Gaza Time Bomb

Setting aside the extreme violence, much about Hamas’s recent actions remains unclear. It comes as a great surprise that the scale of its preparatory actions could have eluded Israeli intelligence.

No doubt, we will learn more in the future.

The pent-up anger on the Palestinian side, generated by more than 15 years of isolation created by the Israeli right, is easily understandable. 

We can only be outraged by the barbarity of Hamas’s atrocities and ask ourselves, what positive result the movement expected to achieve in the beleaguered situation it got itself into? Very soon, the American side started talking about a new September 11, as traces of the massacre were revealed. Some communities were stunned, and the Israeli authorities soon reacted with demonstrative harshness.

The New York Times reported on the bombing of mosques and refugee camps (Jabaliya, Shati, etc.), which led to numerous casualties, and soon on the statement by the Israeli authorities calling on the Palestinian population to leave northern Gaza before it gets cleared of the Hamas militants concentrated there!

One can argue endlessly about the relevance of the Zionist project. But it must be admitted that the Zionists, like many others before them, wrested their right to exist by force of arms.

The war ended with three-quarters of Palestinian territory under Israeli control.

Palestinian Arabs found themselves in two separate sectors: Gaza and the area to the west.

There were 700,000 refugees in the camps located in neighboring Arab countries.

The hostility of the neighboring Arab nations, with the exception of the then Transjordan, was total; the situation remained frozen until 1967. That year we were heading towards a new conflict.

This was the time when the prestige of Gamal Abdel Nasser was significant. The West believed that Israel could disappear (closing the Gulf of Aqaba; withdrawal of international dividing forces at Egypt’s request). The Arabs thought they would definitely win. “We will throw the Jews into the sea,” said a Palestinian official appointed by Nasser.

In fact, Israel’s preparedness was much higher, and the Six Day War ended in a terrible defeat for the Arab armies. Gamal Abdel Nasser offered to resign, but was rejected.

At that time, power in Israel was in the hands of democratic elements; only ten years later the right came to power, never to leave it again.

Perhaps, given the events that followed, one could take a risk and say that after that catastrophic psychological shock on the Arab side, there was a possibility of resolving the issue by expelling the Palestinian population to Transjordan… This country was already largely populated by Palestinians (refugees).

Perhaps the plan to create two deeply hostile states with such different levels of economic development on 25,000 square kilometers was a utopia?

Do we need to recall the murder by a right-wing Jew of Yitzhak Rabin, the only Israeli leader who advocated the creation of a Palestinian state?

Everything was heading towards radicalization of the situation.

A few years before this event, Arafat answered a question he was asked in the following manner, “The future is working for us.” What he meant was, “We will win through demographics.”

When the right subsequently gain the upper hand and Jewish settlers begin to move into Palestinian-held areas, the wives of these settlers will consider it a point of honor to have six children on average.

Today the number of Jews in Israel exceeds the number of Palestinians. This is reminiscent of what was said at one time in response to Arafat’s statement: “Time works for those who work for it.”

Disallowing Israeli settlers to settle in Gaza was a political choice. 

All efforts were directed towards the West Bank of Jordan.

The Gaza Strip became increasingly radicalized: in 2005 and 2006, Hamas legally won municipal elections and then parliamentary elections.

As a result, in December 2008, Israel carried out a series of attacks on Gaza over three weeks. 

In 2009, Netanyahu, in order to weaken the Palestinian National Authority, allowed Qatar to provide financial assistance to Hamas.

The divide and conquer system worked successfully.

Meanwhile, living conditions in Gaza, often compared to a vast concentration camp, were appalling and turned the population against Israel.

All this happened quietly, occasionally accompanied by acts of violence and retaliatory strikes.

This is how the extremely conflict situation we know developed and then exploded suddenly and with enormous force.

Perhaps Israel’s response will be to try to solve the problem in a radical way.

It is unlikely that the plight of the civilian population will be taken seriously. The United States will continue to support Israel regardless of the actions of the Jewish state, and this has already led to referencing the repetition of the September 11 events, which only implies a military response.