Quote:
Originally Posted by CalgaryKid12
I agree, but can you elaborate on the difference between what you're describing and what happened in 2005 when Israel pulled out of Gaza?
|
Well there wasn't complete destruction at the time, so the starting point was different. But Israel did not just leave them alone, they controlled lots of things.
Spoiler!
The year following the disengagement saw a tightening of external Israeli control over Gaza, specifically, the closure of crossings into Gaza for people and goods, increased restrictions on the coastline for fishing, and increased aerial, maritime and on the ground military activity. The Israeli human rights organization
Gisha lists various examples of actions requiring Israeli permission or approval in the year following the disengagement. These restrictions include the need for Israeli permission to import basic necessities such as milk, to host foreign lecturers at universities, and register children in the Palestinian population registry. Additionally, fishermen must obtain permission to fish off Gaza's coast, and nonprofits need approval to receive tax-exempt donations. Financial transactions such as the transfer of salaries to teachers are also controlled by Israel, which affects the payment of salaries by the Palestinian Ministry of Education. Moreover, farmers require authorization to export agricultural products, and students wishing to study abroad depend on Israel's approval for the opening of the Gaza-Egypt crossing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel...trip#Aftermath
Also, the motivation wasn't for Gaza to become strong on it's own, it was "
described by Sharon's top aide as a means of isolating Gaza and avoiding international pressure on Israel to reach a political settlement with the Palestinians."
Gaza needs a non-cynical rebuild. And that would include a full withdrawal form the West Bank as well, and I can imagine that happening sometime between now and never.