.png)
By Nydia Ndam Carrillo
Editor - Emily Whitchurch
The opinions expressed in this article reflect the opinions of its author(s). They do not represent the views of the UCL International Relations Society, Circum Mundum, or its Editorial Team.
Introduction
Following the surprise attack by Hamas on Israel on the 7th of October, Israel has closed off access to power, food and water supplies to Gaza, blocked humanitarian relief (what the UN has called a form of collective punishment), conducted airstrikes, and started a ground invasion. Israel has also used white phosphorus, forcible transfer, and blocked the exit of people through the bombing of crossings. Since the attack to this day, the death toll on both sides has rapidly increased, with most losses on both sides being civilians.
Human rights organisations have denounced Israel’s actions, before these attacks, as guilty of apartheid and the persecution of millions of Palestinians. Contrary to claims made by the Israeli government, the withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 did not lead to the end of the occupation of Gaza. Israel retained control of the territorial waters and airspace, and the movement of people and goods, hence why Gaza is regarded as an open-air prison.
The World is Watching.
International humanitarian law (IHL) has four main pillars: minimising the impact on civilians (humanity), differentiating civilians and combatants (distinction), ensuring that excessive civilian harm does not occur (proportionality) and lastly, a legitimate military objective to weaken the opponent while minimising harm (military necessity). Israel’s response to Hamas’ war crimes were further war crimes. And Israel is still legally bound by IHL, as are Hamas and other organisations - the violations of the rule of law apply regardless of what the other side has done.
Among the widespread international support for Israel’s right to defend itself, like the US and the UK, there are some outliers. Several countries have been extremely vocal about denouncing Israel’s actions towards Palestinians, with many European countries publicly disagreeing with the EU plans to halt all aid to Palestine, and many Latin American countries protesting Israel’s actions.
Ireland’s expression of solidarity towards Palestine stood out. This is based on the shared experience of anti-colonial struggle. The Taoiseach (Irish Prime Minister), Leo Varadkar, has acknowledged Israel’s right to defend itself, however, he also added that ‘Israel doesn’t have the right to do wrong’. While consistently condemning Hamas, Varadkar has also criticised Israel’s breach of IHL. Additionally, 600 academics have asked universities to sever ties with Israeli institutions, the Irish President Michael D. Higgins stated that the EU Commission did not speak up for Ireland and criticised Ursula von der Leyen’s statements on the conflict, and many MPs, such as Richard Boyd Barrett, have spoken up in support of Gaza.
United in Grief: A Common Denominator
Ireland’s understanding of the Palestinian suffering is something that can only be understood by someone who has experienced similar domination. Palestine’s future changed with the British mandate and the Balfour Declaration, which led to the creation of the settler colonial state of Israel and the ethnic cleansing in Palestine in 1948. Similarly, ‘the crafting of […] imperialist Northern Ireland’ through the partition of Ireland in 1921 redrew Ireland’s map. Both countries have a shared history with the British that shaped their current political situation. However, it is important to emphasise that, while Ireland shares a history of colonial struggle, “what [they] have suffered is nowhere comparable to what the Palestinians have suffered for the past 75 years with apartheid occupation, ethnic cleansing, [and] murder.”
Both Ireland and Palestine have had their political situations labelled as ‘religious conflicts’. This is vague and inaccurate, though religion does play a role in the conflict. In Northern Ireland, there are huge disparities regarding the allocation of housing for Catholics and Protestants, and segregation in schools and housing remains. Similarly, the Israeli government has spent more on Jewish students than on Palestinian Arab students in school. However, the problem is deeply rooted in imperialism and the anticolonial struggle, rather than solely in religion.
There is also the question of identity. Northern Ireland only recognised Gaelic as an official language in 2022. Suppressed during British rule, it was associated with nationalism and thus opposed by unionists as it was perceived as a threat to their British heritage. Simultaneously, Israel not only downgraded the official language status of Arabic but also resorted to renaming native Arabic location names to Hebrew versions (known as the Judaization of Palestine) to marginalise the Palestinian identity. These techniques present a direct attack on the sense of identity of the cultures, diminishing their national integrity and ignoring the heritage of a community.
The eruption of the Troubles in Northern Ireland in the late 1960s is also connected to the British. Following discrimination against Catholic Nationalist communities in Northern Ireland and the establishment of illegal paramilitary groups, the conflict led to the death of 3,600 people by 1998. However, the British empire’s legacy persists. In September 2023, the Legacy and Reconciliation Bill was passed which ‘stops the prosecutions for killings by militant groups and British soldiers during the Troubles’ despite widespread opposition.
Regarding Palestine, the British government has yet to apologise for their actions and the ‘moral responsibility, however symbolic’ of their part in the crimes committed against Palestinians. Their support for Israel prevails today, from MPs publicly declaring that calling someone ‘Zionist’ is anti-Semitic and abusive, to former prime minister Theresa May celebrating the Balfour Declaration’s 100th anniversary ‘with pride’. Most recently, the UK parliament voted against a ceasefire in Gaza, with only 125 in favour of a ceasefire versus the 293 majority voting against it.
A Change is Going to Come
Several scenarios have been discussed to stop the Israel-Palestine war, with a two-state solution being the preferred choice internationally. There has always been a disagreement about what a two-state solution means to Israelis versus Palestinians. Palestinians want a sovereign Palestinian state, which didn’t negate the Palestinian citizens’ rights inside of Israel to equality nor did it negate the refugees’ right to choose to return to what became the state of Israel. Israelis viewed this solution as less secure, and a threat to their current power. Either way, the safety of the opposite state would always be compromised.
Israel’s ‘idea of coexistence is rooted in colonialism’, and their regime of apartheid has been developed through a web of systematic repression and continuous human rights violations. Creating a constant state of war, Israel has killed thousands of people, including more than 4,000 children, turning Gaza into a ‘graveyard for children’. Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu stated that their aim is not peace, but to maintain control by having the ‘overall security responsibility for an indefinite period’. So, it is doubtful that the end-goal can truly be described as achieving peace, and whether a two-state solution would work given Israel’s actions in the past years.
The debate for Ireland continues. While Varadkar has been vocal about his wish to see a united Ireland in his time, this decision belongs to the people of Northern Ireland and of the republic. Recent studies show that 57% of 18-24-year-olds would vote ‘Yes’ in a border poll to support Ireland’s reunification. Younger generations are disenchanted by the British government’s ‘blatant disregard for Northern Ireland’. Brexit has also contributed to the possibility of a unified Ireland, with 63% agreeing that Brexit has increased the possibility of unification. Concerns exist over how the union would appear, such as its political identity, state symbols, and devolution. However, Varadkar has emphasised that “unification must not be the annexation of Northern Ireland, it means […] a new state designed together, a new constitution.”
Conclusion
While there are similarities regarding the history between Ireland and Palestine, contributing to their solidarity, their destinies diverge. As UN Chief Antonio Guterres stated, Hamas' attacks and consequent deaths did not happen in a ‘vacuum’. It is therefore important to understand the historical context leading up to this point. The fate of Palestine at the end of the war is uncertain, given the participation of external powers that fuel the conflict for their political agenda - this has further enabled the massacre and dehumanisation of Palestinians to occur and thus hinders the achievement of a solution.
The conflict in Palestine has been surrounded by Israeli propaganda fuelled by the narrative of the complexity of the issue and people’s lack of interest in the conflict. This highlights the utter disregard for the safety of Palestinian lives. From the silence of Arab nations and hesitance to take in Palestinian refugees, to the blatant Western involvement fuelled by their economic interests, the handling of this conflict has been despicable. In some decades, the US and the UK will apologise for their actions and involvement, recognizing their lack of foresight and understanding of the gravity of the situation. Similarly, Arab leaders will have to apologise for their inaction by explaining that the situation posed a threat to the peace in the region. An apology is given by a wrongdoer to those who have been wronged, but how is this possible when the victims are no longer alive?