[worry]

[worry]

[Abyss]

QuickTidal, on 02 November 2023 - 03:02 PM, said:

...

Yep.

In fact if you ask any of the Arab countries, the three religions civilians all lived pretty harmoniously together, and the monkey wrench if ALWAYS the colonialist powers interfering (be they Israel or the US or whoever).

That's an interesting perspective. I suspect Egypt (African country but Arab and very much a part of the Middle-East) re Muslim Brotherhood attacks; Yemen and Saudi Arabia and Bahrain re treatment of their various minority populations; would not line up with that. And there are - according to google so grain of salt activated - >15k Jews in the entirety of the Arab countries, so i wonder how many people there have ever met a Jew. The major Islam v Christian conflicts aren't in the Middle-East, but there are multiple conflicts between Shia, Sunni, and Muslim that go back a few thousand years.

This post has been edited by Abyss: 02 November 2023 - 06:43 PM
Reason for edit: accuracy re Egypt

[Abyss]

QuickTidal, on 02 November 2023 - 04:28 PM, said:

But yeah, I've seen a lot of videos over the last few days where a lot of North American jews who took that "birthright" trip came back changed and understanding what was happening in Israel is wildly wrong.

There's a huge contingent who have been actively and vocally opposed to the Israeli gov and specifically its treatment of the Palestinians for a while now.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Abyss, on 02 November 2023 - 05:09 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 02 November 2023 - 03:02 PM, said:

...

Yep.

In fact if you ask any of the Arab countries, the three religions civilians all lived pretty harmoniously together, and the monkey wrench if ALWAYS the colonialist powers interfering (be they Israel or the US or whoever).

That's an interesting perspective. I suspect Egypt (African, not an Arab country but very much a part of the Middle-East) re Muslim Brotherhood attacks; Yemen and Saudi Arabia and Bahrain re treatment of their various minority populations; would not line up with that. And there are - according to google so grain of salt activated - >15k Jews in the entirety of the Arab countries, so i wonder how many people there have ever met a Jew. The major Islam v Christian conflicts aren't in the Middle-East, but there are multiple conflicts between Shia, Sunni, and Muslim that go back a few thousand years.

Quote

Egypt is the largest Arab country

Egypt country profile - BBC News

Quote

officially the Arab Republic of Egypt

Egypt - Wikipedia

Quote

"Arab" is a cultural and linguistic term. It refers to those who speak Arabic as their first language. Arabs are united by culture and by history. Arabs are not a race. Some have blue eyes and red hair; others are dark skinned; many are somewhere in between. Most Arabs are Muslims but there are also millions of Christian Arabs and thousands of Jewish Arabs, just as there are Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Americans.

[...] The Arab World consists of 22 countries in the Middle East and North Africa: Algeria, [...] Egypt

Facts about Arabs and the Arab World - ADC

[Abyss]

Azath Vitr (D, on 02 November 2023 - 06:35 PM, said:

Abyss, on 02 November 2023 - 05:09 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 02 November 2023 - 03:02 PM, said:

...

Yep.

In fact if you ask any of the Arab countries, the three religions civilians all lived pretty harmoniously together, and the monkey wrench if ALWAYS the colonialist powers interfering (be they Israel or the US or whoever).

That's an interesting perspective. I suspect Egypt (African, not an Arab country but very much a part of the Middle-East) re Muslim Brotherhood attacks; Yemen and Saudi Arabia and Bahrain re treatment of their various minority populations; would not line up with that. And there are - according to google so grain of salt activated - >15k Jews in the entirety of the Arab countries, so i wonder how many people there have ever met a Jew. The major Islam v Christian conflicts aren't in the Middle-East, but there are multiple conflicts between Shia, Sunni, and Muslim that go back a few thousand years.

Quote

Egypt is the largest Arab country

Egypt country profile - BBC News

Quote

officially the Arab Republic of Egypt

Egypt - Wikipedia

Quote

"Arab" is a cultural and linguistic term. It refers to those who speak Arabic as their first language. Arabs are united by culture and by history. Arabs are not a race. Some have blue eyes and red hair; others are dark skinned; many are somewhere in between. Most Arabs are Muslims but there are also millions of Christian Arabs and thousands of Jewish Arabs, just as there are Muslim, Christian, and Jewish Americans.

[...] The Arab World consists of 22 countries in the Middle East and North Africa: Algeria, [...] Egypt

Facts about Arabs and the Arab World - ADC

Noted - should have been clearer. Will edit.

[Lady Bliss]

QuickTidal, on 02 November 2023 - 07:15 PM, said:

Abyss, on 02 November 2023 - 05:09 PM, said:

QuickTidal, on 02 November 2023 - 03:02 PM, said:

...

Yep.

In fact if you ask any of the Arab countries, the three religions civilians all lived pretty harmoniously together, and the monkey wrench if ALWAYS the colonialist powers interfering (be they Israel or the US or whoever).

That's an interesting perspective. I suspect Egypt (African country but Arab and very much a part of the Middle-East) re Muslim Brotherhood attacks; Yemen and Saudi Arabia and Bahrain re treatment of their various minority populations; would not line up with that. And there are - according to google so grain of salt activated - >15k Jews in the entirety of the Arab countries, so i wonder how many people there have ever met a Jew. The major Islam v Christian conflicts aren't in the Middle-East, but there are multiple conflicts between Shia, Sunni, and Muslim that go back a few thousand years.

You're aware I was referring to BEFORE the colonists got their hands in the pie right? Like historically? I said "lived"....It's meant to line up with the fact I noted earlier that back before 1917 Palestine had all three and no one had an issue of note. This was noted in the letters that the mayor of Jerusalem at the time wrote to English politicians concerned that a mass influx of foreigners was going to upset the local symbiosis. It was notable even during the Ottoman Empire rule of the region. This isn't to suggest there wasn't internal strife, that's natural, but the internal civilian population took no real issues with one another. The strife began in earnest when colonial powers bent on an insane political ideology (zionism) decided to annex a people from their land en masse...it should be lost on no one the amount of shit that happened in 1947-1948 in Colonial oppressed countries...the collapse of the British Raj system in India? Partition. Like I would put good money down on every instance of Colonialism in the Middle East and further east weather it be starting colonial shit, or removing it, affected all those places in major ways that have lasting effects even today.

And yes I'd rather we stop using the term "Arab World" as if it's some homogenous lump of peoples all speaking the same exact language and having all the same values...that's about as bad as when people say Africa is a country...it's a Western viewpoint that gets thrown around (usually by the media)...these are distinct countries with distinct cultures dialects and traditions. We need to treat them as such.

I think that people from the middle eastern countries have more in common with each other though. Just like the Eastern European countries. There is similar food, fill dress, and root language.

[Abyss]

QuickTidal, on 02 November 2023 - 07:15 PM, said:

You're aware I was referring to BEFORE the colonists got their hands in the pie right?

Actually, no, i did not know you were referring to that or else i would have raised a whole different and older set of examples of the religions killing the crap out of each other and various subset internal conflicts. The idea that the various tribes and peoples in the Ottoman Empire/Middle East were all getting along famously til the Brits and French came along is just false. The Ottoman Empire was impressive in many ways but it was also expansionist and elitist and a big proponent of slavery. Wars were rare, conflict, not so much. At least three genocides i know of off hand. Part (part) of the reason the British and French were able to conquer the Ottomans was by exploiting internal divisions. The Europeans didn't help, fair to say they made many things worse, but it wasn't all hugs and hookahs before they got there and anyone who says so is either willfully blind or underinformed. It's easier to point the finger at the invaders and insist everything was fine til they got here.

We're on the same page re the impacts of colonialism, and re the utter nonsense of a homogenous 'Arab World'.

[Abyss]

Lady Bliss, on 02 November 2023 - 07:44 PM, said:

I think that people from the middle eastern countries have more in common with each other though. Just like the Eastern European countries. There is similar food, fill dress, and root language.

I suspect that people from those countries - Middle East and East European - would disagree with that to some extent. Yes, many of those countries used to be other larger countries, but the cultural divisions run pretty deep in most instances.

[Garak]

I think the insanity and ethnic cleansing during the Yugoslav wars is a good example of these divisions.

[Garak]

It's like a certain Austrian got reincarnated. How are they this blind to it?

[Maark Abbott]

Garak, on 03 November 2023 - 01:39 PM, said:

It's like a certain Austrian got reincarnated. How are they this blind to it?

Like I said earlier in the thread: of all the countries that should know better than to do this.

[worry]

People are people, for better and for worse. As Art Spiegelman (author of Maus) put it: "suffering doesn’t make you better, it just makes you suffer".

[Mentalist]

QuickTidal, on 03 November 2023 - 11:55 AM, said:

Abyss, on 03 November 2023 - 04:44 AM, said:

QuickTidal, on 02 November 2023 - 07:15 PM, said:

You're aware I was referring to BEFORE the colonists got their hands in the pie right?

Actually, no, i did not know you were referring to that or else i would have raised a whole different and older set of examples of the religions killing the crap out of each other and various subset internal conflicts.

You're trying to make this argument without acknowledging that civilians (the average inhabitants) were generally not killing each other...this is simply a fact that again can be sourced to letters sent from the people in the region at the time in positions to which they would know; and again I can source these if you'd like). Maybe small groups of people had opposing views that led them to violence, or local spats led to violence, but the general themes of the late Ottoman Empire and pre-Nakba Palestine are pretty clearly laid out by the people who were writing at the time. Can you find incidents in these countries of strife in different periods that could be traced to religious differences? Sure. That does not mean they were fighting as you suggest.

It also feels TERRIBLY close to the notion of "Turtle Island was filled with warring tribes of indigenous, so we brought sanity and social structure to those savage tribes" lingo...doesn't it? Kind of a colonialist type thinking that. No?

I wonder why you've taken this tact, why this point stood out to you enough to debate...in service of what? Is it an anti-islam point that serves to explain what Israel is doing to the Indigenous Arabs of the land? Like tie it back to the discussion then...tell me why this point is important to you that Arabs were fighting and other religions were fighting before Israel existed...how does that tie into the current ethnic cleansing? Is it that you want the local Arab countries to take them in? I reiterate as strongly as I can...People should not have to leave their HOME land because European settlers moved there en-masse, threw up a flag and called it their motherland based on spurious religious connections a few thousand years ago....this is the excuse the Crusaders used to invade the Holy Land and sack Jerulsalem repeatedly....Deus Le Volt eh?

Abyss, on 03 November 2023 - 04:44 AM, said:

The idea that the various tribes and peoples in the Ottoman Empire/Middle East were all getting along famously til the Brits and French came along is just false.

"Living harmoniously" is literally the words of the letters written by the man who ran Jerusalem at the time. So either the dude who lived at the time and could comment on it directly was lying....or we know better than him? Is that it? Weird, but okay. Feel free to give me sources on that being false if you please.

Abyss, on 03 November 2023 - 04:44 AM, said:

The Ottoman Empire was impressive in many ways but it was also expansionist and elitist and a big proponent of slavery. Wars were rare, conflict, not so much. At least three genocides i know of off hand. Part (part) of the reason the British and French were able to conquer the Ottomans was by exploiting internal divisions.

Did you think I was standing up for the Ottoman Empire? The locals didn't like their yoke as much as they don't like any yoke...the reason I bought it up was the three religions got along under that yoke...the Ottomans could have given a shit what god people worshipped as long as they did what the Ottomans said. The Ottomans ethnically cleansing people is an entirely different matter because at no point did I defend them as an empire. imperialist is imperialist. This internal divisions the British and French exploited were from Ottoman divisions, not Abrahamic religion ones.

Abyss, on 03 November 2023 - 04:44 AM, said:

The Europeans didn't help, fair to say they made many things worse, but it wasn't all hugs and hookahs

That's not offensive at all. /s

Abyss, on 03 November 2023 - 04:44 AM, said:

before they got there and anyone who says so is either willfully blind or underinformed. It's easier to point the finger at the invaders and insist everything was fine til they got here.

I never said anything was fine, I said that the three religions generally got along during those times in the average populations. The Middle East conflict as we know it today which includes Israel spawned from Israel claiming statehood and oppressing a people since that inception. Like to the DAY. The Nakba literally began on the day Israel called itself a state.


Let me ask you a question, do you not get along with your fellow Canadians because the Convoy-Freedom/F-Trudeau/Anti-vaxx crowd exists and causes strife? We're talking millions of people....the idea that the locals of these regions were all fighting all the time due to the divisions in the Abrahamic religions before it became a flashpoint in Israel is silly and treating them as a monolith, which they are not.

I don' think that such things didn't happen in the past, that would be silly too....but the infusion of a massive group of settlers colonizing a land has basically made the whole thing infinitely worse ever since...if that had not happened who knows what the region would look like.

I mean, we're talking about Palestine, but Israel stole The West Bank from Jordan, The Golan Heights from Syria, Gaza from Egypt....these countries ALL have a reason to hate what Israel represents in the region, stolen land all around and oppressed people.

The Ottomans very much ran a caste system where Non-Muslims paid higher tax and were barred from any promotions within the state apparatus. There's a reason Janissaries were a thing. So no, they very much cared "which god you worshipped"


I can't speak for the Middle East, but the Balkans were an absolute flashpoint of tensions, as we can see in the Balkan Wars, when (pre-WWI) the Slavs and the Greeks were gleefully cleansing hundreds of thousands of Turks from the western side of the Bosphorus. Which was then mirrored by Attaturk and co in Anatolia against the Greeks and the Armenians (due to the whole war for independence thing).

Syria and Jordan didn't exist until the Brits and the French signed a piece of paper to carve up the Middle East. Originally Lawrence of Arabia promised the Sauds that if they rebel they would have a single Arab kingdom from the Arabian Sea all the way to Anatolia, but then Sykes-Picot agreement happened and they started to draw up borders without paying any attention to any cultural or religious divides, which is how we got Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, all rife with cultural and religious divides.

Israel exists b/c Stalin felt that a government of ex-Russian jews who mostly professed socialism would be a natural ally a strategically important region- so he gave the go-ahead to allow them into the UN. As soon as it happened, Israel picked the US, and so the USSR backed all of its Arab neighbours and spent the entirety of the Cold War fueling efforts to destroy it.

In 1948 the UN apportioned a much smaller chunk of Palestine to be Israel, which is where the state was established. We can't really say whether they would have claimed more or not, because as soon as this state was proclaimed (with the blessing of all the superpowers at the time), the coalition of neighbouring Arab states set out to destroy it. I am not condoning violence or ethnic cleansing, but Israel's current borders (recognized in the 1967 UN resolution, sans the extra West Bank colonies) are results of multiple wars against countries surrounding it from all sides with a total population that exceeds theirs by a factor of at least 15.

Israelis are unquestionably committing war crimes and ought to be held responsible for this. At the same time, it's important to understand that both the initial bunch of Zionist repatriants and the subsequent generations that grew up in Israel are severely traumatized (by Western standards), b/c they lived through the horrors of the Holocaust and the subsequent Arab-Israeli wars, respectively. There is unquestionably a siege mentality which comes with living in a society surrounded by a much larger, potentially hostile groups of people, knowing that any day you could face mortar shelling or a suicide bombing. Having that as a normal can't be good for a group's collective psyche, no matter how financially well off they might be compared to their neighbours.

It's an absolutely fucked up situation. The fact that some Gazans were cheering in the streets when they saw footage of Hamas slaughtering Israeli civilians makes then all complicit in the eyes of the latter. Hamas doesn't exist in a vacuum, but it's not a solution. The PLO recognized Israel's right to exist, while Hamas does not. None of the countries directly surrounding Israel are interested in another war (except maybe Syria), but their population could push the governments toward it.

Incidentally, Canada abstained from the ceasefire resolution, b/c an amendment that would include acknowledge the Hamas terrorist strike that preceded the bombing campaign was not approved by 2/3s of the member states. The resolution that was passed frames this as a random escalation of violence, without placing the blame on Hamas for committing an act of terror.

An ideal solution for Gaza would be elimination of Hamas and establishment of a normal government- either the PLO or some sort of provisional one administered by the Arab League, for example. Whether they'd want to function as an exclave of Palestine, or become an independent city-state should be up to them. At the very least those people deserve a government that would care about its people and not divert majority of the aid it gets to build missiles.
Ideally, IDF wouldn't be the ones trying to accomplish this, either. But for all the rioting in the streets, none of the Arab states (who mostly all recognized Israel's 1967 borders, btw) are keen on making any proposals for how to actually deal with the situation.

And as I've said before, with the strengthening ties b/w Russia and Iran, with tacit Chinese endorsement, we are sliding into Cold War 2 mentality, and this makes complex compromises far less likely than splitting things into us vs them.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

QuickTidal, on 03 November 2023 - 03:37 PM, said:

When my grandkids ask me what side of the conflict I was on, I'll say I was on the right side...but that we didn't do enough...that we collectively failed these people and didn't make our govt stop their aggressor from blatantly genociding them to steal their land.

But won't that be after immortal Cyber-Trump conquers Canada and forces your grandchildren to undergo virtual reality propaganda education from infancy?... Perhaps with augmented reality implants (or helmet that they can't remove) to keep Reality consistent with their ideals and beliefs.

[worry]

Mentalist, on 03 November 2023 - 03:42 PM, said:

There is unquestionably a siege mentality which comes with living in a society surrounded by a much larger, potentially hostile groups of people, knowing that any day you could face ... shelling or a ... bombing. Having that as a normal can't be good for a group's collective psyche...

This is a good observation.

Mentalist, on 03 November 2023 - 03:42 PM, said:

An ideal solution for Gaza would be elimination of Hamas and establishment of a normal government- either the PLO or some sort of provisional one administered by the Arab League, for example. Whether they'd want to function as an exclave of Palestine, or become an independent city-state should be up to them. At the very least those people deserve a government that would care about its people and not divert majority of the aid it gets to build missiles.

This is an interesting idea, I guess a mini 2-state solution. I don't feel optimistic about it though, without a huge shift in international pressure. Israel's current feeling about Gaza seems to be a little more ominous...


And at least among some influential world powers, not sure if the incentive's there...


But I'm not trying to be pessimistic, there's different kinds of power that are all at play, but it'd definitely take overcoming what seems to be the current status quo.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Mentalist, on 03 November 2023 - 03:42 PM, said:

An ideal solution for Gaza would be elimination of Hamas and establishment of a normal government- either the PLO or some sort of provisional one administered by the Arab League, for example. Whether they'd want to function as an exclave of Palestine, or become an independent city-state should be up to them. At the very least those people deserve a government that would care about its people and not divert majority of the aid it gets to build missiles.
Ideally, IDF wouldn't be the ones trying to accomplish this, either. But for all the rioting in the streets, none of the Arab states (who mostly all recognized Israel's 1967 borders, btw) are keen on making any proposals for how to actually deal with the situation.

Quote

apparently, [the Israeli government] still hopes to then withdraw, passing local authority to … somebody else. But this scenario is a fantasy. No third party is plausibly willing or able to police and rebuild Gaza on behalf of, and in coordination with, Israel.

One common proposal suggests that an expeditionary or police force, drawn from stable Arab countries[...] Egypt would have to be a central player in any such effort. But the Egyptians have made a foreign-policy priority of not getting sucked back into Gaza [...] They are not about to change their mind.

Another frequently suggested candidate is the Palestinian Authority. But the regime that Mahmoud Abbas leads [...] has nothing to gain from reentering Gaza in the aftermath of Israeli devastation. [...] Abbas rejected numerous Egyptian proposals to have the PA take over government ministries in Gaza, or supply security on the Palestinian side of crossings into the Strip. [...]

If the PA was afraid of returning to Gaza back then, it will hardly be enthusiastic about stepping in behind Israeli forces after a devastating ground war. Gaza’s needs would be immense, and riding into power on the backs of Israeli tanks would mark the PA with a political kiss of death among Palestinians. Maybe, if a third party were to secure Gaza for a time after Israel withdraws, the PA might be willing to come in to replace it. But then we are back at square one[...]

[...] If the Israelis skedaddle, Hamas won’t simply abandon the planned insurgency. It will carry out the plan against whatever power appears to be representing Israel’s interests, whether Arab, UN, or even Palestinian.

No third party is going to step into Gaza to fight the insurgency planned for Israeli troops, rebuild the infrastructure and society shattered by war, and solve the long-standing problem of governance that Hamas’s armed presence has ensured will endure.

Israel’s Dangerous Delusion (msn.com)

[Mentalist]

Azath Vitr (D, on 03 November 2023 - 05:15 PM, said:

Mentalist, on 03 November 2023 - 03:42 PM, said:

An ideal solution for Gaza would be elimination of Hamas and establishment of a normal government- either the PLO or some sort of provisional one administered by the Arab League, for example. Whether they'd want to function as an exclave of Palestine, or become an independent city-state should be up to them. At the very least those people deserve a government that would care about its people and not divert majority of the aid it gets to build missiles.
Ideally, IDF wouldn't be the ones trying to accomplish this, either. But for all the rioting in the streets, none of the Arab states (who mostly all recognized Israel's 1967 borders, btw) are keen on making any proposals for how to actually deal with the situation.

Quote

apparently, [the Israeli government] still hopes to then withdraw, passing local authority to … somebody else. But this scenario is a fantasy. No third party is plausibly willing or able to police and rebuild Gaza on behalf of, and in coordination with, Israel.

One common proposal suggests that an expeditionary or police force, drawn from stable Arab countries[...] Egypt would have to be a central player in any such effort. But the Egyptians have made a foreign-policy priority of not getting sucked back into Gaza [...] They are not about to change their mind.

Another frequently suggested candidate is the Palestinian Authority. But the regime that Mahmoud Abbas leads [...] has nothing to gain from reentering Gaza in the aftermath of Israeli devastation. [...] Abbas rejected numerous Egyptian proposals to have the PA take over government ministries in Gaza, or supply security on the Palestinian side of crossings into the Strip. [...]

If the PA was afraid of returning to Gaza back then, it will hardly be enthusiastic about stepping in behind Israeli forces after a devastating ground war. Gaza’s needs would be immense, and riding into power on the backs of Israeli tanks would mark the PA with a political kiss of death among Palestinians. Maybe, if a third party were to secure Gaza for a time after Israel withdraws, the PA might be willing to come in to replace it. But then we are back at square one[...]

[...] If the Israelis skedaddle, Hamas won’t simply abandon the planned insurgency. It will carry out the plan against whatever power appears to be representing Israel’s interests, whether Arab, UN, or even Palestinian.

No third party is going to step into Gaza to fight the insurgency planned for Israeli troops, rebuild the infrastructure and society shattered by war, and solve the long-standing problem of governance that Hamas’s armed presence has ensured will endure.

Israel’s Dangerous Delusion (msn.com)

You'd think all those filthy rich Gulf states could pool together a bunch of oil money to hire an impartial expert team to govern Gaza for the betterment of the lives of "their Muslim brothers and sisters".........

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Mentalist, on 03 November 2023 - 05:20 PM, said:

Azath Vitr (D, on 03 November 2023 - 05:15 PM, said:

Mentalist, on 03 November 2023 - 03:42 PM, said:

An ideal solution for Gaza would be elimination of Hamas and establishment of a normal government- either the PLO or some sort of provisional one administered by the Arab League, for example. Whether they'd want to function as an exclave of Palestine, or become an independent city-state should be up to them. At the very least those people deserve a government that would care about its people and not divert majority of the aid it gets to build missiles.
Ideally, IDF wouldn't be the ones trying to accomplish this, either. But for all the rioting in the streets, none of the Arab states (who mostly all recognized Israel's 1967 borders, btw) are keen on making any proposals for how to actually deal with the situation.

Quote

apparently, [the Israeli government] still hopes to then withdraw, passing local authority to … somebody else. But this scenario is a fantasy. No third party is plausibly willing or able to police and rebuild Gaza on behalf of, and in coordination with, Israel.

One common proposal suggests that an expeditionary or police force, drawn from stable Arab countries[...] Egypt would have to be a central player in any such effort. But the Egyptians have made a foreign-policy priority of not getting sucked back into Gaza [...] They are not about to change their mind.

Another frequently suggested candidate is the Palestinian Authority. But the regime that Mahmoud Abbas leads [...] has nothing to gain from reentering Gaza in the aftermath of Israeli devastation. [...] Abbas rejected numerous Egyptian proposals to have the PA take over government ministries in Gaza, or supply security on the Palestinian side of crossings into the Strip. [...]

If the PA was afraid of returning to Gaza back then, it will hardly be enthusiastic about stepping in behind Israeli forces after a devastating ground war. Gaza's needs would be immense, and riding into power on the backs of Israeli tanks would mark the PA with a political kiss of death among Palestinians. Maybe, if a third party were to secure Gaza for a time after Israel withdraws, the PA might be willing to come in to replace it. But then we are back at square one[...]

[...] If the Israelis skedaddle, Hamas won't simply abandon the planned insurgency. It will carry out the plan against whatever power appears to be representing Israel's interests, whether Arab, UN, or even Palestinian.

No third party is going to step into Gaza to fight the insurgency planned for Israeli troops, rebuild the infrastructure and society shattered by war, and solve the long-standing problem of governance that Hamas's armed presence has ensured will endure.

Israel's Dangerous Delusion (msn.com)

You'd think all those filthy rich Gulf states could pool together a bunch of oil money to hire an impartial expert team to govern Gaza for the betterment of the lives of "their Muslim brothers and sisters".........

Guess they could travel through (and channel supplies through) Israel instead of Egypt, if the author is correct about the Egyptian government not being willing to get involved in any such effort?...

[Mentalist]

Azath Vitr (D, on 03 November 2023 - 05:33 PM, said:

Mentalist, on 03 November 2023 - 05:20 PM, said:

Azath Vitr (D, on 03 November 2023 - 05:15 PM, said:

Mentalist, on 03 November 2023 - 03:42 PM, said:

An ideal solution for Gaza would be elimination of Hamas and establishment of a normal government- either the PLO or some sort of provisional one administered by the Arab League, for example. Whether they'd want to function as an exclave of Palestine, or become an independent city-state should be up to them. At the very least those people deserve a government that would care about its people and not divert majority of the aid it gets to build missiles.
Ideally, IDF wouldn't be the ones trying to accomplish this, either. But for all the rioting in the streets, none of the Arab states (who mostly all recognized Israel's 1967 borders, btw) are keen on making any proposals for how to actually deal with the situation.

Quote

apparently, [the Israeli government] still hopes to then withdraw, passing local authority to … somebody else. But this scenario is a fantasy. No third party is plausibly willing or able to police and rebuild Gaza on behalf of, and in coordination with, Israel.

One common proposal suggests that an expeditionary or police force, drawn from stable Arab countries[...] Egypt would have to be a central player in any such effort. But the Egyptians have made a foreign-policy priority of not getting sucked back into Gaza [...] They are not about to change their mind.

Another frequently suggested candidate is the Palestinian Authority. But the regime that Mahmoud Abbas leads [...] has nothing to gain from reentering Gaza in the aftermath of Israeli devastation. [...] Abbas rejected numerous Egyptian proposals to have the PA take over government ministries in Gaza, or supply security on the Palestinian side of crossings into the Strip. [...]

If the PA was afraid of returning to Gaza back then, it will hardly be enthusiastic about stepping in behind Israeli forces after a devastating ground war. Gaza's needs would be immense, and riding into power on the backs of Israeli tanks would mark the PA with a political kiss of death among Palestinians. Maybe, if a third party were to secure Gaza for a time after Israel withdraws, the PA might be willing to come in to replace it. But then we are back at square one[...]

[...] If the Israelis skedaddle, Hamas won't simply abandon the planned insurgency. It will carry out the plan against whatever power appears to be representing Israel's interests, whether Arab, UN, or even Palestinian.

No third party is going to step into Gaza to fight the insurgency planned for Israeli troops, rebuild the infrastructure and society shattered by war, and solve the long-standing problem of governance that Hamas's armed presence has ensured will endure.

Israel's Dangerous Delusion (msn.com)

You'd think all those filthy rich Gulf states could pool together a bunch of oil money to hire an impartial expert team to govern Gaza for the betterment of the lives of "their Muslim brothers and sisters".........

Guess they could travel through (and channel supplies through) Israel instead of Egypt, if the author is correct about the Egyptian government not being willing to get involved in any such effort?...

Gaza is a coastal city. It could get everything it needs by sea.

Israel had issues with shipping while HAMAS was in charge (due to the whole "Israel should not exist" bit in their founding charter), and so they insisted on inspecting ships coming into Gaza. HAMAS did not consent to this, so they created a unilateral blocade.

With a bunch of people in charge who do not have destruction of Israel as their mission statement, it's quite possible there might be more room for compromise.