I'm going to post some selected bits from another thread by Iyad el-Baghdadi
It's a thread in response to some of the questions he got from the one above.
I'm going to do this a little out of order - with a point.
A few people triggered me by cheering for this side or that or talking about "winning" or "losing". Do you see anyone winning? These are human beings being killed and human lives being shattered, destroyed.
I hate geopolitical-centric thinking even though I have to engage in it (and as you see I'm pretty good at it). It trains you to look at the world as a game of chess and almost ignore the human lives.
Reminder of my comment here. I'm sorry but cheering for war either way is disgusting.
He is Palestinian.
Oh this he says:
People asking how representative I am of Palestinians. I am extremely Palestinian and I represent only myself. Palestinians are a diverse people with diverse opinions. My comment here (from 2021) stands
From 2021:
Palestinians are a very diverse group of people. We were already diverse pre 1948, but since then we were also forced to live under very different realities from each other. Please do not assume that one Palestinian represents everyone. Follow a whole bunch of people for balance.
For this exact same reason, there needs to be a flurry of initiatives for intra-Palestinian conversation after these events. Including difficult ones. We need to get to know each other, not only in terms of our ideas but where they come from, and what realities we lived under.
Also if you're Palestinian you need in this moment to prioritize your identity over your ideology. Those Palestinians you disagree with were also uprooted, crushed, and traumatized. They lived different lives and came to value different things. Don't hate them, get to know them.
I have ALWAYS found him as a very measured, non emotional tweeter who gives a really well educated opinion (it's still an opinion). But one I've always found helpful and worthwhile reading.
Going back to some of the other points he makes in the thread answering questions (still doing this out of order because I think it's important to emphasise these bits)
Someone asked whether Israel's electorate want Gaza ethnically cleansed. The answer is actually no, the Israeli electorate were largely satisfied with the pre-Oct 7 status quo and thought it was manageable (Palestinians of course were not, it was just relentless and escalating violence and pain).
Did they change their minds after Oct 7? We don't know, but I don't think so. The ethnic cleansing push is coming from certain people in Israel but I don't think it's a mainstream opinion, not yet at least.
On the point about whether what Israel is doing constitutes ethnic cleansing, I think it's worth going back to international law.
This is an international law professor from Switzerland.
Evelyne Schmid AT evelyneschmid
"Northern Gaza" is not, cannot be, a military target in accordance with international law. A whole city cannot be a target. No warning can change that. Warnings are part of the legal analysis when a military objective has been identified; only then does IHL ask about precaution.
Precaution is oc built in the requirements to select targets. The fact that military objects have to be distinguished from civilian ones is a precaution to save life&dignity. But precaution exercised by way of warnings does not and cannot render an indiscriminate attack legal.
Moreover, where, where are people supposed to go? The injured ones, the disabled, the elderly and sick? Those without fuel, food, water and protection against the cold? This must stop.
More clarification: we can only assess the legality of specific attacks (not all of them together), and for that, the Q is whether or not there is a military target in a specific place at a specific target and if so, what the ex ante considerations are re proportionality & precaution.
Clearly, there are military objectives in N Gaza. They are in densely populated areas and may potentially be attacked. But importantly, asking everyone to evacuate does not liberate the IDF from the obligation to only direct attacks against military objectives.
To put more simply collective punishments are a breach of article 33 of the Geneva convention and 'clearing an area' and regarding anyone who remains as a hostile is a problem under international law. Whilst ethnic cleansing does not have a single definition, what Israel is doing would match definitions used in the former Yugoslavia which the UK recognises as ethnic cleansing.
So I don't think it's an unfair use of the phrase. He doesn't go as far as calling Israel actions genocidal but does clarify with the following comment:
Also a reminder that ethnic cleansing and genocide aren't always separate things; they're a continuum of each other.
el-Baghdadi talks about reluctance of Palestinians to move, which in the context of the Israeli asking the Palestinians to move is noteworthy. Keep in mind the Israeli's know this:
There was a question about whether Palestinians would rather "leave" than get bombed and whether they'll leave Gaza if it's damaged beyond repair. How do I explain the Palestinian concept of "sumud صمود" (staying put)?
Like I said elsewhere Palestinians are survivors of erasure. After the Nakba, Palestinians adopted a popular attitude of "staying put" (sumud), this is ingrained in our psyche. Perhaps this song can explain?
Lyrics:
"I'm staying put
In my land, I'm staying put
They can take my livelihood, I'm staying put
They can kill my children, I'm staying put
They can blow up my house, and in its ruins, I'm staying put"
Going back to geopolitics he posts this about Biden and the West:
A few asked about the Biden-Netanyahu relationship. A lot of my insight came from this reporting from Axios. Basically, Biden and Netanyahu don't get along, and while Biden declares strong support in public, in private he's been trying to rein him in.
https://www.axios.com/2023/10/21/israel-hamas-war-inside-bidens-gaza-strategy
I think knowing this and that Biden wanted a meeting that was cancelled (and Sunak stepping in on in some capacity) needs to be on the radar.
Someone asked about Biden's political calculations. Well, taking a very strong position on Israel will ensure that he can't get criticized by the GOP for being insufficiently invested in Israel's security. In fact right-wingers went nuts over this (can you believe Tucker Carlson actually called for de-escalation?
But it's really more likely Biden is acting on political impulse/instinct. He's a Zionist through & through, he said so himself.
That kinda show how far Netanyhu is pushing the US on this and how uncomfortable Biden - an admitted Zionist - also feels.
I find this comment interesting.
Several questions about the atrocities committed on Oct 7. I'm preparing another thread on this but there are now many reports by credible journalists that make it impossible to deny that horrific atrocities were committed on that day.
Israel says Hamas planned every single atrocity from the start. Hamas says some of the worst atrocities were done by other opportunistic parties from Gaza that used the border fence breach to go on a rampage. They also say that at least some of the civilian deaths were due to a disorganized and heavy-handed IDF response.
Like I said I have another thread coming on this but at this point I don't think anybody who's objective can doubt that Hamas committed serious war crimes that day.
Remember we have a massive information war going on for hearts and minds. Hamas outraged the world with war crimes. There seems to be a concerted effort by the Israelis to say it was premeditated whilst there now seems to be a massive row back from Hamas itself. At the same time we have the images (and now lack of images) coming from Gaza.
Fascinating to see Hamas realising a need to do a PR job and that war crimes aren't a good look for anyone...
They want to be taken seriously and as el-Baghdadi pointed out on his original thread Hamas stated objectives have largely been overlooked. (To this point - I think we will start to hear more on this - the hostages are leverage to this).
One final point he makes.
There was a question about Hamas and the hostages. Well, it seems that Hamas is playing an interesting game with the hostages, releasing a few every few days to forestall a ground invasion and to increase political pressure on Netanyahu and the pro-Israel coalition. You can't start a ground invasion when hostages are being released every few days.
In fact there's reporting that Netanyahu and the IDF have been very frustrated by this. There was also reporting that when Hamas said it would release some hostages, Israel initially ignored them.
There's been a development tonight on the hostage situation.
The families of the hostages have met with Netanyhu. It was not a friendly meeting by all accounts.
They have officially endorsed a collective position of swapping all the hostages for all Hamas prisoners Israel holds. "Everyone for everyone" being the slogan.
Plenty of other interesting points on the thread. Will post link in a second.