Int'l Issues So why does Israel prevent Gaza exports?

Direckshun · 11-27-2012, 07:05 AM

Though I disagree with it, I can understand why Israel would block imports to Gaza. Israel must watch out for its own safety, but there's no question in my mind that these measures which are designed to be preventative are carried out in ways that are clearly punitive to the Palestinian people in the wake of their election of Hamas.

But blocking exports from Gaza?

The article at the very end posits a couple different reasons for this, one of which is that this is punitive, to punish the Palestinian people for their sins against Israel and their embrace of Hamas. And while that may play into it, I think the article's other explanation is easier to consider: allowing Gaza to participate economically with its neighbors would at least nominally enrich it, as trade always does. It will increase its ties with its neighbors, and allow the Gazans to effectively function a little more as an autonomous state.

All of which would only aid Palestinians in their striving for their own state.

So, clearly this must be stopped.

Please, tell me how I'm how wrong/supportive of Hamas/anti-Semitic I am in thinking preventing Gazan exports is yet more evidence of the Likud's total indifference to the two-state solution.

And please tell me how Israel isn't inching closer to full-on apartheid of the Palestinian people.

http://www.theatlantic.com/internati...ockade/265565/

The Mainstream Media's Biased Coverage of the Gaza Blockade
By Robert Wright
Nov 25 2012, 10:34 PM ET

There's reason to hope that the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel will lead to an easing of Israel's suffocating economic blockade of Gaza. The ceasefire text said that "opening the crossings and facilitating the movements of people and transfer of goods... shall be dealt with after 24 hours from the start of the ceasefire." But, more than 100 hours later, we're still waiting for word of actual progress.

Meanwhile, if you're wondering where to turn for background information about the blockade, I have this guidance: stay as far away from mainstream media as possible.

Sadly typical of the way the MSM covers the issue is a recent New York Times piece about the ceasefire by David Kirkpatrick and Jodi Rudoren (both of whom have done excellent work on other issues in the region). The piece described the blockade as "Israel's tight restrictions on the border crossings into Gaza under a seven-year-old embargo imposed to thwart Hamas from arming itself."

Putting it this way is a real time saver, not just because it fits into a single short sentence, but because, if you're too busy to actually write that sentence, the Israeli government's press office would be happy to do it for you. But this description of the blockade raises a question:

If the essential purpose of the blockade were indeed to "thwart Hamas from arming itself," wouldn't restrictions on imports into Gaza suffice? (And even then the import restrictions wouldn't have to be as draconian as they were when imposed, or even as tight as they are now, after some loosening.) What I'd like to see an enterprising MSM reporter ask is: How do Israel's severe restrictions on Gazan exports keep arms from getting to Hamas?

Kirkpatrick and Rudoren, later in their piece, do elaborate a bit on Israel's motivation for imposing the blockade. But not enough. After raising the prospect that Egypt may open the Rafah crossing into Gaza, they write that "Israel enforces its embargo on the other sides of Gaza, fearing that it would face an influx of refugees or end up with responsibility for the impoverished enclave."

Fearing "an influx of refugees" doesn't explain why Israel won't let Gazans put whatever goods they want to export on a ship and send them across the Mediterranean to Europe or Africa. Nor, really, does this fear explain the other side of the export restrictions--not letting Gaza export much of anything to Israel or the West Bank. Making sure that exports were confined to goods, and didn't include people, would be readily doable. Israelis know a thing or two about how to set up an effective checkpoint.

The closest Kirkpatrick and Rudoren get to a plausible reason for the export restrictions is in positing an Israeli fear of winding up "with responsibility for the impoverished enclave." But even here they're not putting nearly a fine enough point on it. Here's the fine-point version:

Recall that a very plausible motivation for Ariel Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 was to address "the demographic problem"--the fact that the number of Palestinians in the occupied territory, plus the number in Israel proper, was beginning to approach the number of Israeli Jews. That meant that if Israel's aggressive settlement program eventually led to Israel's absorption of the occupied territories, Israel wouldn't remain a Jewish state unless it were an apartheid state--i.e., unless it continued to deny Palestinian inhabitants of the occupied territories the right to vote. But once you remove Gaza from the equation, and define it as outside of the occupied territory, the math changes (though Gazans contend their territory is still, for practical purposes, occupied, since Israel controls the ports and airspace and the Israeli border and enters Gaza at will to kill Gazans). In this scenario--the divide and conquer scenario--the last thing Israel wants to do now is permit the sort of organic economic ties between Gaza and the West Bank that would make it easier to think of their Palestinian inhabitants as a single people.

There's one other possible motivation for Israel's severe restrictions on commerce involving Gaza: collective punishment. Maybe Israeli leaders want to keep all of Gaza impoverished as payback for the sins of Hamas. Maybe they even think that this impoverishment will lead Gazans to reject Hamas. If so, I have bad news: If Gazans reject Hamas, it will be in favor of Islamic Jihad or even more radical elements, in keeping with the general principle that imposing unjust suffering on people empowers extremists.

Donger · 11-27-2012, 07:14 AM

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-...A+Parenting%29

stevieray · 11-27-2012, 07:21 AM

this year alone...how many thousands of rockets?

HonestChieffan · 11-27-2012, 07:22 AM

They dont like each other.

Direckshun · 11-27-2012, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-...A+Parenting%29

Why does Israel inhibit Gaza exports?

ForeverChiefs58 · 11-27-2012, 07:37 AM

If Mexico elected al qaida as their new govt even through they were sworn to our destrucshun, sent suicide bombers, targeted our childern and launched thousands of rockets at random targets in our big cities, they would no longer exist.

You really are an embarrassment to idiots.

Garcia Bronco · 11-27-2012, 07:46 AM

I fully support Israels right to defend itself from violent objectors to its existence. Its coming too. There will be a knockdown fight sooner rqther than later. Israel will not allow Iran to get a nuke. I wouldn't either.

HonestChieffan · 11-27-2012, 08:03 AM

The Jews want a monopoly.

ROYC75 · 11-27-2012, 08:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Why does Israel inhibit Gaza exports?

At first I thought you were smart enough to understand this, but then reality set in that I was talking to a Pro Palestinian everything so I can see that you are only whining.

Donger · 11-27-2012, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Direckshun

Why does Israel inhibit Gaza exports?

I would imagine because they want to prevent Hamas gaining any more power, in the case of exports, via money.

mnchiefsguy · 11-27-2012, 08:28 AM

Perhaps when the Palestinians start acting like a civilized entity, they will get treated like one. If they want to export and establish trade, then quit trying to kill women and children.

In addition, Hamas would use the financial gain to buy more bombs and rockets, in which they would launch at....you guessed it, Israel.

ROYC75 · 11-27-2012, 08:51 AM

Gee guys, I didn't want to explain it to him. I wanted to let him think it over since he doesn't see this.

ForeverChiefs58 · 11-27-2012, 09:51 AM

Seriously, are you so blind that you can't see this?

It makes as much sense as going into the lounge and making a thread "So why do people prevent Matt Cassellllllllll from being our starting QB?" If you did that no one would take your football posts seriously.

Take a step back for a sec. The people that you support, are also supported by the largest exporter of terrorism, the very same people who have also killed tens of thousands in syria, as well as many deaths and acts of terrorism and killing of innocents around the world.

Where is your condemnation against these people? The people who have put the palestinians where they are? You should put your passion and blame where it belongs, into being against the very terrorists that try to parade around like they should be legit and negotiated with while shooting rockets at random targets and calling for the others destruction.

La literatura · 11-27-2012, 10:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ForeverChiefs58

Seriously, are you so blind that you can't see this?

It makes as much sense as going into the lounge and making a thread "So why do people prevent Matt Cassellllllllll from being our starting QB?" If you did that no one would take your football posts seriously.

Take a step back for a sec. The people that you support, are also supported by the largest exporter of terrorism,

Ah, I see. Hamas exports terrorism. Stop the exports. Stop the terrorism. Makes sense.

ROYC75 · 11-27-2012, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Literature

Ah, I see. Hamas exports terrorism. Stop the exports. Stop the terrorism. Makes sense.

What could they be sending out in exports expecting to be used to buy more weapons or payment of past weapons ?

11-27-2012, 07:05 AM
Direckshun Black for Palestine Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Springpatch Casino cash: $1167782	So why does Israel prevent Gaza exports? Though I disagree with it, I can understand why Israel would block imports to Gaza. Israel must watch out for its own safety, but there's no question in my mind that these measures which are designed to be preventative are carried out in ways that are clearly punitive to the Palestinian people in the wake of their election of Hamas. But blocking exports from Gaza? The article at the very end posits a couple different reasons for this, one of which is that this is punitive, to punish the Palestinian people for their sins against Israel and their embrace of Hamas. And while that may play into it, I think the article's other explanation is easier to consider: allowing Gaza to participate economically with its neighbors would at least nominally enrich it, as trade always does. It will increase its ties with its neighbors, and allow the Gazans to effectively function a little more as an autonomous state. All of which would only aid Palestinians in their striving for their own state. So, clearly this must be stopped. Please, tell me how I'm how wrong/supportive of Hamas/anti-Semitic I am in thinking preventing Gazan exports is yet more evidence of the Likud's total indifference to the two-state solution. And please tell me how Israel isn't inching closer to full-on apartheid of the Palestinian people. http://www.theatlantic.com/internati...ockade/265565/ The Mainstream Media's Biased Coverage of the Gaza Blockade By Robert Wright Nov 25 2012, 10:34 PM ET There's reason to hope that the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel will lead to an easing of Israel's suffocating economic blockade of Gaza. The ceasefire text said that "opening the crossings and facilitating the movements of people and transfer of goods... shall be dealt with after 24 hours from the start of the ceasefire." But, more than 100 hours later, we're still waiting for word of actual progress. Meanwhile, if you're wondering where to turn for background information about the blockade, I have this guidance: stay as far away from mainstream media as possible. Sadly typical of the way the MSM covers the issue is a recent New York Times piece about the ceasefire by David Kirkpatrick and Jodi Rudoren (both of whom have done excellent work on other issues in the region). The piece described the blockade as "Israel's tight restrictions on the border crossings into Gaza under a seven-year-old embargo imposed to thwart Hamas from arming itself." Putting it this way is a real time saver, not just because it fits into a single short sentence, but because, if you're too busy to actually write that sentence, the Israeli government's press office would be happy to do it for you. But this description of the blockade raises a question: If the essential purpose of the blockade were indeed to "thwart Hamas from arming itself," wouldn't restrictions on imports into Gaza suffice? (And even then the import restrictions wouldn't have to be as draconian as they were when imposed, or even as tight as they are now, after some loosening.) What I'd like to see an enterprising MSM reporter ask is: How do Israel's severe restrictions on Gazan exports keep arms from getting to Hamas? Kirkpatrick and Rudoren, later in their piece, do elaborate a bit on Israel's motivation for imposing the blockade. But not enough. After raising the prospect that Egypt may open the Rafah crossing into Gaza, they write that "Israel enforces its embargo on the other sides of Gaza, fearing that it would face an influx of refugees or end up with responsibility for the impoverished enclave." Fearing "an influx of refugees" doesn't explain why Israel won't let Gazans put whatever goods they want to export on a ship and send them across the Mediterranean to Europe or Africa. Nor, really, does this fear explain the other side of the export restrictions--not letting Gaza export much of anything to Israel or the West Bank. Making sure that exports were confined to goods, and didn't include people, would be readily doable. Israelis know a thing or two about how to set up an effective checkpoint. The closest Kirkpatrick and Rudoren get to a plausible reason for the export restrictions is in positing an Israeli fear of winding up "with responsibility for the impoverished enclave." But even here they're not putting nearly a fine enough point on it. Here's the fine-point version: Recall that a very plausible motivation for Ariel Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 was to address "the demographic problem"--the fact that the number of Palestinians in the occupied territory, plus the number in Israel proper, was beginning to approach the number of Israeli Jews. That meant that if Israel's aggressive settlement program eventually led to Israel's absorption of the occupied territories, Israel wouldn't remain a Jewish state unless it were an apartheid state--i.e., unless it continued to deny Palestinian inhabitants of the occupied territories the right to vote. But once you remove Gaza from the equation, and define it as outside of the occupied territory, the math changes (though Gazans contend their territory is still, for practical purposes, occupied, since Israel controls the ports and airspace and the Israeli border and enters Gaza at will to kill Gazans). In this scenario--the divide and conquer scenario--the last thing Israel wants to do now is permit the sort of organic economic ties between Gaza and the West Bank that would make it easier to think of their Palestinian inhabitants as a single people. There's one other possible motivation for Israel's severe restrictions on commerce involving Gaza: collective punishment. Maybe Israeli leaders want to keep all of Gaza impoverished as payback for the sins of Hamas. Maybe they even think that this impoverishment will lead Gazans to reject Hamas. If so, I have bad news: If Gazans reject Hamas, it will be in favor of Islamic Jihad or even more radical elements, in keeping with the general principle that imposing unjust suffering on people empowers extremists.
Posts: 37,650

11-27-2012, 07:14 AM	#2
Donger "Think BOOM!" Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: 33.675° N 106.475° W Casino cash: $55	http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-202_162-...A+Parenting%29 __________________ I think the young people enjoy it when I "get down," verbally, don't you?
Posts: 69,198

11-27-2012, 07:21 AM	#3
stevieray uh a huh Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $85020533	this year alone...how many thousands of rockets?
Posts: 34,148

11-27-2012, 07:22 AM	#4
HonestChieffan Banned Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the Country in MO Casino cash: $1222684	They dont like each other.
Posts: 22,168

11-27-2012, 07:37 AM	#6
ForeverChiefs58 MVP Join Date: Mar 2009 Casino cash: $578253	If Mexico elected al qaida as their new govt even through they were sworn to our destrucshun, sent suicide bombers, targeted our childern and launched thousands of rockets at random targets in our big cities, they would no longer exist. You really are an embarrassment to idiots.
Posts: 6,005

11-27-2012, 07:46 AM	#7
Garcia Bronco No Keys, No Problem Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Denver Casino cash: $60308	I fully support Israels right to defend itself from violent objectors to its existence. Its coming too. There will be a knockdown fight sooner rqther than later. Israel will not allow Iran to get a nuke. I wouldn't either.
Posts: 20,411

11-27-2012, 08:03 AM	#8
HonestChieffan Banned Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the Country in MO Casino cash: $1222684	The Jews want a monopoly.
Posts: 22,168

11-27-2012, 08:28 AM	#11
mnchiefsguy MVP Join Date: Dec 2003 Casino cash: $11115162	Perhaps when the Palestinians start acting like a civilized entity, they will get treated like one. If they want to export and establish trade, then quit trying to kill women and children. In addition, Hamas would use the financial gain to buy more bombs and rockets, in which they would launch at....you guessed it, Israel. __________________
Posts: 5,811

11-27-2012, 08:51 AM	#12
ROYC75 Time For Your Wake Up Call !!! Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Barn Yard Casino cash: $28526	Gee guys, I didn't want to explain it to him. I wanted to let him think it over since he doesn't see this.
Posts: 22,955

11-27-2012, 09:51 AM	#13
ForeverChiefs58 MVP Join Date: Mar 2009 Casino cash: $578253	Seriously, are you so blind that you can't see this? It makes as much sense as going into the lounge and making a thread "So why do people prevent Matt Cassellllllllll from being our starting QB?" If you did that no one would take your football posts seriously. Take a step back for a sec. The people that you support, are also supported by the largest exporter of terrorism, the very same people who have also killed tens of thousands in syria, as well as many deaths and acts of terrorism and killing of innocents around the world. Where is your condemnation against these people? The people who have put the palestinians where they are? You should put your passion and blame where it belongs, into being against the very terrorists that try to parade around like they should be legit and negotiated with while shooting rockets at random targets and calling for the others destruction.
Posts: 6,005

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode