If, as Israeli media reported on Monday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is indeed leaning towards ordering a "full occupation" of Gaza – despite mounting pressure to end the war – it will be the ultimate reversal of Ariel Sharon’s 2005 decision to unilaterally pull Israeli settlers and troops out of the Palestinian territory. It would be a further breach of international law and a strategic error of epic proportions.
Mr Sharon – who was known for his hardline views on and actions towards Palestinians – made a televised address on August 15, 2005, in which the then Israeli prime minister said the “changing reality in this country, in this region and in the world, required another reassessment and changing of positions”. Nicknamed “the bulldozer”, the bellicose general-turned-politician had been an enthusiastic backer of the Israeli settler movement but even he saw the futility of trying to impose the country’s will on the enclave’s Palestinians. “Gaza cannot be held onto forever,” he said.
Mr Netanyahu, who was Israel’s finance minister at the time, resigned from the government in protest. Two decades later – and with the support of some extremist ultranationalist Cabinet colleagues who have openly called for the resettling of Gaza and the expulsion of its inhabitants – he is considering an expansion of the war that hundreds of retired Israeli security officials, including former heads of intelligence agencies, this week publicly said should be brought to an immediate end. Their voices joined those among the families of Israel’s remaining hostages who are also urging Mr Netanyahu to find ways to bring their loved ones home and end the war.
Whether Israel’s Prime Minister chooses to ignore such warnings and flood the shattered remains of Gaza with yet more Israeli troops and armour remains to be seen. However, if the Israeli public wants a glimpse of how such a direct occupation would work, they need only look at the deadly debacle of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s so-called aid operation. Such is the fate of imposed solutions.
Palestinians are fully aware of the fact that 2005 did not signal the end of Israel’s occupation, only its evolution. Israel continued to exercise control over Gaza’s border crossings, its airspace and its coastline, having the final say on what went in and out of the enclave – including its people. Many in the international community, including the UN Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, the EU and many NGOs insisted that Gaza remained occupied after the removal of several thousand settlers in 2005. The UN General Assembly has repeatedly insisted that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to “Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967”, which includes Gaza.
Neither warnings nor international condemnation will deter those in Israel’s political leadership and military whose worldview can be traced back to the bitter infighting over the Gaza disengagement. It is clear that many seek to reverse that decision; the military route that splits Gaza in two is called the Netzarim Corridor, named after one of the Israeli settlements dismantled on Mr Sharon’s orders 20 years ago.
Mr Netanyahu may yet turn away from embracing such lethal nostalgia for conquest and resettlement. But by hinting that it may be a possibility, he emboldens those who seek war without end and postpones the day when a political settlement with the Palestinians ends Israel’s international and regional isolation.
