EU resolution follows a conveniently altered narrative

Earlier this week, the EU Parliamentary Assembly voted on a report titled “The Humanitarian Crisis in Gaza” and adopted Resolution 2142, which consisted of a rehashing of various recommendations seeking to condemn Israel while throwing in a measure of normalisation by propagating the two-state paradigm and the discourse of conflict.

The report, which was issued on 4 January 2017, provided a comprehensive and detailed account of the deprivations faced by Palestinians in Gaza due to Israeli colonial violence. Unlike many other reports, a historical context is also given which summarises international complicity in the depletion and displacement of Palestinians.

However, this important reference is considerably weakened by the absence of consistency – Israel is not referred to as a colonial entity but rather a state that came into being through a simple declaration, rather than as a result of the massacres, displacement and ethnic cleansing committed by Zionist paramilitary forces during the Nakba.

The resolution follows the same diluted narrative. Proposals seeking to alleviate the unbearable situation in Gaza are vague recommendations already bearing the weight of drastic predictions that the enclave will become uninhabitable by 2020.

The estimate, which is not far off, has become another cherished reference in diplomatic circles yet so far it has failed to ingrain any political will to move towards a solution. Possibly, the concept of slow extermination of the indigenous Palestinian population has cultivated a perverted appeal which corresponds to the attitude of incessant reports, statistics, condemnations and concern – albeit lacking any incentive to hold Israeli colonialism accountable.

Hence, for the EU Parliamentary Assembly, it is purportedly logical to reiterate that “only a negotiated two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and the cessation of the construction of new settlements and of the extension of old ones on Palestinian territory can create the necessary framework for the normalisation of the humanitarian situation in Gaza and the promotion of Palestinian state-building.”

There is no mention of the treachery inherent in the two-state compromise, which advocates for the normalisation of colonialism and expects Palestinians to subjugate themselves to perpetual inferiority. Departing from this awareness, the recommendations in the report, which are comprehensive and portray a thorough understanding of the colonial consequences faced by Palestinians in Gaza, will remain shrouded in obvious ambivalence for various reasons.

Israel has exhibited a permanent disdain for any recommendations. The proposals follow a stale framework that has not been properly updated to reflect the entire history of hardship faced by Palestinians. Furthermore, the resolution’s recommendations are issued with a prevailing knowledge that their existence will be limited to inscription, not implementation.

What the EU Parliamentary Assembly will not discuss is the level of complicity when it comes to protecting Israel’s existence at all costs. Despite this being blatantly obvious, the EU, like other international organisations, will seek to divert attention away from the cycle of pretending to safeguard Palestinian rights. It is only through such humiliating measures that maintaining colonial Israel has proved to be such a lucrative deal. Just in case the EU has failed to notice, the resolution cannot conceal its facilitation of obscuring Palestinians from their own narrative.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.