Recovery and reconstruction in Gaza not going to be easy: Palestinian Ambassador

The statement by the Palestinian Ambassador regarding the immense challenges for recovery and reconstruction in Gaza paints a grim picture of the humanitarian catastrophe unfolding in the region. With over 90% of the population internally displaced, living in tents during winter, and infrastructure described as 'totally collapsed,' the situation demands a comprehensive understanding of its background, stakeholders, and implications for global geopolitics, including India.

The current crisis in Gaza is rooted in a long and complex history of conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. Following the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, which Palestinians refer to as the 'Nakba' (catastrophe), hundreds of thousands were displaced. The Gaza Strip itself came under Egyptian administration until the 1967 Six-Day War, when Israel occupied it. Despite Israel's unilateral disengagement from Gaza in 2005, it maintained significant control over its borders, airspace, and maritime access, effectively imposing a blockade since 2007 after Hamas took control. This blockade severely restricted the movement of goods and people, stifling economic development and making the territory heavily reliant on external aid. The recent escalation, triggered by Hamas's attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023, led to a massive Israeli military response, resulting in widespread destruction and a severe humanitarian crisis, which the Ambassador's statement directly addresses.

Key stakeholders in this conflict are numerous and have divergent interests. On one side are the **Palestinians**, represented by the Palestinian Authority (PA) in the West Bank and Hamas, the de facto governing body in Gaza. Their primary demand is for self-determination and an end to occupation. **Israel**, the other principal party, cites security concerns and the need to dismantle Hamas as justifications for its actions. **Regional powers** like Egypt, which shares a border with Gaza, play a crucial role in humanitarian access and potential mediation. Qatar and Saudi Arabia have often acted as financial backers or mediators. Iran is a significant supporter of Hamas and other anti-Israel groups. **Global powers** are also deeply invested: the **United States** is Israel's staunchest ally, providing significant military and diplomatic support, while also advocating for humanitarian aid. The **European Union** generally supports a two-state solution and provides substantial humanitarian assistance. The **United Nations** (through agencies like UNRWA and OCHA) is a critical provider of aid and a vocal advocate for international law and humanitarian principles, often struggling to deliver aid amidst the conflict. International humanitarian organizations like Doctors Without Borders and the Red Cross are on the ground, providing essential services under extreme conditions.

This crisis carries significant implications for India. Historically, India has maintained a strong pro-Palestine stance, rooted in its non-aligned foreign policy during the Nehruvian era, advocating for a two-state solution. However, since the establishment of full diplomatic relations with Israel in 1992, India has pursued a more balanced approach, fostering strategic partnerships with Israel in defence, technology, and agriculture. The current conflict poses a delicate diplomatic challenge for India, requiring it to balance its historical solidarity with Palestine with its growing strategic ties with Israel. Instability in the Middle East directly impacts India's **energy security**, as the region is a major source of crude oil, potentially leading to price volatility. The large **Indian diaspora** in the Gulf region is also a concern, as regional instability could affect their safety and economic well-being. India, as a rising global power and a proponent of a rules-based international order, has a stake in the peaceful resolution of conflicts and adherence to international humanitarian law. India's foreign policy, guided by **Article 51 of the Constitution** (Directive Principles of State Policy), which enjoins the state to promote international peace and security, maintain just and honourable relations between nations, and foster respect for international law, compels it to engage constructively. While India has called for restraint and a humanitarian approach, the conflict underscores the complexities of its 'Look West' policy, which aims to enhance ties with all countries in the region.

Looking ahead, the future implications are profound. The immediate challenge is humanitarian aid delivery and the long-term prospect of reconstruction, which will require enormous international funding and political will, especially given the extensive damage. The viability of a two-state solution appears increasingly distant, as the conflict deepens animosity and trust erodes. The crisis also tests the efficacy of international institutions and humanitarian law. The potential for regional spillover, with other actors becoming more involved, remains a serious concern. For India, the situation reinforces the need for strategic autonomy in foreign policy, allowing it to navigate complex geopolitical landscapes while upholding its values and national interests. The international community must grapple with how to ensure accountability for violations of international humanitarian law and work towards a sustainable peace that addresses the root causes of the conflict, ensuring dignity and security for both Israelis and Palestinians. Without a political resolution, the cycle of violence and destruction, as highlighted by the Ambassador, is likely to continue, with devastating consequences for human lives and regional stability.