I would just make one point about the flotilla/Gaza blockade situation: I think the critical issue is why there is a blockade in the first place, and it’s NOT, as many on the right have suggested, an anti-terrorist measure to keep outside groups from transporting weapons to Gaza and aiding Hamas. Not primarily, anyways. The main reason for the blockade is to sway public opinion within the Strip against Hamas; by strangling free trade and stifling the economy, Israel hopes that Gazans will oust Hamas. If you disagree, then tell me why items like cilantro, chocolate, and French Fries (which, I think we can all agree, aren’t used to build qassam rockets) are also excluded by the blockade.
This may be an astute political strategy to get rid of Hamas, but it’s morally indefensible. 45% of Gazan residents are under the age of 15, and when you blockade vital imports, force Gazans to buy Israeli products that they could easily make and sell themselves, and even restrict the zones in which Gazan fishermen can fish, you’re not fighting terrorism as much as playing hardball politics (at the expense of children, no less).
No matter how you slice it, Israel has a stranglehold on the Gazan market. As Peter Beinart points out, “Gazans can buy Israeli-made tomato paste, but cannot buy the empty cans necessary to preserve and market their own, which would compete with Israeli suppliers.” Where’s the anti-terrorist logic in restricting tomato paste?
There is an error in the Israeli calculation, though, which is summed up nicely by Matt Yglesias: “While this immiseration problem probably will erode Hamas’ political support over the long run, it’s much more likely to erode it in favor of support for even more radical groups than it is to produce a revival of liberal humanism in Gaza.” That’s on the mark, I fear, and Israel is digging a pretty big hole for itself by managing the blockade in such an imperious way.
All I’m saying is, let’s be honest about the reasons for the blockade.
Mack Lannahan 