UN-Truth

This morning, the IDF decided to have a “humanitarian respite” for the second day in a row.

An information note sent by the IDF to journalists in the late morning reported that “Today between 13:00 and 16:00, the IDF will implement for the second successive day a humanitarian recess in offensive activities. This step is in order to enable the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip to replenish stocks and to enable the international organizations to carry out their humanitarian missions”.

The IDF added that “approximately 100 trucks [are] to be transferred to Gaza via Kerem Shalom, and for the first time as a pilot via Erez. Finally, some 500,000 liters of heavy duty diesel for the Gaza power station are scheduled to be conveyed to Gaza via the Nahal Oz fuel Depot”.

UPDATE: However, the UN announced that it was suspending aid shipments until the safety of UN staff can be guaranteed, after a truck driver in a clearly-marked UN truck “was killed by tank fire as he was headed to an Israeli border crossing to pick up an aid shipment”. Two others with him were reportedly injured. A UN spokesman in the region said the trip had been coordinated with Israel. “The Israeli army has not commented”, according to the AP. It was subsequently reported that the IDF was investigating. The driver was reportedly a Palestinian contractor worker engaged or employed by UNWRA. The full AP report can be read here .

In a statement issued from UNHQ/New York — that said that not just one but two drivers had been killed — UNSG BAN Ki-Moon condemned “the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) firing on a United Nations aid convoy in Gaza, the killing of two UNRWA (UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East) contract workers and the injuring of another. According to reports from UN agencies, this incident took place during the three-hour humanitarian lull announced by the IDF. Since the conflict began 13 days ago, four UNRWA local staff have been killed. The UN is in close touch with the Israeli authorities about full investigation of this and other incidents, and about the need for urgent measures to avoid them in the future”. Ban also called again “for an immediate ceasefire in order to facilitate full and unhindered humanitarian access”, and he said that “The inability of the UN to provide assistance in this worsening humanitarian crisis is unacceptable”.

There have now been at least 763 Palestinians killed in Gaza since the IDF operation began on 27 December, and at least 3150 wounded.

And, by the end of the day Thursday, it was reported that another 35 bodies had been found during the “humanitarian respite”.

An article by Jimmy Carter in The Washington Post today, entitled “An Unnecessary War”, reported that about a month after his visit to the region last April, that “the Egyptians and Hamas informed us that all military action by both sides and all rocket firing would stop on June 19, for a period of six months, and that humanitarian supplies would be restored to the normal level that had existed before Israel’s withdrawal in 2005 (about 700 trucks daily). We were unable to confirm this in Jerusalem because of Israel’s unwillingness to admit to any negotiations with Hamas, but rocket firing was soon stopped and there was an increase in supplies of food, water, medicine and fuel. Yet the increase was to an average of about 20 percent of normal levels. And this fragile truce was partially broken on Nov. 4, when Israel launched an attack in Gaza to destroy a defensive tunnel being dug by Hamas inside the wall that encloses Gaza. On another visit to Syria in mid-December, I made an effort for the impending six-month deadline to be extended. It was clear that the preeminent issue was opening the crossings into Gaza. Representatives from the Carter Center visited Jerusalem, met with Israeli officials and asked if this was possible in exchange for a cessation of rocket fire. The Israeli government informally proposed that 15 percent of normal supplies might be possible if Hamas first stopped all rocket fire for 48 hours. This was unacceptable to Hamas, and hostilities erupted”. Jimmy Carter’s report can be read in full here.

The response by the Israeli government to the representative of the Carter Center — offering to deliver only 15% of normal supplies to Gaza — suggests that planning was well underway for Operation Cast Lead.

The Jerusalem Post published an analytical piece today that said the very fact that such a “humanitarian respite” was successful yesterday showed that Hamas was indeed still very much in control: “We were told repeatedly over the past week that the IAF has managed to severely disrupt the Hamas military wing command-and-control apparatus, and that Hamas commanders on the ground [mostly under the ground in tunnels] are finding it hard to communicate with each other and send orders down the chain of command and out to operatives in the field. Then came the humanitarian ceasefire implemented yesterday and this theory started to look questionable. We saw Wednesday that between 1PM and 4PM not a single rocket was fired from the Gaza Strip into Israel, and that the rocket fire resumed promptly at 4PM. This clearly indicates that the Hamas military wing is very much able to communicate orders to its various positions, and that its coordination is doing just fine”. This article can be viewed in full here .

The same article also said that “We were told that Hamas resistance was minimal. [But] It seems that Hamas deliberately allowed the IDF units to advance without much resistance. Hamas is currently positioned within the built-up and densely-populated areas and is trying to draw the IDF into the cities. Hamas is careful not to waste its forces and is not fighting aggressively as the IDF had estimated it would before the ground operation began last Saturday. So either the army’s estimation was wrong – which shows faulty intelligence – or it was right. Either way Hamas is not playing by the IDF playbook and is rather thinking on its feet deciding not to engage the IDF”.

And, it said, “At this moment the IDF has thousands of troops inside Gaza holding positions and whose posture is largely static and awaiting orders. They are completing Stage 2 of their operation: taking up positions on the outskirts of the large cities, isolate Gaza City, and clean those areas of terrorist infrastructure. By all accounts, Stage 2 has exhausted itself and the army is waiting for further orders to either launch Stage 3 or pull back. They have not been ordered to embark on Stage 3: invading the large cities and causing maximum damage to the Hamas military wing, and likewise they have not been ordered to pull back to the Israeli border. In effect, our boys are treading water, marching on the same spot, not advancing, not retreating”.

The author says that the reason for this state of affairs is that “The political echelon is taking time to give the Egyptian-American ceasefire proposal”, but that if the army “is not being ordered to push forward with massive force, it [should] just be pulled out quickly. Soldiers cannot be allowed to remain static in enemy territory”.

An article by former International Crisis Group analyst Mouin Rabbani (currently an independent Amman-based researcher) , published in the current issue of Middle East Report Online says that “With even the month-long 2002 battle for the Jenin refugee camp paling by comparison, [this] is the most serious armed confrontation between Israel and the Palestinians since the 1982 siege of Beirut … As in 2002, Israel’s first objective was to incapacitate public administration, sever the link between government and people, and isolate the leadership, rather than deal an immediate body blow to militant groups. And as in the West Bank at the height of the second uprising, Israel recognizes that smashing armed groups goes only so far; a sustainable victory requires that the population be cowed into submission and lose faith in its leaders and militants, with its energies redirected toward more mundane projects such as obtaining basic needs and services that the crippled government can no longer provide, and protecting itself from the ensuing chaos in an increasingly competitive environment”.

Rabbani also wrote that Israel never had any intention of lifting the blockade on Gaza, even during the cease-fire (tahdi’a) between Israel and Hamas that went into effect last June: “Although it is unwritten, the tahdi’a’s contents have been specified by its Egyptian midwife and leave little to the imagination: an immediate, comprehensive and reciprocal cessation of hostilities between Israel and the Gaza Strip, leading to a scheduled and full termination of the Israeli blockade (excepting materials used to produce projectiles and explosives), as well as a resumption of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations on a prisoner exchange and Palestinian-Egyptian talks on regulating the Rafah crossing. According to the Egyptians, the agreement makes no mention of restrictions on Palestinian arms smuggling … Nevertheless, Israel and Egypt refused to lift the siege, spurning Hamas’ key demand and primary incentive to enter into the deal. Indeed, although the blockade was eased for many (but by no means all) basic goods, imports consistently fell below Palestinian requirements and exports remained non-existent. More to the point, according to the International Crisis Group, Israeli officials said that ‘they did not intend to open the crossings fully and anticipated this would be a serious bone of contention’.”

Meanwhile, a day before Hamas believes the term in office of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas will expire (on 9 January), he is in Spain — on his way back from the UN in NY — to talk about Gaza …

Rabbani, in his analysis for MERIP, writes that “In the growing international diplomatic circus, the key issue for Israel is an effective international mechanism to prevent Hamas from rearming after Cast Lead is officially pronounced a victory. In this respect, the dispatch of foreign combat engineers to the Egyptian side of the Rafah border and deployment of a naval force off the Gaza coast are being mulled over. Since these forces will not be stationed on Palestinian territory, Hamas’ acquiescence in its own emasculation will not be required. Similarly, Israel would very much like to see an international and regional consensus — for example, one expressed in a UN Security Council resolution — demanding a permanent Hamas ceasefire. Then, as in 2002, it can withdraw from the Gaza Strip unrestrained by any agreement with the Islamists, and continue with raids and incursions at will to continuously weaken its adversaries under the pretext of removing imminent threats to its security. Needless to say, such scenarios are predicated on Israel’s ability to deliver a devastating blow to the Qassam Brigades and others before the fighting subsides. For others, restoring Abbas’ presidential guard at Rafah and perhaps introducing international monitors into Gaza are seen as primary objectives, the hope being that — particularly with government in Gaza obliterated — they can function as a bridgehead for a restoration of Abbas’ rule to Gaza. It is for this reason more than any other that Hamas has thus far rejected the introduction of third-party forces. For some in Hamas, furthermore, governance has been more of a restriction than an opportunity, and resuming life as a militant resistance movement embedded in Palestinian society is hardly the worst outcome … Yet, when all is said and done, two issues rise head and shoulders above the rest: the urgency of beginning the process of reversing Israel’s impunity in its dealings with the Palestinian people, and the equally dire need to address the fundamental issue of occupation, without which ceasefires, sieges and code-named calamities like Operation Cast Lead would be unnecessary”. Rabbabi’s analysis can be read in full here.

The UN Security Council is due to meet later today in New York to consider a Libyan draft resolution calling for an immediate cease-fire. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, and British Foreign Secretary Douglas Milibrand all stayed for another night in New York. Rice told journalists at a stake-out that they were staying because there was still work to be done.

The IDF also reported today that, among its humanitarian activities, “approximately 300 dual nationals are expected to be evacuated via Erez terminal at the request of the various embassies. The dual nationals will be shuttled to Allenby Bridge and make their way to Jordan accompanied by embassy staff”.

Meanwhile, the Jerusalem Post reported that “The IDF Spokesman’s Unit released a statement on Wednesday saying that the army had permitted the entry of a limited embed press pool into the Gaza Strip and would be distributing footage from this pool.” This report can be read here .

The Foreign Press Association (FPA) in Israel, which has appealed to Israel’s Supreme Court for access to the Gaza Strip that foreign journalists have been denied for most of the past two months — and completely since Operation Cast Lead began on 27 December — has still not had its “pool” reporters go in.

According to the FPA today, “the IDF has the prerogative to choose embeds, not us. They sent in one BBC cameraman and 3 Israeli journalists. Embeds means you are not free to go where and when you like, you go in and leave with the IDF unit. NONE of our members have gone in”.

In a legal update to its members, the FPA reported on Thursday evening that “The FPA lawyers have notified the State Attorney’s office and the Defense Ministry’s legal council of non-compliance on the part of the State in respect of the Supreme Court decision — given that the Erez crossing was again open today for humanitarian traffic. This is a procedural step required prior to a return to the Supreme Court”.

Filed under: Gaza, Israel, Journalism and Journalists, Palestine & Palestinians