The tug-of-war between the Hamas government and international institutions in Gaza

By: Omar Shaban

Summary:-

The relation of the international organisations working in the Gaza Strip with the Hamas government has been characterised by severe tension and lack of trust, since the former adopted the same position most of the Western states took, including America and Israel, of not dealing with the Hamas government and the institutions related to it, while these institutions strive to continue their work in the Gaza Strip.

A political position par excellence:-

The blockade and the Israeli war on the Gaza Strip and the crises resulting from them formed a golden opportunity for many international institutions, whether those searching for work for themselves in the areas of disasters and conflicts or those seeking solidarity with the Palestinian people. Dozens of international institutions that had never worked in Gaza flowed into the Gaza Strip, especially after the Israeli Cast Lead operation in December 2008, until their number reached 88 international institutions. These institutions varied between Islamic institutions coming from the Gulf, Turkey, and Malaysia, and Western institutions coming from Europe and America, in addition to those already present in the Gaza Strip. These international institutions, especially the Western among them, took the position of boycotting the Hamas government — and it is a political position par excellence, although their charters provide that they do not work in politics. The Hamas government imposed on the international institutions that they deal with it, which caused a severe tension in the relation of the Western international institutions with the Hamas government.

The position and demands of the Hamas government:-

In its relation with the international institutions that adopted the boycott, the Hamas government's position swung between its keenness that the work of these institutions continue — with what that means of an implicit recognition of it and a breaking of the isolation around it — on one hand, and benefiting from their services in a way that helps it lighten the effects of the Israeli blockade on the population of the Gaza Strip on the other hand. The demands of the Hamas government of the international institutions are summarised in the following: 1) registration at the department of public institutions at the Ministry of Interior; 2) presenting financial and administrative reports; 3) obtaining an entry visa for their employees before their entry to visit or to work in the Gaza Strip. The Hamas government rests in its position on the fact that it is a democratically elected government and it is the ruling body of the Gaza Strip; therefore it falls within its powers to organise the work of the international institutions and provide protection for them. From this standpoint the Hamas government finds it strange that the international institutions refuse to coordinate with it, while these international institutions used to coordinate with the Israeli occupation despite the position of international law rejecting the occupation. Likewise it demonstrates the soundness of its position by the fact that all the Western and Eastern governments oblige the institutions present on their lands to register legally. The Hamas government senses that the international institutions' refusal to cooperate with it touches its dignity and points to a lack of respect for it. And it looks at the position of the international institutions as representing a rejected superciliousness and an unethical employment of the suffering caused by the blockade and the war.

The position of the international institutions:-

The international institutions realise the dangers of their cooperating with the Hamas government, which necessarily means the cutting off of funding from them and exposing their employees to legal accountability by the governments of their countries. Therefore the international organisations found themselves in a great impasse: on one hand they are in pressing need of Western governmental funding to continue their services and preserve their existence, and on the other hand they must harmonise between the political context in which they work and the needs of society in general. The international institutions rested in their position refusing cooperation with the Hamas government on the importance of what they present to Palestinian society, which suffers deep humanitarian crises because of the blockade imposed since June 2007. Under these pressures the reactions of the international organisations varied: some of them took a decision to stop work in the Gaza Strip and withdraw for fear of the sanctions in the event of their breaking the international conditions, while some other institutions tried to search for middle solutions that would allow them to work without breaking their position — such as resorting to an independent auditor who communicates with the Hamas government on their behalf. With the passage of time, and given each one's need for the other, the state of tension lightened after the international institutions agreed to register with the Hamas government and present regular financial reports to it. Despite that, many international institutions, especially the Western ones, still refuse to cooperate with the institutions related to the Hamas government and its movement. Likewise they still refrain from presenting their services to the individuals believed to be loyal to Hamas and to the other organisations listed on the terrorism list.

The position of Palestinian society:-

- Without diminishing the importance of the work of the international institutions in the Palestinian territories, their work has been a focus of questioning: some saw the international institutions' carrying out infrastructure projects during the years of the Israeli occupation as a lightening of its responsibilities — it being the party that imposed high taxes; therefore it would have been more fitting for it to return this money to Palestinian society through implementing infrastructure projects, as provided by the Geneva Convention, which obliges the occupying power to care for the citizens residing under its authority.

- Some in Palestinian society may understand the international institutions' refusal to engage with the Hamas government because of the political stipulations, but they do not understand the discrimination some international institutions practise between one poor person and another because of political affiliation. Likewise some think that the international institutions' refusal of oversight has opened the field wide to financial and administrative corruption, confirmed by established indicators of cases of corruption marring their work, whether in collusion with their local partners or without their knowledge, or both together.

- Many in Palestinian society feel severe anger at the conduct of many of the international institutions and their employees, whether foreign or local, who deal with severe superciliousness and arrogance with the targeted categories. And this contradicts entirely the principles and foundations of humanitarian work. Likewise the high salaries and remunerations of their employees and their standards of living, in a way that distinguishes them from the majority of society. Likewise some international institutions impose on whoever wishes to visit them the undergoing of strict and, most of the time, humiliating security procedures, in a way that pictures them as security institutions and not charitable ones.

- Some cast doubt on the measures the Hamas government applies, since they take place selectively and do not include within their scope the Arab and Islamic international institutions nor those connected by some relation with the Hamas government. Likewise they are not applied to the dozens of solidarity delegations that visit Gaza carrying with them in-kind aid whose amount and manner of distribution are not announced.

- Palestinian society values the important role these institutions play in lightening the humanitarian suffering, as the situation would be catastrophic without them. But it sees nothing preventing these international institutions from cooperating and coordinating with the Hamas government in a way that strengthens their claim of serving those in need of them without discrimination.

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/ar/contents/articles/opinion/2013/02/tension-ngo-hamas-gaza.html