Israel/Hamas War - Ceasefire

[Toggenburgsaregreat]

Each Saturday we are seeing demonstrations in London where people are marching with placards and calling for a ceasefire in the Hamas/Israel war.

However, it is difficult to know how the supporters of Palestine think this can be achieved? (Interestingly, no calls for Hamas to cease hostilities and return the hostages were heard - so is this really a call for unilateral disarmament?)

And who should Israel negotiate a ceasefire with? Hamas, ISIS, ISSP, The Muslim Brotherhood - all of these groups/any of these groups?

What is it the supporters of Palestine actually want?

This is interesting -
" Egypt's curbs on movement through its crossing with the Gaza Strip is a security decision that had to be taken even though it has cut off imports of medicine and aid to the impoverished coastal enclave....Egypt had no other recourse but to seal the tunnels although it is not a decision without physical and political risks. The ban and its broader war is an open invitation for extremist groups in Gaza and Sinai to continue striking at Egyptian targets....But the crossing had to be closed because Hamas had been inviting all sorts of militant and Jihadist groups and training them in Sinai, kidnapping and killing Egyptian soldiers and smuggling the killers into the Gaza Strip via tunnels and hiding Muslim Brotherhood leaders in Gaza."

Quoted from https://mepc.org/commentary/egypt-criticized-gaza-blockade

And again - “This buck-passing between Israel and Egypt, in which each blames the other for the denials of access, shows that the two governments have a mutual interest in preventing international media coverage of the situation in the Gaza Strip. Israel is primarily responsible for this news blockade, but Egypt has continued to be complicit in recent weeks. You cannot pretend to deplore bias in the media’s coverage of the war while at the same time preventing journalists from going there."

Quoted from 'Reporters without Borders'-

https://rsf.org/en/rsf-investigation-how-egypt-complicit-reporting-blockade-gaza

From 'Foreign Affairs'
"The Egyptian government, after all, has been party to the 16-year-long Israeli blockade of Gaza, enforcing tight controls on what comes in and out of the enclave through the border crossing at Rafah"

(Much of article behind pay-wall.)

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/middle-east/egypt-cauldron-gaza

Why isn't Egypt getting it's fair share of the flack for this 'blockade' ??

Because Israel is the occupying power, not Egypt.

Hmmm - so let's get this right because Israel has closed its borders with Gaza it is an occupying power enforcing an illegal blockade siege.

But although Egypt has also closed its border with Gaza it is definitely not an occupying power and definitely not enforcing an illegal blockade siege.

Egypt also has a border with Gaza and is complicit in the blockade. Sisi is absolutely corrupt but somehow gets given a free pass by the US
It does not change that Israel is the occupying force of Gaza. Israel controls what can go in and out of Gaza and also maintains control alongside Egypt of what can enter and leave through the Rafah border. Which is the border between Gaza and Egypt.
Not only that, at the start of the war, Egypt bombed the Rafah border to prevent aid entering through it

Hmmmm, some rather strange logic at work here, methinks.

Well you can go and read about the Rafah border. Egypt does not have full control over it.
Under a 2007 agreement between Egypt and Israel, Egypt controls the crossing but imports through the Rafah crossing require Israeli approval.

And that's not to say I think Egypt is totally innocent in all of this but it does not have full control over the Rafah border as you would assume most countries would have over their borders.
Israel maintains a level of control as part of the blockade there too

That should say Israel bombed the border

You seem to misunderstand what a fact is and what an opinion is.
I don't have the time to explain to you what makes an embargo a legal prohibition when you can easily look it up yourself. I will give you a hint though, it is related to ratified international laws.
You do know that Ukraine is able to produce their own fuel and that Russia their own grain ( no reported famine there), something the Palestinians can't do in Gaza as the IDF has destroyed infrastructures and arable lands.
Cutting off water is unlawful, according to the Geneva convention, which Israel itself has signed up to, but there is a but because they refused to apply it to the occupied territories and blocked the Palestinians signing up to it.
Why is that?

No, again you've got that wrong. That's not why Israel is the occupying force.

But no matter what facts are presented you won't change your mind so this is pointless. If it makes you feel better to ignore the internationally recognised legal status of Israel as occupying force in Palestine which includes Gaza due to the blockade then good for you.

@Toggenburgsaregreat the logic appears strange to you because it's not logical or factual as it is no more than a PP's apparent misunderstanding of the issue.

@ConnieCounter

Which all neatly takes me back to my original post replying to @Parkingt111 which stated:

++++

"Parkingt111
Gaza is also considered occupied according to the EU"

I would definitely agree with you that the West Bank is occupied territory with Israel building settlements in what is effectively some one else's country and should most definitely stop and then be removed.

However I would definitely disagree with you on Gaza being an occupied territory prior to 7th October given that the Israelis had pulled out completely in 2005. Now you could twist the definition by saying that Israel blockaded or sanctioned Gaza but this is no different than the blockades or sanctions against say North Korea or Iran which are certainly not occupied territories.

+++

By using the term "Palestine" you are referring to the West Bank and Gaza, although they governed very separately (Fatah in WB, Hamas in Gaza). Given that (in my opinion) WB is occupied (see above) you infer that Gaza as part of Palestine is also occupied which (in my opinion it is not).

This is not a misunderstanding on my behalf simply a clarification.

I would also like to return to my question of:

"Also Egypt closed the border with Gaza in 2007 is that an economic sanction or an illegal blockade/ siege as well?"

@ConnieCounter

So you state that Israel is not an occupying force because of the blockade "That's not why Israel is the occupying force."

But then you state that Israel is internationally recognised as an occupying force because of the blockade:

"the internationally recognised legal status of Israel as occupying force in Palestine which includes Gaza due to the blockade then good for you."

Which one is it?

Gaza is stateless, but its borders are controlled by Israel. That is a fact I think.

Most economic sanctions are between states. You can't compare US sanctions on North Korea/Iran with what's happening to Gaza. North Korea/Iran are countries in control of their own borders. They can (and do) choose to get goods and services from their allies. It may be more difficult and expensive, but its possible.

Gaza has no choices as its not in control of its borders, so what's happening in Gaza is a blockade, not sanctions. Israel won't let in goods/services from Gaza's allies.

Egypt has every right to control the inbound border to them with neighbouring countries (as all countries do). In my opinion, Israel are applying very unfair pressure around that border because they want Gazans to flee the territory that way.

Israel control the inbound traffic from Egypt to Gaza, and like all the Gazan borders they aren't letting aid in. Plus they are bombing rafah, where the crossing is, so even if aid does get in, it can't be distributed.

If Israel were applying "sanctions" not a blockade they would be making it much easier for food/water/medicine to get in. They aren't and the results are predictable.

All interesting opinions but I thought the thread was about how to bring about a ceasefire that satisfies both parties rather than whether Israel is the occupying state. It is what it is.

@AdamRyan

Firstly thank you for providing a structured counter argument.

Gaza is officially part of the Palestinian Authority and residents in theory can apply for PA passports. But given that the WB and Gaza are separately governed the PA is being difficult on issuing passports to Gazans. For example 50 to 70% (mostly the young) do not have a passport. So although officially Gazans are not stateless, I would agree that the reality is that 50 to 70% are stateless.

You are correct that Israel has not been letting in good and services across its own borders into Gaza as is its right to do so. Although it did allow people to cross into Israel mainly for work purposes.

I also agree that Egypt did not let in goods and services into Gaza as is their right to do so. But it also more severely restricted movement of people into Egypt than say Israel did (it didn't need Gazans for work purposes).

I would disagree that Israel has been putting unfair pressure on Egypt to close the border on the basis that they did this in 2007 when Israel was not in open conflict with Hamas. They did it for their own reasons because they feared the destabilising effects of Iranian backed Hamas on Egypt.

I'm also sure that Israel would be happy to see Gazans cross into Egypt but the Egyptians do not wish to create Gaza 2.0 in Northern Sinai.

As for the bombing of Rafah that was indeed reasonable for Egypt to close the border at that time on safety grounds but the bombing of Rafah has been now been stopped (after US pressure).

I would agree that if Gaza had a border with a country that was friendly to it (like N Korea or Iran) then it could indeed get aid in etc more easily. But equally if China closed the border with N Korea as well would that make it a blockade.

So is the difference between a blockade and a sanction based on whether you can get around the sanctions?

Fair point - the short answer is I don't think there will be.

Israel won't agree to a ceasefire until all their hostages (or those still alive) are returned and that Hamas are removed from power because they believe that if Hamas stay in control then they will simply attack Israel again and again.

The Egyptians and Qataris proposed a peace deal under which the hostages were released and Hamas left Gaza to be replaced by the Palestinian Authority and Gaza rebuilt with Gulf money. Hamas understandably refused. Interestingly Hamas was backed in this by Iran who wants to keep a client group close to Egypt in order to keep pressure on them.

So that leaves us where we are with innocent civilians being the pawns and paying the price for a larger Middle East power game.

@1dayatatime
I'm not sure, I have seen a increasing shift of rhetoric from the US to Netanyahu that military force is not going to resolve the issue
There also seems to be disagreement within the higher ranking members of the knesset in what should be accepted as part of a hostage deal as the pressure to bring them home is really increasing
I read something today let me find it

No, in my opinion (not a lawyer though) the difference between a blockade and a sanction is two fold:

• sanctions are against a state. There is no state of Palestine
• blockades are indiscriminate in the goods/services being blocked. Sanctions are targeted to particular types of goods and services.

Gaza is "blockaded" (I prefer under siege) because it isn't a state and very little is getting across the border.

I would also like to return to my question of:

"Also Egypt closed the border with Gaza in 2007 is that an economic sanction or an illegal blockade/ siege as well?"

Is Parkingt111 correct in saying Israel maintains some controls over this border as well?

https://time.com/6556017/israel-egypt-border-gunfire/

Egypt and Israel have had a peace treaty since 1979, and the two countries have cooperated in blockading the Gaza strip since Hamas’s takeover in 2007

Egypt controls one crossing into Gaza, in Rafah, but everything coming in requires Israeli approval

@Parkingt111

"@1dayatatime
I'm not sure, I have seen a increasing shift of rhetoric from the US to Netanyahu that military force is not going to resolve the issue
There also seems to be disagreement within the higher ranking members of the knesset in what should be accepted as part of a hostage deal as the pressure to bring them home is really increasing
I read something today let me find it"

+++

As on previous exchanges I completely agree with you that military force is not going to resolve this issue. Even if Israel managed to identify and eliminate every single Hamas member then all that would happen is that they are replaced with Hamas 2.0 most likely Palestinian Islamic Jihad who are even more extreme.

We are though seeing signs of the Gaza conflict spreading for example Iran bombing Pakistan and vice versa costing the lives of children and of course the situation in Yemen as well.

@1dayatatime found it, there does seem to be disagreement with accepting a truce in return for the release of hostages. Netanyahu seems adamant on keeping up the military pressure.
Elsewhere it's been reported that Blinken has also warned Netanyahu that military pressure will not necessarily yield the results he hopes to see and there seems to be some frustration with Netanyahu from the US.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-said-frittering-away-hostage-deal-by-unilaterally-toughening-demands/

Yes, the escalation in other countries is concerning. It seems Pakistan has said after today's strikes that they want to end any further escalation so that's something atleast