Occupying Gaza would be a historic mistake for Israel
The leaders of the Israeli settler movement, meanwhile, have protested near the border with Gaza and demanded that they be permitted to settle the strip as they have settled in the West Bank. A groundswell of support in Israel – by no means a majority – considers the indefinite takeover of Gaza to be the only permanent solution to the war.
I believe this is mistaken. Occupying Gaza is a terrible idea and would be a grave mistake if the Israeli government and Knesset agree to it. Occupation tends to create more problems than it solves; and it becomes an open wound, a staging post for all of a nation's domestic and foreign enemies.
An occupation soon proves itself a point of vulnerability, not a demonstration of a nation's strength and resolve. It is no surprise that hundreds of retired Israeli security officials, including former heads of intelligence agencies, have recently issued a letter to Donald Trump and called on him to pressure Netanyahu to end the war rather than continue it indefinitely.
Western countries know well the perils of occupation. After the September 11 attacks in 2001 – former president Joe Biden's favourite comparison for October 7 – the United States deposed the rulers of the Taliban in Afghanistan and Saddam's Iraq and settled in for significant occupations of both countries. Initially at least, these were mounted with British and international help.
In the realms of highest theory, these occupations might have borne fruit. The Afghan economy grew at a rate unseen since the 1970s. Infant mortality collapsed. The population doubled. The number of Afghans who were literate after twenty years without the Taliban in Kabul dwarfed the population who could read in 2001.
Iraq nowadays is a very flawed democracy. Recent visitors to Baghdad tell me they cannot believe how prosperous and peaceful it seems.
But the United States still lost those wars. It was still utterly humiliated and defeated.
America, it turned out, simply wanted to rule Afghanistan less than the Taliban did, and to rule Iraq less than Iraq-based proxies with ties to Iran. There is no reason to think Israelis will be keener to rule Gaza in a decade than those who live there.
Hamas's leadership has been devastated; the Palestinian Authority is led by 89-year-old Mahmoud Abbas. Some Israeli policymakers might see a vacuum there to be filled with good foreign governance. But this would be false. The truth is that, in the modern world, no matter your reasons and no matter what you think you are doing for the territories under your occupation, the resentment and unhappiness of those living there will win out.
We cannot forget that Israel occupied Gaza from 1967 to 2005. When that occupation ended, Hamas came to power on a tide of grievance and threats. The only alternative to the same result would be not just be a forever war but a forever occupation – a permanent Afghanistan, an eternal Vietnam.
Every issue with the food supply, with electricity and water, would become Israel's problem. So would every unnatural civilian death. Most countries would not wish the administration of Gaza upon their worst enemies. Israel's leaders would be better not to take it on willingly.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
12 minutes ago
- The Independent
The Paris office of Israeli airline El Al is vandalized with graffiti
Israeli airline El Al said Thursday that its Paris office was vandalized with anti-Israel graffiti, calling the act a 'deeply disturbing' incident as tensions between France and Israel run high. The graffiti was discovered Thursday morning. El Al said the offices were unoccupied at the time of the incident and no one was harmed. Photos shared on social media showed red spray paint across the glass doors and walls, including the phrase 'El Al genocide airline.' The airline said it was handling the matter with the 'utmost gravity' and working 'in close coordination' with authorities in France and Israel.' El Al added it 'unequivocally condemns all forms of violence, particularly those driven by hatred,' and said its planes 'proudly' display the Israeli flag. Israeli Transportation Minister Miri Regev condemned the act and blamed the policies of French President Emmanuel Macron. 'Today it's El Al, tomorrow it's Air France,' she wrote on social media. 'When President Macron makes announcements that give gifts to Hamas, this is the result.' The incident comes amid diplomatic friction following Macron's pledge last month to recognize a Palestinian state — a move welcomed by some European allies but strongly opposed by Israel. Israel's Foreign Ministry also condemned what it called an antisemitic attack and urged the French government to ensure the safety of El Al staff and offices and to bring the perpetrators to justice. In May, several Jewish sites across Paris were defaced with green paint, including the Shoah Memorial, three synagogues and a Jewish restaurant. France is home to Western Europe's largest Jewish population, with an estimated 500,000 Jews — approximately 1% of the national population. In recent years, antisemitic incidents have surged, with a sharp increase reported in 2023 after the Oct.7 Hamas attacks in Israel. These include physical assaults, threats, vandalism, and harassment, prompting alarm among Jewish communities and leaders.
Reuters
13 minutes ago
- Reuters
Russia's seven-month budget deficit exceeds annual target
MOSCOW, Aug 7 (Reuters) - Russia's seven-month budget deficit exceeded the target for the entire year by a quarter, Finance Ministry data showed on Thursday, highlighting the strain of financing the war in Ukraine. U.S. President Donald Trump, who is expected to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin in the coming days, said this week that the Russian economy "stinks", and that declining energy prices could pressure Putin to halt the war. The data showed that from January to August this year, Russia ran a budget deficit of 4.9 trillion roubles ($61.44 billion), or 2.2% of gross domestic product. Russia targets a deficit of 1.7% of GDP this year, having tripled it in May, citing falling oil prices and Trump's tariff wars as the main reasons. Last month, the deficit was in line with this target. The ministry reported that expenditures from January to July amounted to 25.19 trillion roubles, an increase of 20.8% compared to the same period last year. Meanwhile, revenues increased by only 2.8% year-on-year to 20.32 trillion roubles. "This is mainly due to the advanced financing of expenses in January of the current year, as well as a decrease in oil and gas revenue inflows," the ministry said, emphasizing that the current figure will not affect the annual target. Russia has been increasing fiscal spending throughout its three and a half years of war in Ukraine to finance the military effort. The Vedomosti business daily cited an unnamed Finance Ministry spokesman this week as saying that the ministry is planning another revision of this year's budget in the autumn. It did not provide any details of the planned revision. The daily also cited Dmitry Gusev, deputy head of the parliament's budget committee, as saying that increased spending was the main reason for the revision. Gusev also mentioned that non-energy revenues were affected by lower investment. The budget's oil and gas revenues - its most important source of cash, slated to account for about 22% of total revenues this year - fell by 27% in July due to lower prices and the strong rouble. Potential new sanctions, flagged by Trump in case Russia does not show any progress towards peace in Ukraine, added pressure on the economy, although the nature of new measures is not yet clear. However, Russia recorded a third consecutive week of deflation on August 6, increasing the possibility of another key rate cut by the central bank in September. A further cut could potentially boost Russia's flagging economic growth. ($1 = 79.7500 roubles)
The Guardian
43 minutes ago
- The Guardian
‘It's not a coincidence': after Ghislaine Maxwell's prison move … what next?
When Ghislaine Maxwell was transferred to a minimum security prison camp last week, despite being convicted of sex trafficking for Jeffrey Epstein, her move fueled ever-growing speculation about authorities' handling of the late financier's crimes. For many, the timing of Maxwell's sudden relocation from a Florida penitentiary to a Texas lockup known for its more campus feel and celebrity inmates was especially suspect – with two Epstein victims reportedly describing the event as a 'cover-up'. Maxwell, who was found guilty in 2021 of luring girls into Epstein's abusive world, met with the deputy attorney general, Todd Blanche, one week before the move. This sit-down with Blanche – who defended Donald Trump in criminal proceedings before working in his justice department – came amid extensive criticism of the president's botched release of Epstein investigative files. The Epstein scandal is once again roiling American politics with many especially focused on the exact nature of Trump's own social links to Epstein, who killed himself in a New York jail cell in 2019. Trump had vowed on the campaign trail to release the Epstein files, a siren song to the many Maga devotees convinced that a network of elites protected Epstein and potentially participated in his sex trafficking of teen girls. But Trump's justice department then later released a memorandum stating that there was no Epstein client list and elected not to release extensive case files. Following the backtracking, several reports highlighting Trump's past ties to Epstein stoked still more suspicion. The Wall Street Journal published an article alleging that Trump contributed a 'bawdy' letter to a birthday book for Epstein. Not long after this story was published, Trump said that he had instructed the justice department to request unsealing of grand jury transcripts in Epstein and Maxwell's criminal proceedings. The newspaper on 23 July reported that his attorney general, Pam Bondi, told him that there were multiple instances of his name in the Epstein files, potentially negating whatever benefit he hoped would come from his grand jury directive. The House oversight committee on Tuesday subpoenaed Trump's justice department for Epstein investigation files, per the Associated Press – further amplifying comment surrounding Maxwell's improved prison conditions. Several longtime defense attorneys said that Maxwell's reassignment to FPC Bryan suggested she provided useful information to the justice department officials she talked with. It's also possible that this transfer foreshadows still better conditions for Maxwell – including possible release, they speculated. 'My thinking is: if it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck,' said Randy Zelin, a longtime defense attorney who has taught law at Cornell Law School. 'If someone who is in a really not nice prison gets moved to a nicer prison, there is typically a reason behind that, and it's not merely because you are the next contestant on The Price Is Right or today's your lucky day. 'It would appear to me that when Ms Maxwell was questioned under what we call a 'proffer agreement' by the government, the answers that she gave were found to be credible, they were found to be truthful and they were found to be helpful,' Zelin said. 'In exchange for her being helpful and being truthful and being candid and being cooperative, she had a [benefit] conferred upon her, which is: she's in much nicer digs than she was before she provided her help to the government.' While the Bureau of Prisons has discretion over inmate placement, Zelin surmises there was probably an agreement between the correctional agency and the justice department to move Maxwell. 'It's not a coincidence, and it's either because she's helping the Department of Justice go after other people, or she has more or less exonerated the president, and she has told the Department of Justice that she knows of absolutely nothing inappropriate, untoward or gross that took place between the president and Jeffrey Epstein,' Zelin said. Asked if one should look at Maxwell's move as a one-off, Zelin said no. 'This is the beginning, not the end.' For Sam Bassett, a criminal defense attorney with Austin, Texas-based law firm Minton, Bassett, Flores & Carsey, publicity surrounding Maxwell's meeting is particularly interesting. 'One of the things that intrigued me about the whole situation with her interview is how public it was and how public her lawyer was about it. I know that when my clients cooperate, either post conviction or even before they're convicted, it's something that I like to keep under wraps,' Bassett said. He noted that one reason for privacy surrounding meetings and cooperation is because other inmates tend to look down upon those who cooperate. 'So it really flagged to me that this was kind of a political move on a lawyer's part. It puts some pressure on the president or his staff to consider a pardon or commutation at some point.' As for Maxwell's transfer, Bassett said it could stem from security reasons – such as threats at her previous prison in Florida – or her lawyers requested a move. But it was 'unusual' that a person found culpable of such a serious crime as sex trafficking would end up in a prison camp. 'Maybe it's to be a recognition for cooperation, giving her more freedom, so to speak, in a facility,' he said, noting that a move to a lower-security facility might be considered a favor to some. 'The question is: is this a foreshadowing of bigger favors to come? Neama Rahmani, founder of West Coast Trial lawyers and a former federal prosecutor, said there were multiple possibilities behind the move. 'It could be something huge or just a mere coincidence,' Rahmani said. 'The Bureau of Prisons has complete control over inmate placement, and especially when you deal with female inmates, there's not as many facilities, so the options are more limited.' Rahmani said that sex trafficking was considered a more serious crime, a crime of violence, 'so her being moved to a minimum security camp would be atypical, but it's not unheard of'. That said, the chronology continues to raise many questions. Maxwell met with Blanche, she is vying for relief from the US supreme court, and potentially will testify before Congress. 'The timing of it all leads me to believe that maybe something big is really happening, and by something big, that has to be a cooperation, right? That's really all she has to offer.' For Maxwell, relief could take the form of prosecutors requesting a resentencing, prison officials moving her to home confinement, or a pardon. A veteran legal public relations expert, who spoke under the condition of anonymity as they have clients in federal custody, surmised Maxwell 'must have provided prosecutors with information that was valuable enough post conviction for her to warrant these more favorable sentencing conditions – and they're considerably more favorable'. 'The interesting thing to outsiders is it appears that she's a cooperating witness, though, at this point, she's cooperating against a corpse, and a corpse cannot be convicted,' they said. The public relations veteran described the Maxwell-Blanche meeting as 'part one' of a process potentially resulting in better sentencing conditions. 'Part two is the public finding out, through DoJ disclosure, what information she actually provided,' they said. 'I do think that there's going to be some mechanism for them to release what she shared – and I think what she shared was indeed favorable enough to secure these lessened conditions.' Asked for comment about Maxwell's transfer, a senior administration official said: 'Any false assertion this individual was given preferential treatment is absurd. Prisoners are routinely moved in some instances due to death threats, and significant safety and danger concerns.' Trump's justice department pointed to Blanche's tweet about his meeting with Maxwell, in which he said they 'will share additional information about what we learned at the appropriate time'. Neither the Bureau of Prisons nor Maxwell's lawyer immediately responded to requests for comment.
