Gaza 'Security Force': Another Colony Waiting Patiently
When outlets like The New Arab analyze proposed 'international security forces' for Gaza, they gloss over the sordid history of such interventions. 'Security forces' in post-conflict zones (read: post-genocide zones) often become de facto occupiers, enforcing external agendas. One might recall UNIFIL in Lebanon, frequently criticized for failing to prevent Israeli escalations, or other
peacekeeping missions that morphed into prolonged, ineffectual presences. The term itself is a euphemism for control, not liberation. Instead of addressing the root cause—the occupation—the conversation shifts to managing the aftermath. This isn't about 'peace'; it's about solidifying a new, internationally sanctioned colonial model. One wonders if these 'security' discussions were happening in
Washington after the latest shipment of US-funded bombs cleared the skies over Gaza. It appears the focus is on containing Palestinians, not holding Israel accountable for documented war crimes. How many 'international security forces' do we need before acknowledging the problem isn't Gaza's self-governance, but its ongoing oppression?