While the new American administration tries to rekindle hopes of a settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, the inhabitants of Gaza are taking stock of their plight following the recent Israeli incursion. 1,330 Palestinians (and 13 Israelis) were killed in the operation, and an estimated 25,000 homes were destroyed or are beyond repair, leaving around 100,000 Palestinians homeless. This short video gives some idea of extent of the devastation.

Much now depends on the Gazan reaction to their increasingly desperate situation. Unemployment is above 50% with most households living below the poverty line.  Population density in the territory is over 4,000 people per square kilometre – among the highest in the world (in comparison, England’s population density at 395 is the highest in Europe). Recent studies of Palestinian children suggest 70% have witnessed a killing, and 30% suffer from PTSD. On top of all this, most of the international community has cut off aid to the territory since Hamas seized power in June 2007. 

Hamas understands that this is a battle for hearts and minds above all else. In the wake of the destruction wrought by Israel, Hamas officials are giving monetary compensation to those whose properties were damaged in the conflict. Much of this money comes from ‘charitable’ donations from sources outside the country including Syria and Iran.

A homeless Palestinian counts compansation money handed out by a Hamas official

Although armed resistance can only lead to more Palestinian blood being spilt in the perpetual cycle of violence, such logic is unlikely to be at the front of the mind of a young Palestinian with no hope, no home, and a fistful of Hamas shekels. However many militants were killed in the recent operation, Hamas is unlikely to be short of new recruits to take their places. As Henry Kissinger observed: the conventional army loses if it does not win, the guerilla wins if he does not lose.

In spite of this, Israel hopes that Palestinians will see Hamas as the sole cause of their plight. The rational response, according to the Israeli argument, would be for Gazans to rise up against Hamas and force the militants to put down their weapons. There will certainly be many who have much to blame the militants for, but Hamas rules the territory with an iron fist, treating those who question their tactics as Israeli sympathisers, and going as far as executing excessively vocal critics. It seems unlikely that Israel has created the necessary conditions to expect an olive branch to be held out to them any time soon.

Thirdly, there is the possibility of a political solution. Unfortunately, for the moment at least, politics seems to be a cause of violence rather than a force for peace on both sides of the divide. While Hamas’s cause grows in strength, political expediency must be suspected as at least part of the reason behind the timing of Israel’s show of force. The ruling Kadima party is under great pressure from Benjamin Netanyahu’s right-wing Likud party ahead of February 10th’s general election. Lagging behind in the polls to a party with a far more hawkish stance, Kadima’s action looks very much politically motivated. It is also notable that it was executed days before Barack Obama was sworn in (an image of schoolchildren fighting in class before the teacher arrives comes to mind). Whoever wins on February 10th, and Likud still seem the likely victors according to the polls, it would seem that the road to a negotiated peace is likely to be a long one.

To (apocryphally) paraphrase Stalin, 13 deaths can be perceived as individual tragedies, whereas 1,330 are a mere statistic. It is easier for Israelis to concentrate their sorrow on the deaths of a small number of their own, whose names and faces they will know, and whose relatives’ grieving words and tributes will have been broadcast across the media, than to truly comprehend the tragedy on the other side of the divide.

However, this conflict has brought Israelis uncomfortably close to one of the human tragedies being wrought in their name in Gaza. The incident in question happened on the last day before the ceasefire, live on Israel’s Channel 10 news. Correspondent Shlomi Eldar had been talking live each day with Dr Ezzeldeen Abu Al-Aish, a Palestinian doctor living in Gaza City, who provided daily eyewitness reports via cellphone on the latest from the front line of the conflict (Israeli correspondents were barred from the area during the incursion). Dr Al-Aish was the perfect Palestinian correspondent for Israeli news. He trained in Israel and spoke fluent Hebrew. He is involved in cross-border research with Israeli colleagues into the effects of the conflict on Israeli and Palestinian children. He is a peace activist, and vocal critic of both Hamas and Israeli violence. His children had attended summer camps for Israeli and Palestinian kids in the United States. Incidentally, just before the conflict he had received an offer of a teaching position at the University of Toronto.

When Shlomi Eldar made his call to Abu Al-Aish on January 16th, this is what happened (click the triangle in the bottom right-hand corner, then the arrow to the left of the second icon from the top to activate subtitles):

There were eighteen people at home when the tank shells hit. Three of his daughters and a niece were killed instantly. Another two daughters were injured, one seriously. Understanding the PR implications of something like this happening on live news, the Israeli authorities quickly got an ambulance to the scene.

The IDF claim they were firing at a sniper in the house. Given Abu Al-Aish’s record as a man of peace it seems highly unlikely, but this is a time of war, and there is little rationality on either side. Here is what happened at the press conference following the incident:-

In spite of having three of his children slaughtered, and verbal abuse from jingoistic Israelis, Abu Al-Aish used the press conference to call for peace. In addition to his words in the above clip, he said: “From our pain we can learn. We may disagree, but we should learn from that. Let us express the pain, let it out. It’s beneficial to us all. Maybe the blood of my daughters was the price, and if it was, I am happy about it. The cost of ceasefire to save lives to be my daughters’ and my niece’s blood — honestly, I am proud of it. I am fully proud of it.” He added: “I will never change the way I believe. There is no other way but for us to live in peace, with justice and respect for human rights. The military way proved its failure years ago. And still we haven’t learned the lessons.”

Before the conflict, Danny Seaman, director of the Israeli government press office, candidly stated : “There is an unequal war going on there between a power and a terror organization, and the only way to hurt us is to get those images to hurt us in the battlefield of public opinion. In that sense, the less pictures coming out helping them the better”. The Israeli government knows that it cannot be beaten on the battlefield, but that in spite of 94% of Israelis being in favour of the operation before it took place, public opinion could easily be softened by the veil being lifted on the human stories behind the statistics of war. In the words of one Israeli columnist, the Abu al-Aish story has “managed to finally penetrate the layer of cast lead that has sealed the ears of the Israeli public [...] He made the killing suddenly appear tangible, close, shocking and threatening.”

In spite of his great loss and the abuse he has suffered even in his time of grief, Abu al-Aish has not wavered from his message of peace. His story has sparked intense debate in Israel, and pricked untold hardened consciences, not to give in to terrorists, but to insist on seeing every loss of life, regardless of nationality as a tragedy rather than a collateral damage statistic. We can only hope that this conflict represents the lowest ebb of hope, and that public opinion on both sides will one day soon demand peaceful solutions. This is a terribly hard problem to solve, but the first step is a political resolve on both sides to find a peaceful solution.