#the other is an entire country under siege by an illegal occupation | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

friendship-korea-japan · 4 years

Text

6.7. Gwageo and the Yangbans

Question 6: Conditions in the last years of the Joseon era › 7. Gwageo and the Yangbans

Click here for table of contents

6.7. Gwageo and the Yangbans

The Gwageo examination was intended to select people of integrity who had mastered academic knowledge to have them take charge of politics and administration. However, the system had become quite corrupted in the last years of the Joseon era, as shown in the description below quoted from pages 135-136 of “Chapter 6. Sections – Bureaucratic posts and grades – Professional schools” in “Introduction” of The History of the Church of Korea.

[While I am not sure about the past, it is clear that today’s open examination (Gwageo) is quite corrupted. Today, it is not those who are the most well-learned and competent who are entitled to the diploma. It is those who have the most money or the most influential patrons who pass the examination. King Gyeongjong (in office between 1720 and 1724) started to publicly sell literary diplomas (Jinshi and distinguished examinee diplomas) in addition to bureaucratic posts and ranks. From that period, ministers started to carry out similar transactions as the king to procure their own interest. At first, there were protests and opposition to such acts, but today the custom has become so widespread that no-one dares say no. It has now become common for young people, who come to take the examination every year, to openly buy the finished writings by greedy intellectuals or for the name list of future Jinshi (Shengyuan) and distinguished examinees to be known before the beginning of the examination. The learning is damaged, and most of the officials can no longer read or write classical Chinese texts, which is the official language. Real scholars face heightened states of despair.]

The description above shows the reality of Gwageo in the final part of the Joseon Dynasty as seen by a French missionary. We could say that the entire Joseon was contaminated and that illegal acts were rampant in Gwageo, as the king took initiative in corruption.

Those who passed the Gwageo thanks to bribes or connections, entered the Yangban class and became officials who squeezed farmers and fishermen to get back the money they spent for bribery. The suryeong (guardians), who were expected to act against fraud by Yangbans, overlooked injustice since they were doing the same thing. In addition, the auditors, who had the role of identifying and controlling illegal acts and reporting them to the king, also overlooked such acts by demanding money from those involved.

We also find the following description on p. 372 of “Chapter XXXII. The Reorganized Korean Government” in Korea and her Neighbours.

[The Country is eaten up by officialism. It is not only that abuses without number prevail, but the whole system of Government is an abuse, a sea of corruption without a bottom or shores, an engine of robbery, crushing the life out of all industry. Offices and justice are bought and sold like other commodities, and Government is fast decaying, the one principle which survives being its right to prey on the governed.]

Isabella Bird pointed out that in Korea, the entire administration system was “an abuse, a sea of corruption without a bottom or shores, an engine of robbery”, and that the “right to prey on the governed” would survive even if the government declined.

On pp. 488-489 of “3. Rise of popular movements”, “Chapter 9. Latter period of the Joseon era (19th century) in Korean History I, there is the following description about the rebellion led by Hong Gyeong-nae. Below is the quotation of the text in summary.

[The rebellion by Hong Gyeong-nae (Pyongan Province Peasants’ War), which took place in December 1811, was a large-scale armed uprising that enormously disturbed the Joseon Dynasty from inside, along with the popular rebellions of the three southern provinces in 1862 and the Donghak Peasant Movement in 1894.

[…]

After the launch of the forces on December 18 and the news of the occupation of Gasan, the rebellion by Hong Gyeong-nae ended with victory by the government forces on the following April 19 and the large-scale massacre of the rebels following fierce battles with the government forces and the siege of the Jeongju Fortress. While the spread of the rebellion was limited to inside Pyongan Province, it was a large-scale revolt with the clear goal of dynastic change.

[…]

The impoverishment of counties and provinces was caused by such officials as suryeong, hyangim and hyangri, led by gamsa. In particular, suryeong officials led extreme exaction. While it may be true that they sometimes tried to cover the financial deficit of their eup (county and prefecture), in most cases they pursued their private interest. At that time, many bureaucrats wanted to get a post outside the capital which would allow them to save money in a period of around two years, including gamsa and suryeong, and the spoils system was actively used. Especially in Pyongan Province, as suggested by the Sedo politician Kim Josoon, who said that “Pyongan Province is a large territory. Its wealth and splendor is the best in the country”, the accumulation of wealth through commerce and mining industry was important, and officials rushed to get posts such as gamsa or suryeong there. Those officials, after they were nominated and dispatched, exploited the local people they were in charge of, and there was a vicious cycle in which the profit they obtained enriched the Sedo politicians in the capital and was used as their political funds.

[…]

The harvest was a great failure in 1811 and people suffered from starvation. The damage was especially horrible in Pyongan Province. (p. 490)

[…]

From December 29, 1811, Hong Gyeong-nae entered Jeongju Fortress and started to hold up inside, while developing the command system.

[…]

As for the oppression army, […] more than 8,000 soldiers encircled Jeongju on January 11. […] The battle lines continued to be deadlocked until April. From April 3, the government army started to dig a tunnel to blast the fortress. […] On April 19, they laid explosives on the walls of the fortress, blew up the northern walls and started to invade the fortress. During this battle, Hong Gyeong-nae was killed and those who were arrested were sent to Hanseong and executed. A total of 2,983 participants in the siege were arrested, among whom 1,917 people, which corresponds to all but 842 women and 224 boys of ten years old or less, were decapitated, putting an end to the uprising.]

The king and the bureaucrats, including the lowest-ranking officials, squeezed ordinary people in an illegal and cruel way. No longer capable of enduring such exploitation, people started to fight to protect themselves, but they were suppressed by force and suffered a great massacre.

The corruption of the Gwageo examination caused the corruption of the Yangban class formed by the examination, and they exploited and did great harm to the governed, including farmers and fishermen, driving them into a situation in which they had no choice but to fight against the government in order to survive.

On the other hand, while part of the Yangban class may have enjoyed a life of luxury, many of them presumably had to exploit others to make ends meet. It was probable that members of the Yangban class, bound by the culture according to which working was a shameful act, had no way to survive other than by exploitation or embezzlement, which gradually became part of their custom. That was the reality of the “rule of Korea by Koreans” under the Joseon regime in the 19th century.

#Joseon #history of korea #about Korea #korean people #korea-japan

0 notes

daniellehumanbean-blog · 7 years

Text

US anti-BDS law legitimizes illegal Israeli occupation

In recent months, the US congress has advanced a so called “Israel anti-boycott act.” The bill, which expresses the “opposition of the United States to actions to boycott, divest from, or sanction Israel”,[1] has been widely understood as an attack on the free speech of Palestinian rights advocates in the US. The ACLU has claimed that the bill’s “impacts” would go against principles of free speech,[3] and constitutional lawyer Glenn Greenwald spoke out against the bill on similar grounds.[4] Roger Waters of Pink Floyd, whose work has been censured under state-level bills containing language mirroring the congressional legislation, described the law as “draconian” and “McCarthyite.” [5] Even conservative commentators have questioned the constitutional legality of a specific provision in the bill which would make requests for “information” about a boycott illegal.[2]

While the bill’s impact on free speech poses serious concerns, other significant elements of the bill have been less discussed. Crucially, there has been little mention in the US of how the congressional anti-boycott bill subtly legitimizes the Israeli occupation of Palestine— which is virtually universally regarded as illegal under international law. The bill in question is the latest in a slew in recent years to have effectively treated the Israeli military occupation of Palestine as part of Israel under US federal law. That the US congress is recognizing the legitimacy of the illegal conquest of one country by another is a troubling development for those in the US who are concerned about the US role in promoting military aggression in the world.

The congressional bill effectively recognizes the legality of the Israeli occupation by not distinguishing legally between territories Israel occupies in Palestine, and Israel proper. For the purposes of the bill, entities operating in occupied-Palestine and those in Israel proper are the same, whereas it explicitly states that a US federal ban on ”actions to boycott, divest from, or sanction Israel" refers to Israeli organizations both “in Israel or in Israeli-controlled territories.” The bill cites a UN Human Rights Council resolution as an example of such a boycott against “Israel”-- despite that the resolution cited clearly distinguishes between Israel and the occupied territories, and doesn’t call for any action against Israel itself, or businesses within its borders.[6]

The current bill is the latest in a host in recent years to have legitimized the Israeli occupation under US law by treating the occupied territories as part of Israel. In 2015, for example, the US budget passed by Congress included a provision which required US aid to Palestine to be restricted in proportion to Palestinian government pensions to “individuals who are imprisoned after being fairly tried and convicted for acts of terrorism.“[7] The law did not distinguish between trials in Israel—where there is a semblance of due process—and those in occupied Palestine, where there is martial law.[8]

In 2016, a similar law was proposed, halting US aid to Palestine until its government “[took] credible steps to end acts of violence against United States and Israeli citizens that [were] perpetrated by individuals under its jurisdictional control”[9]. Again, the language of the bill did not distinguish between those acts prosecuted under legitimate Israeli courts, and those under martial law in occupied Palestine. New versions of this bill introduced earlier this year[10] were passed through Senate committee several weeks ago.[11]

The language in these bills is neither coincidental nor derived from some selective reading of US Public Law. It consists with explicit calls from members of Congress for US recognition of Israeli sovereignty over Palestine. US legislators have repeatedly called for the US embassy to be moved to Jerusalem— part of which is in occupied Palestine— since the passage of the 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act. This bill described the illegal Israeli conquest of East Jerusalem as a “reunification,” and affirmed “congressional sentiment that Jerusalem must remain undivided—” with Palestinian East Jerusalem under Israeli administration—in violation of international law.[12] Some representatives have gone as far as to call for the Israeli annexation of the entire West Bank, claiming that Israel ought to “hold the high ground” for “defense purposes.”[13]

None of this is to mention the unconditional military support which congress has provided Israel for decades, despite the country’s violations of basic principles of international law, dating to the beginning of the illegal Israeli occupation 50 years ago. As the Jewish Telegraphic Agency wrote earlier this year: “Aid to Israel in Congress and the pro-Israel community has been sacrosanct, and no president has seriously proposed cutting it since Gerald Ford in the mid-1970s.”[14]

The Israeli PM has described Congress as “the most important legislative body in the world.”[15] Virtually no other legal organ in the world outside of Israel recognizes Israeli sovereignty in Palestine to any extent. Even the Israeli High Court of Justice maintains that Israel holds the West Bank under “belligerent occupation.”[16] The International Court of Justice, the UN General Assembly, and the UN Security Council all consider Israel an “occupying power.”[17][18][19] As recently as last year, the UN Security Council specifically advised governments to “distinguish, in their relevant dealings,” between Israel and the occupied territories.[20] The commitment of the US State Department to this international consensus was maintained by US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson at his confirmation hearing, where he described a two-state solution according to the internationally-recognized Israeli-Palestinian borders as “the dream.”[21]

The precedent being advanced by the Israeli Anti-Boycott Act clearly threatens this dream. Unfortunately, Congressional support for illegal Israeli policy in the bill has been largely ignored in the US media. A handful of articles in publications like the Forward and the Minnesota Star Tribune have mentioned the implicit US recognition of the Israeli occupation following from the Anti-Boycott legislation.[22] Meanwhile, the recent passage of the Taylor Force Act through a US Senate committee was met with virtual silence. Two congressional budget hearings on the State Department’s compliance with Palestinian budget restrictions[23][24] were also ignored—despite that they received some international coverage.[25] Certainly, knowledge of these congressional efforts to-- as the op-ed in the Star Tribune put it-- “create the fait accompli of an Israel that effectively includes territories seized in the Six Day War in 1967,″ ought be disseminated more widely, so the US public understands the acts of miliary aggression which are being legitimized and supported in its name.

Nevertheless, there have been alternative currents advanced recently in Washington, even in the midst of this congressional bellicosity. In a recent interview with The Intercept, for example, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) described the US as “complicit” in the Israeli occupation of Palestine through its military aid to the country. He expressed his inclination to reduce this aid in favor of humanitarian aid to the Palestinian city of Gaza— which the UN recently described as “unlivable”[26], following a decade of siege and several wars waged by Israel— and advocated investment in some sort of ‘regional’ environmental infrastructure project. Sanders also defended the international institutions under scrutiny from his congressional colleagues via legislation like the Israel Anti-Boycott Act, and questioned the prevailing wisdom in US foreign policy circles of “unilateralism,” whereas, as he said, “the belief that we can simply overthrow governments that we don’t want… has got to be re-examined.”[27]

The international legal principles of multilateralism and the inadmissibility of aggression sketched in these comments could form the basis for a new US federal law in which—contrary to recent legislation like the Israel Anti-Boycott Act— recognition of the legality of the occupation of Palestine and unconditional military aid to Israel are unequivocally rejected, and subsequent US aid to Israel is conditional on Israeli compliance with international law-- particularly insofar as it proscribes any unilateral Israeli annexation of Palestinian territory.

Of course, these principles would need to be backed up by some form of disciplined, concerted, grassroots action, in which members of congress who genuinely believed in these sort of principles were put into office by a highly-organized anti-war movement. After all, US federal law already technically bans military aid to countries with bad human rights records[28]— but this has never been enforced with regard to countries like Israel[29], or Saudi Arabia.

Nevertheless, that these ideas have entered the US public discourse to any extent is a welcome respite from the prevailing congressional spirit of aggression and hypocrisy toward the Palestinian people. And--if the US people desire it-- it could very well inspire the sort of action from the US public urgently needed to end both the US complicity in the crimes committed against the Palestinians, and the illegitimate threats to the free speech of advocates for Palestinian rights in the US.

[1] “Israel Anti-Boycott Act.” S. 720. 115th US Congress. 1st Session. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/720/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22Israel+Anti-Boycott+act%22%5D%7D&r=1

[2] Volokh, Eugene. “There’s no First Amendment right to engage in anti-Israel boycotts — but there is a right to call for such boycotts.” Washington Post. 25 July 2017. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/07/25/theres-no-first-amendment-right-to-engage-in-anti-israel-boycotts-but-there-is-a-right-to-call-for-such-boycotts/?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.51508f878fb6

[3] American Civil Liberties Union. “ACLU letter to the Senate opposing Israel Anti-Boycott Act.” 17 July 2017. Web. Accessed 9 September 2017 https://www.aclu.org/letter/aclu-letter-senate-opposing-israel-anti-boycott-act [4] Greenwald, Glenn, and Ryan Grim. “US lawmakers seek to criminally outlaw support for boycott campaign against Israel.” The Intercept. 19 July 2017. Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. https://theintercept.com/2017/07/19/u-s-lawmakers-seek-to-criminally-outlaw-support-for-boycott-campaign-against-israel/ [5] Waters, Roger. “Congress shouldn’t silence human rights advocates.” The New York Times. 7 September 2017. Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/07/opinion/roger-waters-congress-silencing-advocates.html?mcubz=0

[6] 19 USC 4201. “Trade negotiating objectives.” Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:19%20section:4201%20edition:prelim) [7] “Consolidated and further continuing appropriations act, 2015.” US Public Law 113-235. 113th US Congress. 16 December 2014. US Government Publishing Office. Web. Accessed 11 September 2017. https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/83/text [8] “Administrative Detention.” B’Tselem. 1 January 2011. http://www.btselem.org/administrative_detention. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. [9] “Taylor Force act.” S. 3414. 114th US Congress. 2nd session. 28 September 2016. Web. Accessed 11 September 2017. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/3414/text [10] “Taylor Force act.” HR 1164. 115th US Congress. 1st session. 16 February 2017. Web. Accessed 11 September 2017. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/1164/text [11] Magid, Aaron. “After amendment, Booker now supports Taylor Force Act.” Jewish Journal. 8 September 2017. Web. Accessed 11 September 2017. http://jewishjournal.com/news/nation/224185/amendment-booker-now-supports-taylor-force-act/ [12] “Jerusalem Embassy Act.” US Public Law 104-45. 104th US Congress. 8 November 1995. US Government Printing Office. Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ45/html/PLAW-104publ45.htm [13] Harkov, Lahav. “Members of Congress call on Trump to move embassy to Jerusalem.” Jerusalem Post. 25 May 2017. Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Members-of-Congress-call-on-Trump-to-move-embassy-to-Jerusalem-493923 [14] Jewish Telegraphic Agency. “Bernie Sanders to Friedman: Should some Israel funds go to Gaza?” Jerusalem Post. 2 March 2017. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. http://www.jpost.com/American-Politics/Bernie-Sanders-to-Friedman-Should-some-funds-for-Israel-should-go-to-Gaza-483093. Quoted in Hasan, Mehdi. “Bernie Sanders To Democrats: This Is What a Radical Foreign Policy Looks Like.” The Intercept. 22 September 2017. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. https://theintercept.com/2017/09/22/bernie-sanders-interview-foreign-policy/ [15] Netanyahu, Benjamin. “The complete transcript of Netanyahu’s address to Congress.” Washington Post. 3 March 2015. Web. Accessed 11 September 2017. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/03/03/full-text-netanyahus-address-to-congress/?utm_term=.e5fdce797dee [16] Israeli High Court of Justice. Beit Sourik village council v. The government of Israel. 2 May 2004. Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. http://elyon1.court.gov.il/Files_ENG/04/560/020/A28/04020560.A28.pdf . Quoted in Wikipedia. “Israeli-occupied territories.” Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories [17] International Court of Justice. “Legal consequences of the construction of a wall in the occupied Palestinian territory.” 9 July 2004. Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. http://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/131 . Cited in Wikipedia. “Israeli-occupied territories.” Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories [18] United Nations General Assembly. “Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and the occupied Syrian Golan.” A/Res/66/78. 12 January 2012. Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/UNISPAL.NSF/47D4E277B48D9D3685256DDC00612265/C2A00B6E6E1C02CF8525798E00578F75 . Cited in Wikipedia. “Israeli-occupied territories.” Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories [19] United Nations Security Council. S/Res/478. 20 August 1980. Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/DDE590C6FF232007852560DF0065FDDB . Cited in Wikipedia. “Israeli-occupied territories.” Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli-occupied_territories [20] United Nations Security Council. S/Res/2334. 23 December 2016. Accessed 9 September 2017. Web. http://www.un.org/webcast/pdfs/SRES2334-2016.pdf [21] US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “Hearing on the Nomination of Rex Tillerson to be Secretary of State.” 11 January 2017. Web. Accessed 12 September 2017. http://www.thisweekinimmigration.com/uploads/6/9/2/2/69228175/hearingtranscript_senateforeignrelationstillersonconfirmationhearing_2017-01-11.pdf [22] Goldberg, J.J. “No, the Anti-BDS Bill Doesn’t Threaten Free Speech. But What It Does Might Be Worse.” Forward. 4 August 2017. Web. Accessed 11 September 2017. http://forward.com/opinion/politics/379109/no-the-anti-bds-bill-doesnt-threaten-free-speech-but-what-it-does-might-be/

Schwartz, Eric. “Israeli-occupied territories: Legislature musn't overreach on Mideast boycott.” Star Tribune. 25 January 2017. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. http://www.startribune.com/israeli-occupied-territories-legislature-musn-t-overreach-on-mideast-boycott/411810136/

Hager, L Michael. “Legitimating the settlements.” Foreign Policy Journal. 12 February 2016. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/02/12/legitimating-the-settlements-another-congressional-bow-to-israel/

[23] US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “Rex Tillerson answers questions on 2018 State Department Budget.” Youtube. 13 June 2017. 1:23:35--1:26:30. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzmXbV2hF4k

[24] US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “Sec. Rex Tillerson testifies on State Department budget.” Youtube. 29:15--32:47: 14 June 2017. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_U5dtkHDoV8

[25] Sawafta, Ali. “Despite Tillerson reassurance, Palestinians not stopping 'martyr' payments.” Reuters. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-palestinians-attackers-payments/despite-tillerson-reassurance-palestinians-not-stopping-martyr-payments-idUSKBN19519Q

[26] The United Nations country team in the occupied Palestinian territory. “Gaza— Ten Years Later.” July 2017. P. 2. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. https://unsco.unmissions.org/sites/default/files/gaza_10_years_later_-_11_july_2017.pdf [27] Hasan, Mehdi. “Bernie Sanders to Democrats: This is what a radical foreign policy looks like.” The Intercept. 22 September 2017. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. https://theintercept.com/2017/09/22/bernie-sanders-interview-foreign-policy/ [28] “Limitation on assistance to security forces.” 22 U.S. Code § 2378d. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2378d

[29] Lazare, Sarah. “Here's What Happens When a U.S. Senator Calls for Israel to Be Held Accountable for Atrocities.” Alternet. 4 April 2016. Web. Accessed 24 September 2017. http://www.alternet.org/grayzone-project/heres-what-happens-when-us-senator-calls-israel-be-held-accountable-atrocities

#us congress #leahy law #palestine #israel #boycott #free speech #occupation #foreign policy #middle east

0 notes

newstfionline · 7 years

Text

Ticking towards war: What will it take to change life in the Gaza Strip?

Antony Loewenstein, The Age, April 10, 2017

Umm al-Nasr, Gaza Strip: Everybody in Gaza fears another war. After the 2014 conflict, which killed 2250 Palestinians and 70 Israelis, little has changed on the ground for the territory’s 2 million residents.

A local psychiatrist, Khaled Dahlan, recently told me in Gaza that Palestinians had multi-generational trauma, having been dispossessed and attacked for decades. “We have had so many conflicts” in the last 70 years, he said.

The World Health Organisation estimates that at least 20 per cent of the population has severe mental illness.

Daniel Shapiro, the US ambassador to Israel under former US president Barack Obama, recently warned that “the next war in Gaza is coming”.

Israel’s military Chief of Staff, Lieutenant-General Gadi Eisenkot, explained in late March that his country reacts “disproportionately” to rocket fire from the strip. “The reality in Gaza is volatile,” he said.

Eisenkot warned that the Hamas authority in Gaza was “continuing to dig [tunnels] underground and to build their abilities and defensive capabilities”. Israel claims Hamas has new heavy rockets with which to attack Israeli border towns.

Israel’s State Comptroller released a report on the 2014 war that found the Israeli government was uninterested in avoiding a military conflict. “There was no realistic diplomatic alternative concerning the Gaza Strip,” it stated.

Hamas recently elected a new leader in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, who reportedly opposes reconciliation with Israel. He served 22 years in an Israeli jail before being released in a prisoner swap in 2011. Tensions rose again after the alleged Israeli assassination in late March of a senior Hamas militant in Gaza.

Hani Muqbel, head of the Hamas Youth Department, told me in Gaza that his group’s philosophy was different to Islamic State’s or al-Qaeda’s. “They’re destroying the image of Islam,” he said. In contrast, Hamas had built a “national liberation movement”.

He acknowledged the current difficulties in Gaza but blamed the “Israeli occupation, siege and the [rival Fatah-run] Palestinian Authority [in the West Bank]”.

Many said they wanted to leave and build a life elsewhere.

Muqbel said that Hamas did not want another war but that its issue with Israel “wasn’t between Jews and Muslims. It’s not a religious war, it’s about land.”

He demanded that Western powers stop claiming Hamas “wanted to kill Jews because they’re Jews. We do not.”

The Israeli media largely ignores Gaza and Israelis are not legally allowed to visit. Yet former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo recently said that the occupation was the country’s only “existential threat”.

An editorial in the liberal newspaper Haaretz urged the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to “immediately consider other ways of halting the deterioration in Gaza--first and foremost by alleviating the wretchedness of life there”.

The Israeli human rights group Gisha recently found that Israel had massively reduced the ability of Gazans to leave in the last months, dropping 40 per cent compared to last year’s average. In February, only 7301 people went through the Erez checkpoint, which connects Gaza to Israel and the occupied West Bank. It was the lowest number since the end of the 2014 war.

Countless Gazans haven’t left for years. Many told me that it was impossible to plan anything major in life, such as marriage or travel, with certainty because applications to leave Gaza were routinely rejected by Israel with no reason given. Often they were ignored entirely.

The effect of the wars and isolation has been dramatic on the domestic lives of men and women. The last years have seen an explosion of Western aid organisations in Gaza working with local NGOs on furthering women’s rights in a male-dominated society. Many women said that these courses gave them awareness of their legal and social rights along with the ability to resist and leave a violent marriage.

The United Nations Commission on the Status of Women recently released a draft resolution that highlighted the status of Palestinian women. It expressed “deep concern” about the “ongoing illegal Israeli occupation and all of its manifestations”, including “incidents of domestic violence and declining health, education and living standards, including the rising incidence of trauma and the decline in psychological well-being”, especially for girls and women in Gaza.

A lawyer with the Gaza-based NGO Aisha Association for Women and Child Protection, Asma Abulehia, said that she met six to seven women every day who faced domestic abuse or economic uncertainty. However, many women couldn’t leave their houses to seek help, trapped by an abusive husband or family.

“The Israeli occupation is the main reason for these problems,” she told me. “The bad economic situation has worsened social problems, along with ignorance of Islam and unfair laws against women in Gaza.”

Due to the suffocating 10-year blockade imposed by Israel and Egypt, support for Hamas has decreased. Many people long for a return of the Fatah-led Palestinian Authority that governs Palestinians in the West Bank, though they aren’t convinced it would make much difference to their daily lives. Many said they wanted to leave and build a life elsewhere.

This month, Human Rights Watch released a new report, Unwilling or Unable, detailing Israeli restrictions on human rights workers entering Gaza to document breaches of human rights and international humanitarian law. It accused Israel of severely curtailing the ability of Israelis, Palestinians and internationals to enter or leave Gaza and dismissed its reasons for doing so.

Human Rights Watch asked the International Criminal Court, currently investigating possible war crimes committed in Palestine including Gaza, to determine the “credibility” of Israeli domestic investigations and its restrictions of human rights workers in and out of Gaza.

In a 2015 report the United Nations voiced fears that Gaza would be uninhabitable by 2020. It stated that the 2014 war had “effectively eliminated what was left of the middle class, sending almost all of the population into destitution and dependence on international humanitarian aid”.

There are alternatives. A group of Israeli and Palestinian economists recently released two studies with the World Bank that outlined a blueprint for economic development in the West Bank, Jordan Valley and Gaza. At the launch in Jerusalem, former Israeli ambassador to South Africa Ilan Baruch was blunt.

“There has been a deliberate Israeli policy to create deficiency,” he said. “The international community has to get involved--not as a donor, but to exert pressure.”

The constant threat of war against Gaza makes normality impossible. Hypertension, deep anxiety, increasing domestic violence and insomnia are ubiquitous amongst the population.

With hawkish Israeli commentators demanding another war with Hamas, and advocating the assassination of its leaders within days of any conflict commencing, prospects will only improve if the international community can put concerted effort into finding a new direction.

#Gaza #Israel #Palestinian women #Hamas

0 notes