JERUSALEM: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu didn’t elaborate when he said this week that Israel would maintain indefinite “overall security responsibility” in Gaza once it removes Hamas from power in response to a deadly Oct. 7 cross-border raid by the Islamic militant group.
Experience suggests that any Israeli security role will be seen by the Palestinians and much of the international community as a form of military occupation. This could complicate any plans to hand governing responsibility to the Palestinian Authority or friendly Arab states, and risk bogging Israel down in a war of attrition.
Even if Israel succeeds in ending Hamas’ 16-year rule in Gaza and dismantling much of its militant infrastructure, the presence of Israeli forces is likely to fuel an insurgency, as it did from 1967 to 2005. That period saw two Palestinian uprisings and the rise of Hamas.
Benny Gantz, of Israel’s three-member War Cabinet, acknowledged Wednesday that there’s still no long-term plan for Gaza. He said any plan would have to address Israel’s security needs.
“We can come up with any mechanism we think is appropriate, but Hamas will not be part of it,” he told reporters. “We need to replace the Hamas regime and ensure security superiority for us.”
Here’s a look at what a lingering Israeli security role might look like and the opposition it would inevitably generate.
OUTRIGHT OCCUPATION
In the 1967 Mideast war, Israel captured Gaza, the West Bank and east Jerusalem, territories the Palestinians want for a future state. Israel annexed east Jerusalem, home to the Old City and its sensitive religious sites — a move not recognized by the international community — and considers the entire city its capital.
The military directly governed the West Bank and Gaza for decades, denying basic rights to millions of Palestinians. Soldiers staffed checkpoints and carried out regular arrest raids targeting militants and other Palestinians opposed to Israeli rule.
Israel also built Jewish settlements in all three areas. Palestinians and most of the international community consider these settlements illegal.
After two decades of outright military rule, Palestinians rose up in the first intifada, or uprising, in the late 1980s. That was also when Hamas first emerged as a political movement with an armed wing, challenging the secular Palestine Liberation Organization’s leadership of the national struggle.
THE WEST BANK MODEL
Interim peace deals in the mid-1990s known as the Oslo Accords established the Palestinian Authority as an autonomy government in the West Bank and Gaza meant to lead the way toward an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel.
Several peace initiatives by a string of American presidents failed. The Palestinian Authority lost control of Gaza to Hamas in 2007.
That has left the Palestinian Authority in charge of roughly 40 percent of the Israeli-occupied West Bank. Its powers are largely administrative, though it maintains a police force. Israel wields overall security control.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is deeply unpopular, in large part because his forces cooperate with Israel on security even as Palestinian hopes for statehood have all but disappeared. Many Palestinians view the PA as the subcontractor of a never-ending occupation.
Israel keeps tens of thousands of soldiers deployed across the West Bank. They provide security for more than 500,000 Jewish settlers and carry out nightly arrest raids, often sparking deadly gunbattles with militants.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has suggested the Palestinian Authority could return to Gaza after the war. That could further unravel Abbas’ legitimacy among his own people, unless it were linked to concrete steps toward Palestinian statehood.
Arab leaders, even those closely tied to Israel, will likely face similar backlash if they step in to help it control Gaza.
THE GAZA MODEL
What about an over-the-horizon presence, with moderate Palestinians maintaining security inside Gaza and with Israel intervening only when it deems absolutely necessary?
That’s been tried as well.
In 2005, in the wake of a second and far more violent intifada, Israel withdrew soldiers and over 8,000 settlers from Gaza. The PA administered the territory, but Israel continued to control its airspace, coastline and all but one border crossing.
Hamas won Palestinian elections the next year, leading to an international boycott and a severe financial crisis. Months of unrest boiled over in June 2007, when Hamas drove out forces loyal to Abbas in a week of street battles.
Israel and Egypt imposed a blockade on Gaza, severely restricting trade and travel in what Israel said was an effort to contain Hamas. Palestinians and rights groups considered it a form of collective punishment. It caused widespread misery among the enclave’s 2.3 million residents.
Israel, like most Western countries, considers Hamas a terrorist organization. Hamas has never recognized Israel’s existence and is committed to its destruction through armed struggle.
But over 16 years that saw four wars, the two entered into various undeclared cease-fires in which Israel eased the blockade in return for Hamas halting rocket attacks and reining in more radical armed groups.
For Israel, the arrangement was far from ideal but preferable to other options and bought yearslong periods of relative calm.
THE LEBANON MODEL
In 1978 and then again in 1982, Israel invaded southern Lebanon in a battle against Palestinian militants.
That led to an 18-year occupation enforced through local ally the South Lebanon Army, which received arms and training from Israel.
In 1982, the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah was founded with Iranian backing with the objective of pushing Israeli forces out of the country. It carried out attacks on both the SLA and Israeli troops, eventually leading to Israel’s withdrawal in 2000.
The SLA quickly collapsed, creating a vacuum that was filled by Hezbollah. In 2006, the group battled Israel to a stalemate during a monthlong war.
Today, Hezbollah is the most powerful force in Lebanon. With an estimated 150,000 rockets and missiles, it’s considered a major threat by Israel.
ANOTHER WAY?
Israel has sent mixed messages about evolving plans for Gaza.
Leaders say they don’t want to reoccupy Gaza. They also say troops need freedom to operate inside Gaza long after heavy fighting subsides.
“On the question of the operation’s length — there are no limitations,” Gantz said Wednesday.
That could mean leaving troops stationed inside the territory or along the border.
Some officials have discussed a buffer zone to keep Palestinians away from the border. Others, including the US, have called for the Palestinian Authority’s return.
In another twist, Gantz suggested any future arrangement for Gaza be contingent on calming Israel’s northern front with Hezbollah and the West Bank, where troops regularly battle Palestinian militants.
“Once the Gaza area is safe, and the northern area will be safe, and the Judea and Samaria region will calm down – we will settle down and review an alternative mechanism for Gaza,” said Gantz, using the biblical term for the West Bank. “I do not know what it will be.”
Israel says it will maintain ‘overall security responsibility’ for Gaza. What might that look like?
https://arab.news/whzrk
Israel says it will maintain ‘overall security responsibility’ for Gaza. What might that look like?
- Even if Israel succeeds in ending Hamas’ 16-year rule in Gaza and dismantling much of its militant infrastructure, the presence of Israeli forces is likely to fuel an insurgency, as it did from 1967 to 2005
Kurdish fighters leave northern city in Syria as part of deal with central government
The deal is a boost to an agreement reached last month
ALEPPO, Syria: Scores of US-backed Kurdish fighters left two neighborhoods in the Syrian Arab Republic’s northern city of Aleppo Friday as part of a deal with the central government in Damascus, which is expanding its authority in the country.
The fighters left the predominantly Kurdish northern neighborhoods of Sheikh Maksoud and Achrafieh, which had been under the control of Kurdish fighters in Aleppo over the past decade.
The deal is a boost to an agreement reached last month between Syria’s interim government and the Kurdish-led authority that controls the country’s northeast. The deal could eventually lead to the merger of the main US-backed force in Syria into the Syrian army.
The withdrawal of fighters from the US-backed and Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces came a day after dozens of prisoners from both sides were freed in Aleppo, Syria’s largest city.
Syria’s state news agency, SANA, reported that government forces were deployed along the road that SDF fighters will use to move between Aleppo and areas east of the Euphrates River, where the Kurdish-led force controls nearly a quarter of Syria.
Sheikh Maksoud and Achrafieh had been under SDF control since 2015 and remained so even when forces of ousted President Bashar Assad captured Aleppo in late 2016. The two neighborhoods remained under SDF control when forces loyal to current interim President Ahmad Al-Sharaa captured the city in November, and days later captured the capital, Damascus, removing Assad from power.
After being marginalized for decades under the rule of the Assad family rule, the deal signed last month promises Syria’s Kurds “constitutional rights,” including using and teaching their language, which were banned for decades.
Hundreds of thousands of Kurds, who were displaced during Syria’s nearly 14-year civil war, will return to their homes. Thousands of Kurds living in Syria who have been deprived of nationality for decades under Assad will be given the right of citizenship, according to the agreement.
Kurds made up 10 percent of the country’s prewar population of 23 million. Kurdish leaders say they don’t want full autonomy with their own government and parliament. They want decentralization and room to run their day-to day-affairs.
King Abdullah, Bulgarian president co-chair Aqaba Process meetings in Sofia
- Initiative aims to bolster cooperation on security, counterterrorism issues
- King held separate talks with several regional leaders on sidelines of event
LONDON: King Abdullah II of Jordan and Bulgarian President Rumen Radev co-chaired the third round of the Aqaba Process meetings in Sofia on Friday, bringing together international leaders to address pressing security challenges in the Balkans and beyond, the Jordan News Agency reported.
The Aqaba Process Balkans III forum, jointly organized by Jordan and Bulgaria, tackled issues such as regional security, counterterrorism efforts, online radicalization and illegal migration. The participants also explored opportunities for greater international cooperation, including intelligence sharing and strategic partnerships in combating extremism.
Attending the event were heads of state, government officials and security representatives from Serbia, Albania, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Slovenia, Kosovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Spain, Greece, Italy, France, the UK, US and Japan.
Prince Ghazi bin Muhammad, King Abdullah’s personal envoy and chief adviser on religious and cultural affairs, was among the attendees, while several international organizations, including the EU, Interpol, Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, were also represented.
On the sidelines of the forum, King Abdullah held meetings with several regional leaders, including Slovenian President Natasa Pirc Musar, Albanian President Bajram Begaj, Kosovan President Vjosa Osmani-Sadriu, North Macedonian President Gordana Siljanovska Davkova, Montenegrin President Jakov Milatovic and Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic.
Launched by the king in 2015, the Aqaba Process is designed to enhance coordination between regional and international actors in the fight against terrorism and extremism. It fosters military, security and intelligence cooperation, focusing on counterterrorism strategies and the exchange of expertise.
Previous meetings have been hosted by Jordan, Albania, Brazil, Indonesia, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Rwanda, Singapore, Spain, the US and the UN General Assembly.
Discussions have covered diverse regions such as East Africa, Southeast Asia, Latin America, West Africa and the Sahel.
In Tunisia, snails inch toward replacing red meat as people turn to cheaper protein
- Snails have been consumed in Tunisia for more than seven millenia
- Low in fat and high in iron, calcium and magnesium, snails offer both nutritional value and economic relief
AKOUDA, Tunisia: In fields outside their hometown in central Tunisia, an increasing number of unemployed young men are seeking a new way to make a living, picking snails off of rocks and leaves and collecting them in large plastic bags to take to the local market to be sold.
More and more people, they say, are buying the shelled wanderers as the price of market staples remains high and out of reach for many families.
“They’re profitable, beneficial and quite in demand,” said Karim, a 29-year-old snail seller from the village of Akouda said.
Snails have been consumed in Tunisia for more than seven millenia, according to research published last year in the journal Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences. In today’s world considered mostly a bistro delicacy, they’re again gaining traction in Tunisia as a practical alternative to red meat — a protein-rich substitute that pairs perfectly with salt, spices, and bold seasonings.
The snails are a lifeline for some in Tunisia, where youth unemployment now hovers above 40 percent and inflation remains high, three years after spiking to its highest levels in decades. A lack of opportunity has fueled social discontent throughout the country and, increasingly, migration to Europe.
Low in fat and high in iron, calcium and magnesium, snails offer both nutritional value and economic relief. In a country where unemployment runs high and median wages remain low, they cost about half as much as beef per kilogram and often less when sold by the bowl.
“Snails are better for cooking than lamb. If lamb meat costs 60 dinars ($19.30), a bowl of snails is five dinars ($1.60),” a man named Mohammed said at the Akouda market.
As the price of meat and poultry continues to rise, more Tunisians are turning to affordable, alternative sources of protein. Beyond their economic appeal, these substitutes are also drawing interest for their environmental benefits. Scientists say they offer a more sustainable solution, producing far fewer carbon emissions and avoiding the deforestation linked to traditional livestock farming.
Wahiba Dridi, who serves snails at her restaurant in Tunis, cooks them in a traditional fashion with peppers and spices. She said they were popular throughout this year’s Ramadan, which ended last week. Though Tunisian Muslims traditionally eat red meat at the meals during which they break their daily fasts, a kilogram of snails costs less than 28 Tunisian dinars ($9) compared to beef, which costs 55 dinars per kilogram ($18).
“If people knew the value of snails they would eat them all year long,” Dridi said.
US sending Israel 20,000 assault rifles that Biden had delayed, say sources
- The rifle sale is a small transaction next to the billions of dollars worth of weapons that Washington supplies to Israel
- The March 6 congressional notification said the US government had taken into account “political, military, economic, human rights, and arms control considerations“
WASHINGTON: The Trump administration moved forward with the sale of more than 20,000 US-made assault rifles to Israel last month, according to a document seen by Reuters and a source familiar with the matter, pushing ahead with a sale that the administration of former president Joe Biden had delayed over concerns they could be used by extremist Israeli settlers.
The State Department sent a notification to Congress on March 6 for the $24 million sale, saying the end user would be the Israeli National Police, according to the document.
The rifle sale is a small transaction next to the billions of dollars worth of weapons that Washington supplies to Israel. But it drew attention when the Biden administration delayed the sale over concerns that the weapons could end up in the hands of Israeli settlers, some of whom have carried out attacks on Palestinians in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.
The Biden administration has imposed sanctions on individuals and entities accused of committing violence in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, which has seen a rise in settler attacks on Palestinians.
On his first day in office on January 20, Trump issued an executive order rescinding US sanctions on Israeli settlers in a reversal of US policy. Since then, his administration has approved the sale of billions of dollars worth of weapons to Israel.
The March 6 congressional notification said the US government had taken into account “political, military, economic, human rights, and arms control considerations.”
The State Department did not respond to a request for comment when asked if the administration sought assurances from Israel on the use of the weapons.
CLOSE TIES
Since a 1967 Middle East war, Israel has occupied the West Bank, which Palestinians want as the core of an independent state, and has built settlements that most countries deem illegal. Israel disputes this, citing historical and biblical ties to the land.
Settler violence had been on the rise prior to the eruption of the Gaza war, and has worsened since the conflict began over a year ago.
Trump has forged close ties to Netanyahu, pledging to back Israel in its war against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. His administration has in some cases pushed ahead with Israel arms sales despite requests from Democratic lawmakers that the sales be paused until they received more information.
The US Senate on Thursday overwhelmingly rejected a bid to block $8.8 billion in arms sales to Israel over human rights concerns, voting 82-15 and 83-15 to reject two resolutions of disapproval over sales of massive bombs and other offensive military equipment.
The resolutions were offered by Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who caucuses with Democrats.
The rifle sale had been put on hold after Democratic lawmakers objected and sought information on how Israel was going to use them. The congressional committees eventually cleared the sale but the Biden administration kept the hold in place.
The latest episode in the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict began with a Hamas attack on Israeli communities on October 7, 2023 with gunmen killing 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostages, according to Israeli tallies. Israel’s campaign has so far killed more than 50,000 Palestinians, Gaza health authorities say.
Israel’s National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, a far-right member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, oversees the Israeli police force. The Times of Israel newspaper in November 2023 reported that his ministry has put “a heavy emphasis on arming civilian security squads” in the aftermath of October 7 attacks.
Medecins Sans Frontieres ‘appalled’ by second staff member killed in Gaza within weeks
- Hussam Al Loulou died in the strike on Apr. 1 in central Gaza
GENEVA: Global medical charity Medecins Sans Frontieres said on Friday it was appalled and saddened by the killing of one of its staff by an air strike in Gaza, the second within two weeks.
Hussam Al Loulou died in the strike on Apr. 1 in central Gaza, alongside his wife and 28-year-old daughter, the organization said.
