Share & more
World powers are fighting over the future of Gaza. The stage for that battle: the UN Security Council.
In October, Hamas and Israel agreed to a peace plan, brokered in part by US President Donald Trump. Israel has killed or wounded hundreds of Palestinians since a ceasefire began.
On 17 November, the Security Council passed a resolution backing the so-called 20-point plan.
It authorises an “international stabilisation force”, and approves a “board of peace”, overseen by Trump. Essentially, this would govern Gaza, and direct reconstruction and humanitarian aid efforts.
There are red flags all over this – not to mention an absence of voices from Palestine and from Gaza, warns Shahd Hammouri, a Palestinian-Jordanian lecturer in International Law and Legal Theory at the University of Kent.
“The overall narrative here is the US using international legal mechanisms to normalise an unlawful occupation and to leave its forces without any international oversight,” she tells host Tammam Aloudat on Rethinking Humanitarianism.
In this latest episode, the podcast examines the implications of the Security Council decision from three perspectives.
Hammouri discusses the alarming parallels with the occupation of Iraq. Gazan poet and writer Nour ElAssy reads an essay about why the war in Gaza has not ended, despite all the rhetoric about peace. And journalist Riley Sparks details new reporting on humanitarian aid in Gaza.
Guests:
Shahd Hammouri, lecturer in International Law and Legal Theory at the University of Kent, and an international legal consultant
Nour ElAssy, poet and writer from Gaza, Palestine
Riley Sparks, reporter covering migration and human rights
Subscribe on Spotify, Apple, Google, Stitcher, or YouTube, or search “The New Humanitarian” in your favourite podcast app.
Got a question or feedback? Email [email protected] or have your say on social media using the hashtag #RethinkingHumanitarianism.
