Jean-Pierre Filiu, a professor of Middle East studies, recently shared his experiences from Gaza, where he spent over a month at the turn of the year. His observations bring into focus the pre-existing humanitarian crisis exacerbated by the current conflict. They document the convoluted process that humanitarian organizations now must follow to get aid into the region. Filiu’s account couldn’t be more timely, as Israel imposes the harshest of restrictions on outsiders’ access to Gaza. Both restrictions have dramatically hampered humanitarian operations in the region.
Filiu’s entry into Gaza last December was hardly a given, as he had to maneuver through the hurdles placed by Israeli military and government censorship. He spent time being hosted by an international humanitarian organization working in the southern coastal belt of al-Mawasi. Despite Israel’s tight blockade on aid entering Gaza during the war, Filiu’s ability to gain entry highlights the difficulties faced by independent observers attempting to assess the situation on the ground.
Yet Israel has prohibited international media and other independent observers from entering Gaza. All of this raises significant transparency and accountability concerns about the administration’s handling of this continuing conflict. Filiu’s first hand observations tell us much about the disastrous humanitarian situation in Gaza. These dire conditions have deteriorated cataclysmically since Hamas seized control in 2007.
During his time in Gaza, Filiu was personally exposed to extreme conditions, including the threat of famine, as documented by humanitarian agencies just able to function inside the region. The war has resulted in catastrophic loss of life, killing about 70,000 people, the vast majority civilians. The relentless bombardment has devastated large swathes of Gaza – often for miles on end. Humanitarian needs, holocaust sky high, have led to renewed pressure for greater humanitarian aid and safer treatment for the civilian victims of Israel’s destruction.
Amidst all the chaos, a convoy of sixty-six trucks carrying flour and hygiene kits rolled out. Then they crossed west, through the Israeli checkpoint at Kerem Shalom. Along this time period, these trucks moved up and down the corridor that borders Egypt and north along Gaza’s primary coastal highway. The most disturbing example was when marauders stopped twenty vehicles on the Gaza strip. With this significant loss, the one and only United Nations considered it an improvement from other aid convoys, in which almost every load had been hijacked.
Filiu’s story is full of harrowing accounts of Israeli military operations to protect aid convoys. He told the story of one such example. He witnessed Israeli quadcopters supervising and directing the looters to indeed attack local protective security contingents that were providing security for the convoy.
“It was one night and I was … a few hundred metres away. And it was very clear that Israeli quadcopters were supporting the looters in attacking the local security teams,” – Jean-Pierre Filiu.
Drawing on media reports, Filiu concluded that Israel’s goal was to discredit Hamas as well as the UN. Meanwhile, local looters might use the confusion as an opportunity to redistribute aid or profit from a sale, enabling them to fund their own networks without having to rely solely on Israeli monetary support.
“The [Israeli] rationale [was] to discredit Hamas and the UN at that time … and to allow [Israel’s] clients, the looters, to either redistribute the aid to expand their own support networks or to make money out of reselling it in order to get some cash and so not depend exclusively on Israeli financial support,” – Jean-Pierre Filiu.
The impact of this conflict is not only acute violence. As Filiu correctly noted, effective counterinsurgency operations need the right mix of military force and political action to win over the hearts and minds of the people.
“Any successful counterinsurgency anywhere over history … has to balance the military operation with some kind of political campaign to win hearts and minds,” – Jean-Pierre Filiu.
The Israeli military justified its actions in Gaza, stating that they conducted strikes against armed individuals planning to divert humanitarian aid for Hamas. They claimed that their operations aimed to minimize harm to civilians while targeting terrorist activities.
“The strike was conducted to ensure a hit on the terrorists while avoiding damaging the aid. The IDF continues to operate against the Hamas terrorist organization and is doing everything possible to mitigate harm to uninvolved civilians. The IDF … will also continue to act in accordance with international law to enable and facilitate the transfer of humanitarian aid to the residents of the Gaza Strip,” – Israeli military spokesperson.
Yet Filiu’s insights hint at a much larger story about the humanitarian catastrophes and intricate geopolitics that define the Middle East today. He lamented that the situation in Gaza reflects a troubling shift in global norms concerning human rights and conflict resolution.
“I’ve always been convinced that it’s a universal tragedy. It’s not one more Middle Eastern conflict. It’s a laboratory of a post-UN world, of a post Geneva convention world, of a post-declaration of human rights world, and this world is very scary because it’s not even rational,” – Jean-Pierre Filiu.
Government and humanitarian organizations on the ground have detailed a grave situation. They characterize international responses to the crisis as characterized by “passive, if not active benevolence.” This decision raises important questions about accountability and responsibility in the face of civilian suffering, especially when such suffering takes place in ongoing hostilities.