Starving or defeated

Israel should not aim to defeat the Palestinian people

Adi Dagan|Published: 09.26.06 , 23:26

Israel's policy in the occupied territories in the past six years, and even more so ever since the Hamas government was elected, has been premised on immense economic and political pressure exerted on Palestinian society.

This pressure is meant, among other things, to cause the Palestinians to accept Israel's preconditions before Israel considers turning its attention to Palestinian needs or interests. This policy of coercion is not only immoral, but also wrong and dangerous to all of us – and every person in Israel must protest it.

Regarding the starvation of Palestinian residents, there is no say much in order to see we're talking about an atrocious policy. Recently we learned that 830,000 residents in Gaza depend on UNRWA's food rations.

Seventy percent of Strip residents are subsisting through donations of flour, oil, beans, and sugar. According to World Bank figures, 2006 is emerging as the most difficult year in the Palestinian Authority's history, as a result of Israel's closure of crossings and prevention of the movement of goods, as well as foreign aid cutbacks.

The bombing of the Gaza power plant in June left its resident with irregular supply of electricity and water. It's hard to grasp how people live under such conditions for months, particularly in Gaza – a small area disconnected from the world and located dozens of kilometers south of Tel Aviv, although for most Israelis it might as well be on another planet.

Regarding the rational of defeating the Palestinian people and government so that they accept Israel's conditions, seemingly this sounds logical. Israel exerts economic and military pressure on the people, whose lives are becoming intolerable, so that residents press their government to change its ways or act to topple the government and replace it with one that is more suitable for Israel's purposes.

However, this policy is a short-term one and blind to its fateful future implications.

Just agreement needed

Many historical examples exist showing the bitter results of capitulation agreements between peoples. The Oslo Agreements between Israel and Arafat, who was a weak leader at the time desperate for diplomatic achievements, dragged the Palestinians into agreeing for symbolic control over roughly 40 percent of the Territories.

This led to the number of settlers being doubled in the period 1994-2000.

The maintenance of control mechanisms in accordance with Israel's interests in the Territories led to the outbreak of the second Intifada. In Lebanon, the 1982 invasion and Israel's lengthy presence and intervention in the country managed to bring about the removal of the PLO, but enabled Hizbullah to emerge.

Similarly, Iraq's occupation and the establishment of a pro-American regime there by force are boosting the resistance offered by some local factions and serve as fertile ground for violence and the absence of stability and peace.

The conclusion of all this is that starving and punishing the Palestinian population is not only an atrocious, blind policy. The attempt to shatter political frameworks and intervene in the basic positions of a foreign government is highly dangerous.

Genuine negotiations that would lead to a just agreement accepted by all sides must be premised on compromise vis-à-vis the genuine desires and interests of the Palestinian people, and not vis-à-vis a platform introduced by a puppet regime and an exhausted, starved people that has been defeated. Such capitulation agreements will ultimately fan the flames of the continuing conflict.