Why is Gaza being blockaded? We dive in to understand its implications.
The situation in the Gaza Strip is dire, and it has been for years. The Israeli government’s permanent quarantine of the region has had devastating consequences for the people living there. The human rights implications of the blockade and its historical context draw parallels with other instances of beleaguerment, such as the Yemen blockade supported by the United States, Israel, and Britain.
A history marked by persecution
Israeli blockades have a troubling history, marked by multiple instances of grave consequences. One of the most notable blockades occurred in 2006 when Israel imposed a comprehensive naval siege of the Gaza Strip, limiting the entry of goods and vital supplies. The result was a dire humanitarian crisis with significant loss of life due to shortages of food, medicine, and electricity.
Tragically, this blockade exacerbated tensions in the region, leading to violent clashes and loss of innocent lives. Another instance took place in Lebanon in 2006 when Israel implemented a controversial air and sea blockade, which caused severe disruption to the livelihoods and well-being of Lebanese citizens. Such historical events highlight the complex and contentious nature of Israeli blockades, raising questions about their compatibility with international human rights standards.
The Blockade: a violation of human rights
The Right to Life: The most fundamental human right is the right to life. By limiting access to essential resources like food, medical supplies, water, and electricity, the Israeli blockade places the lives of thousands of innocent civilians at risk. The situation is especially dire for those in the intensive care unit, including children, babies, and infants whose life support depends on a consistent power supply.
The right to life is protected under “the Fourth Geneva Convention“, which specifically addresses the protection of civilians in times of armed conflict.
The Right to Food and Water: The blockade severely restricts the flow of goods into Gaza, making it difficult for its residents to access sufficient food and clean water. This undermines the right to adequate nutrition and potable water, leading to malnutrition and waterborne diseases.
The right to food and water is enshrined in the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 25)” and the “International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, Article 11)”.
The Right to Health: Adequate healthcare is a human right. The blockade limits access to medical supplies, leading to inadequate healthcare, and making it difficult for Gazans to treat and prevent illness.
The right to food and health is safeguarded by international agreements such as the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights“, “ICESCR“, and the “Convention on the Rights of the Child“.
Why does Israel cut off essentials in Gaza and can Palestinians leave?
Within the confines of this small space, an area the size of Britain’s Isle of Wight (141 square meters), where a staggering two million inhabitants must seek refuge while awaiting the cessation of hostilities, the availability of expansive, unoccupied terrain is incredibly scarce. It is markedly difficult for Palestinians to move in and out of Gaza, as exits are strictly controlled by military checkpoints. In essence, it is virtually impossible to leave Gaza, making Palestinians susceptible to settler attacks and military violence, hence why many call it an “open-air prison“.
The objective of this phase of the continuing Israeli-imposed siege, as described by Israel’s Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, is to orchestrate a scenario wherein the beleaguered Gaza Strip is deprived of fundamental necessities, rendering it bereft of electrical power, sustenance, potable water, and access to vital gaseous resources. The parallels between this and the Warsaw ghetto are frighteningly similar. This approach is substantiated by several key points:
- Human Density: The enclave’s exorbitant human density exacerbates the predicament, leaving the population with meager spatial respite. With two million individuals residing within the area, the confines of habitation and safety are ominously restricted.
- Strategic Intent: The explicit delineation of intent by Defense Minister Gallant underscores the strategic objective of this siege. By systematically dismantling access to electricity, food, water, and gas, the siege aims to incapacitate the enclave, thereby engendering severe humanitarian ramifications.
- Civilian Suffering: It is paramount to acknowledge that such measures disproportionately impact the civilian population, exacerbating an already dire humanitarian crisis. The siege causes heightened suffering, thus raising concerns pertaining to international humanitarian law.
- Long-Term Consequences: This multifaceted deprivation, if protracted, has long-term implications on the socio-economic and health infrastructure of Gaza, thereby compounding the region’s post-conflict recovery efforts.
In summary, the imposition of this siege within the Gaza Strip leaves an extensive populace devoid of life-sustaining essentials and subjects them to the perils of a protracted humanitarian catastrophe.
Historical Context and Parallels
- The Yemen Blockade: The Israeli government’s blockade on Gaza is not an isolated incident. The support provided by the United States, Israel, and Britain to the Saudi-led coalition in the Yemen conflict has raised concerns over the humanitarian impact of the blockade on Yemen. Just as in Gaza, the Yemen blockade has resulted in food and medical shortages, contributing to a severe humanitarian crisis.
- Previous Blockades: Israel has previously implemented blockades, most notably in Lebanon, which drew widespread condemnation for their impact on civilians. These actions raise questions about the consistency of Israeli policies with human rights principles.
The Israeli government’s blockade on the Gaza Strip constitutes a serious violation of human rights. It endangers the lives of innocent civilians, including children and infants who depend on life support when admitted to an intensive care unit.
It is essential to reflect on the wider context of blockades, such as the Yemen blockade, where similar human rights abuses persist with the support of influential nations.
Lack of commitment from the EU, UK and US
The consistent continuation of blockades, like the one in Gaza, showcases a concerning lack of willpower on the part of the European Union, United Kingdom, and the United States to take decisive action against such violations of human rights. This inaction raises disturbing questions about the sincerity of their commitment to upholding human rights on the global stage.
Despite their vocal support for international human rights standards, the ongoing suffering caused by these blockades reveals a troubling hypocrisy. The failure to address these issues not only undermines the credibility of these nations but also perpetuates a cycle of suffering in regions affected by such policies, calling for a reevaluation of their commitment to the principles they claim to uphold.
Photo: Maxar
stanisland.com 