The General Assembly of the United Nation adopted a resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, allowing for the release of hostages and delivery of aid to Gaza. In the past, the highest priority for Israel has been the return of their nationals from captivity. Even the return of dead bodies of their soldiers or civilians was extremely important for them. Israel has scores of their soldiers and civilians in Hamas custody. Nevertheless, currently, its priority seems to be to “eliminate” Hamas.
Israel has absolutely refused to agree to any kind of cease-fire as it fears that Hamas will exploit the cease-fire to regroup, rearm and relaunch missiles and rockets into Israel. Who can say that the Israeli apprehension is unjustified? As of now, Israel is launching fierce aerial bombardments, indiscriminately killing civilians, and destroying whatever infrastructure exists in Gaza, in the expectation that at some stage, the bombings would have inflicted so much damage, pummelled Hamas infrastructure such as tunnels and other platforms so thoroughly, reduced their morale so low, that the Israeli Defence Forces would hardly face any opposition.
The North-South divide, which became apparent after Russia’s failed invasion of Ukraine, has become further pronounced due to the developments in the Middle East. Most nations of the Global South, while condemning Hamas’ attack on October 7, are in sympathy with what the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres said in the Security Council on October 24. He reminded the international community of the context in which Hamas had acted. He made it clear that he condemned Hamas’ ruthless attack on Israel. At the same time, he brought up the story of occupation, the siege of Gaza for so many years, and the denial of the right of self-determination to the Palestinian people. We, in the Global South, are being bombarded by Western, which is mainly American, narratives about the events in the Middle East. We do not have access to other aspects of the conflict, though plenty of material is available for those wishing to go deeper into the situation. Guterres deserves to be complimented for setting the record straight; he has earned the respect of the vast majority of the international community.
It is interesting to note that of the 193-member UN General Assembly, 14 countries, including the US, voted against the Jordan-drafted resolution calling for immediate and sustained truce. The 44 abstentions include Canada, Germany, Japan, UK and India. The US veto is understandable. The US wants to leave Israel free to “finish” the job of “eliminating” Hamas, irrespective of how long it might take and how many lives might get lost.
All wars end. This one will too. When and how, it is too early to guess. Israel will keep fighting and bombarding until it achieves its stated goal, unachievable as it is. At some time, it might unilaterally declare that it has succeeded in wiping out Hamas, and claim victory. What happens after Hamas has been “eliminated”? For sure, Israel would not want to reoccupy the Gaza Strip, it would be a death trap for them. Much as the ordinary people of Gaza might want to get rid of Hamas rule, they would be even more resentful of Israelis in Gaza. Hand over Gaza to Egypt to administer it for some time? “No, thank you” would be Egypt’s response. Invite the Palestine Authority (PA), based in Ramallah in the West Bank, to return to Gaza and restore its authority which they had lost in 2006? (It is pertinent to recall that Hamas had fairly and squarely won a democratic election in 2006, but it was not recognised by the democratic West.) This would seem to be the only practicable solution. PA President Mahmoud Abbas might be tempted to welcome it. On paper at least, the Palestinian movement would have unified. However, he is most unpopular in the West Bank for corruption and for collaborating with Israel. He will lose all credibility among his people. It would be something like what happened in Afghanistan in 1979 when Babrak Karmal came on a Soviet tank and assumed presidency; he received no support from the people or internationally.
But even that would not reassure the people of Israel about their security. The “international community” keeps talking of a two-state solution, like a mantra. But the same international community knows, or ought to know, that the two-state solution is a chimaera. A state to become a state, must have land. Where is the land for a future Palestinian state? The West Bank is heavily populated by Israeli settlers, by some accounts more than 7,00,000 of them, who will never return to Israel. Whatever land is left is like Swiss cheese, dotted with innumerable settlements. The current Prime Minister will never agree to a Palestinian state, however truncated. He had opposed the Oslo accords which envisaged a future Palestinian state.
Just as the British dumped the Palestine issue on the United Nations in 1947, this time too, the matter will have to be dealt with by the UN. After the Anglo-French-Israeli attack on Egypt following President Nasser’s nationalisation of the Suez canal in 1956, a UN peacekeeping force, called UNEF — United Nations Emergency Force, was deployed to keep peace between Egypt and Israel. In the same manner, a UN peacekeeping force can be deployed along the Israeli-Gaza border, with an effective and implementable mandate to monitor all movements of people and supplies. This can only be done with Israel’s consent. Israel, at present, is most unhappy with the United Nations, but it should remember that it owes its very birth to the same United Nations. The establishment and deployment of a peacekeeping force will be the responsibility of the Security Council where Israel’s staunch ally, the US, wields enormous power and influence and will go to any length to fully protect Israel’s interests.
The writer was India’s Permanent Representative to the UN. He was appointed by the UN Secretary General as a special envoy to the Middle East peace process from 1993 to 1999 and was India’s special envoy to the Middle East from 2005 to 2009
