Israel reinvades Gaza

BY ELSA CLARO— Granma International staff writer—

THE signs are overwhelming and all of them lead in the same direction: Israel had already planned the invasion of Gaza and the soldier hostage has served as the pretext for it to advance its offensive. The fact that that is what would occur when the different Palestinian groups have just signed a commitment to unity and shared goals, confirms suspicions.

It does not suit the Ejud Olmert government to negotiate with the National Palestinian Authority. If its representatives were to sit down at the table with international witnesses as mediators, they would have to make concessions and that does not figure in any of the projects conceived by Ariel Sharon and his political inheritor. Establishing the definitive borders of the state of Israel in a unilateral manner, maintaining control over the water whose source is in the Gaza Strip and continuing to oversee all Palestinian movements with its exterior wall; now, that is part of its plan.

In his report to the UN Human Rights Commission, Professor John Dugard, that agency’s special rapporteur, stated shortly before the Israeli withdrawal nine months ago: "Israel does not plan to relinquish its grasp on the Gaza Strip. It plans to retain ultimate control over Gaza by controlling its borders, territorial sea and airspace. Consequently it will in law remain an Occupying Power still subject to obligation under the Fourth Geneva Convention."

That section of the international pact was violated at different points by Israel. Dugard’s conjectural warning about the future was been amply fulfilled. Barely 15 days ago, when he returned to the occupied territories, he reflected it as follows:

That situation has been compounded by the European-U.S.-Israeli financial boycott that is intensifying the general precariousness of existence in the Gaza Strip. It was one of the instruments utilized to asphyxiate the population so that it would end up rejecting the Hamas government that it had elected, according to the rules dictated by the West.

Fear of Hamas because it does not recognize the state of Israel and has not renounced the armed struggle as a means of attaining sovereignty? That is doubtful. For those who have a powerful and well-supplied army and control of the ways of entering or leaving these enclaves, standing up to a handful of ill-equipped men cannot be any problem, but rather a good pretext for creating a ruckus, conditioning steps or going for it for it for whatever motive..

However, for Hamas to conciliate its interests and points of view with the rest, does imply a great danger for the Israeli government. It signifies that Hamas can show flexibility, that it knows how to yield, and that denotes dynamic strategies that are developing its capacity and presenting prospects. Plus, such a conciliation would leave no basis for obstacles to international recognition of the government formed by Hamas.

In real terms, the agreement among the Palestinian factions maintains the PLO as their general representative and grants implicit recognition to Tel Aviv of its pre-1967 borders. There are more pieces and possible moves on the board and that does not suit Olmert.

The kidnapping of around 50 Palestinian deputies and ministers is highly significant within this serious context. Israel wants to get them out of circulation, keeping who knows how many incarcerated and until when, or to restrain them from any influence in their respective communities. Their destiny could well be the same as the Palestinian women and children arrested and imprisoned in Israeli prisons without charges or any evidence.

These are normal events for a people that experience the unheard of and atrocious as a daily situation. Few are blush over that. On the contrary they remain silent or give support to the usurpers. Primarily the United States. Without any doubt Bush was aware that the strike was going to come. A few minutes after the Israeli air-naval-land incursion began, he grabbed the first microphone that he could find to say that they had the right to "defend themselves."

And squeaky-clean Europe? Well, all right, thanks for asking. •

The Gaza Strip was occupied by Israel in the Six Day War (1967). The Oslo Agreement signed in 1993 returned it to the Palestinian National Authority. Despite the commitments agreed in the Norwegian capital, the Israeli Army did not withdraw from the area until September 2005, when Sharon’s unilateral deployment was put into practice.

An agreement of unity which brought Hamas to recognize the existence of Israel according to its pre-1967 borders, was signed just prior to the reoccupation of Gaza by representatives from Al Fatah, Hamas, the Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. For the moment, it is called the Document of the Prisoners (given that it was signed in a prison to include incarcerated Palestinian leaders.