamas is expected to abide by a document whose authors  
deny it a chair at the diplomatic roundtable. Israeli Foreign Minister  
Tzipi Livni's insistence that Hamas is "not to be given the  
opportunity to gain any sort of legitimacy within a renewal of a  
truce" fails to recognize the popularity of this group in the West  
Bank, and its control of Gaza. Contrary to common belief, Hamas has  
time and time again requested inclusion in the international political  
process; even if it means talking to Israel. But this is old news.  
Hamas adopted this position almost 2.5 years ago by recognizing the  
Prisoners Document whereby it agreed to surrender control of the  
Palestinian government in favor of a power sharing administration  
committed to a negotiated two-state settlement on the territories  
Israel occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem. This document fell  
on the deaf ears of the international community and was dismissed by  
Israel as "advocating continued resistance."

The UN resolution is perhaps most favorable to Palestinian President  
Mahmoud Abbas who, while his 4-year term officially ran out on January  
9, has been trying to use the diplomatic process to secure his rule at  
home. Warnings by the Chief of the Shin Bet in late August of the need  
to come up with a political solution prior to the end of Abbas' term  
prompted the PLO to declare him "the president of the future state of  
Palestine." But the PLO is not an elected body and cannot legitimately  
elect others to power. Thus, to win more time in office Abbas has used  
the current negotiations to extend his term, hoping to bypass the  
Palestinian elections for another year.

Indeed, Abbas' statement that an Israeli rejection of the Gaza  
ceasefire makes it responsible for "perpetuating a waterfall of blood"  
is also true in that it would severely weaken his own rule; further  
destabilizing an already tense political atmosphere in the West Bank.

Resolution Lacks Substance

The resolution is not legally binding and issues no time restrictions.

Granted, it "stresses the urgency of and calls for an immediate,  
durable and fully respected ceasefire leading to the withdrawal of  
Israeli forces from Gaza." However, when words like "durable" and  
"leading to" are translated into military terminology, it means that  
Israel now has free reign to end Gaza blitzkrieg when it wants.

The resolution also dilutes important issues by addressing everyone's  
concerns without imposing protocols for their engagement. Violence  
against civilians is condemned. Humanitarian assistance is to be  
distributed. Initiatives aimed at creating and opening humanitarian  
corridors are welcomed. Tangible steps toward intra-Palestinian  
reconciliation are encouraged. Intensified discussions will occur. And  
finally, member states are instructed to increase efforts for peace.

Vague language with various mechanisms attached. In fact, Hamas is not  
even mentioned in the resolution. Even the reopening of the crossing  
points in Gaza are to be conducted through a document signed by the  
Palestinian Authority in 2005 and dealt with through Cairo. Further,  
it was just announced on January 10, that EU diplomats seek to bypass  
Hamas by restoring control over the crossings to Fatah-led PA security  
personnel.

As evident from the attacks of the past few days, the resolution  
allows Israel to announce its own ceasefire and not be bound by an  
international document. In effect, it serves as yet another diplomatic  
cushion between Israel's ongoing war crimes in Gaza and the region,  
and international law.

Thus far, it is becoming evident that both Mahmoud Abbas and the Arab  
states jumped on the U.S.-led diplomatic train to quell widespread  
public dissent at home, the effect of which is the encouragement of  
Israeli unilateralism. And while recent movement by Abbas and the  
Egyptian-led initiative seeks to broker agreement from Israel and  
Hamas on the UN document, both have yet to adopt its recommendations.

Until the adoption of a resolution with vigor or the severe insertion  
of a world power both with the political prudence of sitting down with  
Hamas and the ability of cornering Israel into a ceasefire, the  
unbearable status quo persists. In the meantime, Israeli bombs rain on  
the Strip and people of conscience around the world are glued to their  
televisions, continuing to witness an organized genocide against an  
oppressed peoples. •

Shourideh Cherie Molavi writes regulary on, and reports from,  
Palestine, and also lives in Toronto.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(((( T h e B u l l e t))))~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Bullet is produced by the Socialist Project. Readers are
encouraged to distribute widely. Comments, criticisms and
suggestions are welcome. Write to info at socialistproject.ca

If you wish to subscribe: www.socialistproject.ca/lists/?p=subscribe

The Bullet archive is available at www.socialistproject.ca/bullet

For more analysis of contemporary politics check out
'Relay: A Socialist Project Review' at www.socialistproject.ca/relay