“A hundred percent of Gaza should be for the Palestinian people, right? That’s what we want to see. And we’ve been calling on Israel to pull back from its occupation from the so-called yellow line and that will continue to be our position,” UN Spokesperson Stephane Dujarric stated last week.
Dujarric’s comments were uttered after Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated he ordered the Israeli military to encroach further on Gaza, to 70 percent of the territory. The Yellow Line, which Dujarric mentioned, is already an expired demarcation, while the Orange Line, recently briefly making news headlines, is the physically unmarked border that will determine Israel’s entire military occupation of Gaza. Further Israeli colonial expansion has the backing of the US Board of Peace, led by Nickolay Mladenov, who has already absolved Israel from not keeping to the ceasefire terms since Hamas refused to disarm.
Since Mladenov’s narrative remained unchallenged, Netanyahu does not even have to justify Israel’s military occupation of Gaza, which sets the scene for recolonising the area.
Mladenov already warned that Hamas would be blamed for any repercussions after refusing to disarm, bringing the narrative back to the start of the genocide. For the UN, the deception works well. It allows Israel’s ongoing security narrative unlimited and unwarranted justification. Hamas takes the blame for Israel’s military occupation, and the UN maintains relevance through its humanitarian paradigm for a while longer.
UN officials can embellish their rhetoric, but their credibility has long been pulverised. If one goes back to history, as should be done, ignoring Palestinian self-determination to vote for partition in 1947 represents the foundations of the lie upon which all UN rhetoric is based. Palestine has been repeatedly throttled by the UN to pave the way for Zionist colonial encroachment.
The Yellow Line, which Dujarric referred to, was only the beginning of the visible manifestation of Israel’s territorial appropriation. Calling upon Israel to pull back from the Yellow Line when military occupation has already expanded ignores the fact that Israel had already moved past the demarcation which was linked to purportedly rebuilding Gaza.
The question, therefore, is not what the UN’s spoken position is, but what lies beneath its rhetoric, which can be linked to decades of the international community’s approval and endorsement of various forms of Israeli colonial violence.
The Yellow Line and the Orange Line are not just demarcations; they are proof of Israel’s ongoing forced transfer of the Palestinian people. Genocide was the first step; military occupation of utterly destroyed territory is the second. Instead of talking about the Yellow Line, for example, can UN spokespersons and officials recognise the political implications of the Palestinian people’s forced displacement from Gaza? Can UN officials speak of Palestinians outside of the humanitarian paradigm, or as appendages to what Israel is planning for Gaza? What the UN allegedly wants is not the main issue here, and neither should it be. Palestinians are being forced out of Gaza and restricted into a humanitarian paradigm that robbed them of rights alongside land. That is what Dujarric should have addressed – the forced absence of the Palestinian people’s political agency, which facilitates ongoing colonisation, as the UN envisaged since 1947.
The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.
