With Gaza entering its second week of the Israeli operation “Protective Edge”- the third of its kind in three years- worldwide protests in support of the Gazans have erupted calling for Israel to halt the operation immediately. Netanyahu in his increasingly childish ways, adamant on the stance that Israel has the right to defend herself, has provided enough evidence on how a ceasefire is nowhere in sight and as a result the offensive has taken the direction of a stalemate. The death toll now soars to a horrific 711- with most of the victims being women and children- and the number of injured have almost touched 4500. A city-many have prescribed to be the world’s largest open-air prison- is knit in a strip of 41 km long, 15km wide and hosts a population of 1.8 million- has been besieged by the Israeli army since 2006 after Hamas were democratically elected.
The reactionary sentiments regarding Israeli offences in the past have been categorized into three parts. First are those who hold the Palestinian narrative dear, based on humanitarian grounds and not only religious affiliations with the masses. Second, the Israeli side of the story who legitimize these invasions on the basis of Israel having the right to defend herself against Hamas- a terrorist organization finding its roots as a retaliatory force against the Israeli state, post the occupation. Third: the ‘neutrality’ response towards the region and its conflict. The latter often is dismissed, as a conflict (the word in itself holding ambiguity) on this scale holds little association to neutrality. For a region under occupation, a “neutral” stance can only be sought if the situation on both sides equated to be a like-for-like state of affairs.
This time however, a fourth categorical reaction has stemmed in regions such as Pakistan; that of political opportunism. Likewise next door, in India, the opposition has called for a resolution to be passed to intervene and to stop the violence in Gaza, later which was rejected as the ruling party value the Zionist-nationalistic fervor and will remain “neutral” on the stance.
Pakistan has always staunchly supported the Palestinian cause and the government has openly condemned operation “Protective Edge”, raising concerns over the increased genocide being committed. As crowds of hundreds have taken to the streets in Lahore and Karachi to express their solidarity with the Gazans, parties such as Pakistan Awami Tehrik- headed by the cleric Tahir Ul Qadri- Jama’at al islami and PML-Q have hijacked the rallies and as a result proposed a notion of collecting an “Islamic army” mirroring the western forces of NATO to intervene in Gaza. Salma Hashmi of Pakistan Muslim League-Q says: “When western countries, including the USA, Britain, France, Canada and others, could join hands to protect their interests by forming a joint military alliance in the shape of NATO, then why are Muslim countries reluctant to form a joint Islamic army which should be funded jointly by all Muslim countries”
This statement can stimulate unimaginable criticisms alone; not only is this highly impracticable given the history the Muslim countries have had with Israel, but it also reflects the political agendas these parties may have just weeks before the proposed long march against the government. One cannot help but wonder whether these parties are toying with the delicate sentiments of the people towards Gaza and manipulating them to their own advantage to rally support for the upcoming march. The reasons why this sort of “army” is not viable is because the Muslim countries Hashmi speaks of, have remained silent on the issue-bar Egypt who is trying on the surface- to negotiate a truce with the aid of Kerry, the US secretary of state. However, President SiSi of Egypt looks upon Hamas as an enemy and brokering a peace between the two sides may be complex.
The “Islamic Army” when reviewed with solidified questions may not have enough Muslim support to rally into Gaza. So, if the Middle East does not bat an eye- which it is actively participating in at the moment- one may question which Muslim country is left to join hands and become an Islamic NATO?
Pakistan unfortunately lacks the resources and military might to take on the heavily US-funded Israeli Army and with operations being carried on in its own turf, most likely lacks the personnel as well. Also, if it were to miraculously participate in such an activity, the ruling party in India next door will jump to the rescue of Israel; due to its, as mentioned earlier- affiliation to the state.
Not only are these parties, after their agendas closely evaluated, looking to rally support in order to topple the current regime, but are inciting and fuelling the already heavy presence of the Anti-Western and Anti-Zionist-which they are then quick to translate into anti-Semitism-sentiments further. As witnessed in the rallies hijacked by these parties, burning of the Israeli flag has been a common practice. The domino effect of these actions then ignites the rise in Islamophobia and Anti-Arab racism against the Palestinians further. One should easily then scrutinize the agendas and motives of these parties. Are they working towards the solidarity of the Palestinians; who require anything but the increased carnage by these unjust Israeli operations? Or are they aiding the precarious situation and adding to their helplessness?
The future of the Palestinian plight lies in peaceful co-existence; a phenomenon- which in light of the recent events- seems bleak. The ideal role which Pakistan and other Middle Eastern countries- as historically they have found it hard to break away from the West and will continue to do so- is to adopt policies of playing the mediator, as most are allies of the US. Pressure can be put on the US if all these countries unite but unfortunately the ground reality does not dictate so.
