First MENA Solar Conference starts tomorrow

First MENA Solar Conference starts tomorrow

The First MENA Solar Conference starts tomorrow with researchers from 120 universities and 38 countries informs the Government of Dubai.

14 Nov, 2023

 

With the participation of prominent researchers and experts from 120 universities and research centres from 38 countries, the first Middle East and North Africa Solar Conference (MENA SC) 2023, organised by Dubai Electricity and Water Authority (DEWA) launches tomorrow, (Wednesday 15 November 2023). The conference lasts until 18 November at the Dubai World Trade Centre. MENA SC coincides with the 25th Water, Energy, Technology and Environment Exhibition (WETEX) and Dubai Solar Show (DSS) organised by DEWA from 15 to 17 November.

MENA SC focuses on six research areas in solar power. These include unconventional and new concepts for future technologies; silicon photovoltaic materials and devices; Perovskite and organic materials; PV module and system reliability in the MENA region; solar resources for PV and forecasting; and power electronics and grid integration.

The conference aims to highlight various fields of solar energy to accelerate the transition towards clean and renewable energy in the region with specialised discussion panels and seminars. It provides an important opportunity for experts, researchers, and specialists worldwide to exchange ideas, discuss projects and growth opportunities in the sector, share knowledge and experiences, and explore the latest technologies and scientific innovations in solar energy.

Participants at the conference include Lawrence L. Kazmerski, Professor and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Emeritus Fellow, University of Colorado Boulder, USA; Mohammad K. Nazeeruddin, Professor and Molecular Engineering Laboratory Director, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne (EPFL), Switzerland; Shanhui Fan, Professor and Senior Fellow, Stanford University, USA; Mowafak Al Jassim, Principal Scientist and PV Group Manager, National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), USA; Steven Ringel, Professor and Associate Vice President, Ohio State University, USA; Xiaojing Hao, Professor and ARC Future Fellow, University of New South Wales, Australia; and many experts from around the world.

COP28: a year on from climate change funding breakthrough

COP28: a year on from climate change funding breakthrough

At the COP28: a year on from climate change funding breakthrough, poor countries eye disappointment at Dubai summit

By Lisa Vanhala, UCL

At the COP27 summit in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, an agreement to establish a loss and damage fund was hailed as a major breakthrough on one of the trickiest topics in the UN climate change negotiations. In an otherwise frustrating conference, this decision in November 2022 acknowledged the help that poorer and low-emitting countries in particular need to deal with the consequences of climate change – and, tentatively, who ought to pay.

This following year has seen more extreme weather records broken. Torrential rains created flooding which swept away an entire city in Libya, while wildfires razed swathes of Canada, Greece and the Hawaiian island of Maui.

As these events become routine worldwide, the case grows for an effective fund that can be set up quickly and help those most vulnerable to climate change. But after a year of talks, the fund has, so far, failed to materialise in the way that developing countries had hoped.

I’m writing a book on UN governance of loss and damage, and have been following the negotiations since 2013. Here’s what happened after the negotiators went home and what to watch out for when they return, this time at COP28 in Dubai.

Big questions

Many questions were raised and left unresolved in Sharm El-Sheikh. Among them: who will pay into this new fund? Where will it sit? Who will have power over it? And who will have access to the funding (and who won’t)?

A transitional committee with 14 developing country members and 10 developed country members was appointed by the UN to debate these questions after COP27. The committee has met regularly over the last year, but at its fourth meeting at the end of October – scheduled as the last session – important questions surrounding the fund, such as who should host and administer it, remained. Discussions broke down without an agreement.

In early November, less than a month before COP28, a hastily arranged fifth meeting presented committee members with a text cobbled together by the two co-chairs from South Africa and Finland as a take-it-or-leave-it agreement. Developing countries agreed to having the fund hosted by the World Bank for an interim period, despite reservations.

Developed countries also objected to the final text. The US wanted to add the adjective “voluntary” to any mention of contributions to the fund. Others argued that the pool of contributors to the fund should be widened to include some developing countries, such as Saudi Arabia, and also private sources of finance. These objections were noted but the text was adopted without them.

These recommendations must now be signed off at COP28, which begins on November 30. With almost 200 countries having to reach agreement on these arrangements and dissatisfaction widespread, the process isn’t likely to be straightforward.

The world’s bank?

Developing countries have been sceptical of the World Bank as a potential host of the fund for several reasons.

Many delegates worry about the bank’s reputation, including the dominance of developed country donors, its emphasis on providing loans rather than grants, and the lack of climate-savviness in the bank’s operations. These concerns are likely to reemerge in Dubai.

The US is the biggest shareholder in the World Bank and traditionally, the bank’s president has been a US citizen nominated by Washington. Small-island developing states (among the most vulnerable to climate change due to sea-level rise) have argued for moving the fund away from a donor-recipient model, with all their usual power imbalances, towards a partnership founded on a shared commitment to protecting the planet.

This will require partial or total reform of the World Bank – and some argue this is already happening under its new president. But hosting the fund within the bank would still give donor countries disproportionate influence, despite recommendations by the transitional committee that the fund’s governing board be composed of a majority of developing country members.

A man walks past a building with 'World Bank Group' in tall letters on the exterior.
The World Bank is headquartered in Washington D.C.
The Bold Bureau/Shutterstock

High overhead costs are another concern. One board member of another fund hosted by the World Bank has suggested that the administrative fees the bank charges are rising and absorbing a larger share of aid. This could mean that, for every US$100 billion offered to countries and communities reeling from disaster, the World Bank will keep $US1.5 billion. This will be hard for an institution still funding the climate-wrecking oil and gas industry to justify.

The types of finance made available by the fund will need to be at odds with the bank’s traditional mode of loan financing, by offering grants and other forms of highly concessional lending. Developing countries have consistently argued that loss and damage funding should not increase a developing country’s debt burden.

The agreed text says the loss and damage fund will “invite financial contributions”, with developed countries expected to “take the lead”. Developing countries want developed nations (as the largest historical emitters) to provide funding, but rich nations have pushed back against any notion that they have an obligation to pay.

Rather, while making all the right noises on climate finance, they may gain short-term kudos by simply rebranding existing forms of climate finance or development aid, rather than offering any new money.

The compensation taboo

One thing you’re unlikely to hear at COP28 is “compensation”. While newspaper editors love headlines about reparations, liability and compensation when reporting on loss and damage, and a rise in climate litigation is making governments and polluting companies nervous, this language is still totally absent in discussion of the issue in the negotiations.

In fact, research has shown that mentions of compensation in state submissions to the UN declined dramatically after the establishment of the mechanism on loss and damage in 2013. The fine print of the 2015 Paris Agreement noted that loss and damage was “not a basis for liability or compensation”.

I have noticed a taboo emerging around the term within the COP process. Instead, countries are increasingly opting for language such as “solidarity” as the basis for finance. These word choices show where power lies.

All of this is to sound a note of caution going into COP28. Major agreements on loss and damage have historically not lived up to their promises due to bureaucratic forum-shifting (moving topics to venues outside of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change), delays, and under-resourcing. The adaptation fund was established in 2001 but only approved its first funding in 2010.

How is the urgent need for support among vulnerable communities and countries going to be met when the pace of progress within the climate change negotiations is glacial at best, and tends to be particularly slow and unambitious on loss and damage finance?

At COP28, making the loss and damage fund real is a litmus test for the legitimacy of the entire climate change negotiation regime.


Imagine weekly climate newsletter

Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 20,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.The Conversation


Lisa Vanhala, Professor of Political Science, UCL

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The featured image is for illustration and is of Climate Justice Alliance.org.

The battle against air pollution

The battle against air pollution

The battle against air pollution, per the author of a Jordan Times article, is an overwhelming issue that transcends borders and requires urgent attention.

The above-featured image is for illustration and is credit to INHABITAT

Nov 10, 2023

 

Air pollution within the closest layer of the atmosphere where life exists, which is called the biosphere, has experienced a global environmental crisis that affects the health and well-being of people and other living beings around the world. It’s an issue that transcends borders and requires urgent attention.

The combustion of fossil fuels of industries and the built environment is a major source of air pollution. Factories and houses burning fossil fuels for construction, heating and cooling release pollutants such as sulfur, carbon and nitrogen oxides, among others. Encouraging industries and buildings in general to adopt energy-efficient and clean renewable energy practices can cut emissions while saving cost, maintenance and investment.

The transportation sector powered by gasoline and diesel, contributes significantly to air pollution. An average vehicle passenger emits around 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide each year depending on the vehicle’s fuel, car fuel economy, and the distance covered. Short-term exposure to high levels of certain air pollutants, such as carbon monoxide or lead, can lead to acute neurological symptoms, including confusion, dizziness and seizures.

Agriculture is another source emitting gases, such as ammonia, nitrous oxide and methane, primarily from ploughing, fertilisers, land changes and livestock. Land-use changes, such as deforestation, can affect air quality and reduce the planet’s capacity to absorb and store carbon dioxide.

Power plants that rely on coal, oil, or natural gas to produce electricity release pollutants into the air, including greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane. Coal combustion emissions can exceed one kilogramme of carbon dioxide for each Kilo Watt hours of electricity generated.

As glaciers melt due to rising global temperatures, various gases are released into the atmosphere, contributing to climate change. Two prominent gases are methane, and carbon dioxide which occurs as ice containing ancient air pockets melts, intensifying the greenhouse effect further warming the planet.

Global warming has intensified wildfires, releasing gases into the atmosphere as trees and vegetation burn. Fine particulate matter is also released, impacting air quality, human health and exacerbating climate change, air pollution, and associated health issues and biodiversity damage, emphasising the urgent need for effective wildfire management and climate mitigation strategies.

Air pollution can lead to respiratory diseases such as asthma, bronchitis, and lung infections. Long-term exposure to pollutants is linked to heart diseases and increased mortality rates. Children exposed to air pollution may experience reduced lung development, leading to lifelong health problems. Exposure to fine particulate matter, ozone, and nitrogen dioxide can lead to eye irritation, redness, and dry eyes. This can result in discomfort, itching, and a feeling of grittiness in the eyes. Airborne allergens like pollen and mold spores can become more concentrated in polluted air, increasing the risk of allergy. Prolonged exposure to air pollution may affect visual acuity. In Jordan, you can visit MOE site to monitor air quality in different locations of Amman (https://en.jordanenv.com/).

Airborne pollutants like fine particulate matter and airborne heavy metals can trigger inflammation in the body, including the nervous system. Chronic inflammation may lead to neuroinflammation, which is associated with various neurological disorders. Long-term exposure to air pollutants has been associated with deficits in cognitive function. Prenatal exposure to air pollution, especially in areas with high pollution levels, has been linked to adverse neuro-developmental outcomes in children. This can include behavioral problems, developmental delays, and a higher risk of conditions like autism and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. There is also growing evidence that air pollution may be associated with mood disorders such as depression and anxiety.

Excess carbon dioxide in the air dissolves in seawater, leading to ocean acidification that can harm marine organisms with calcium carbonate shells or skeletons, including corals, mollusks, and some types of plankton. Excess nitrogen compounds can lead to the proliferation of harmful algal blooms, which can produce toxins that harm marine life, including fish and shellfish. These toxins can also pose risks to human health when seafood is consumed. Airborne micro plastics and other pollutants can find their way into the oceans, contributing to the growing problem of marine debris.

In conclusion, solutions to combat air pollution include increasing the scale of using renewable energy sources like solar and wind power. Promoting electric vehicles and expanding charging infrastructure can decrease emissions from transportation. Promoting vehicle pooling, biking and walking can further decrease emissions. Encourage sustainable farming and precision agriculture practices that reduce ammonia emissions from fertilisers and livestock. Implement urban planning that reduces congestion, encourages clean public transportation, and enhances air quality. Increase green spaces in cities with less heat islands and protect forests that can help in absorbing pollutants, providing cleaner air and thus better health for all biodiversity.

Ayoub Abu Dayyeh, The writer is an energy and green buildings consultant.

.

.

 

Role of architecture and urban form in the Israel-Palestine Dispute

Role of architecture and urban form in the Israel-Palestine Dispute

An analysis of the role of architecture and urban form in the Israel-Palestine Dispute as intimated in this new edition of Eyal Weizman’s book (cover picture below) is reviewed in a Greater Kashmir post.

The opinions expressed within reflecting the author’s views and position on the issue are shared by more and more greater numbers.  Let us see what’s it all about.

The above-featured image is for illustration and of Architectural Review showing Roads often highly fortified and for use by Israelis only, such as this section known as the Tunnel Road – or also the Apartheid Road – near the settlement of Gilo, under construction last year. Credit:Yonatan Sindel / FLASH90

 

Role of architecture and urban form in the Israel-Palestine Dispute

By Sheikh Muzamil Hussain, Guest Contributor

The relationship between political will and the built environment is conspicuous and stands out most in turmoil-laden geographies. Architecture, beyond its primary function, can be perpetuated as a tool for occupation and dominance. Hollow Land, a book by Eyal Weizman published in 2007, navigates through the later proposition. Weizman has been an outspoken critique of Israel’s policies its occupation of Palestine and has written widely on the geopolitics of the Middle East.

The author’s pedantic observation of Israel-Palestine dynamics puts into the narrative what is otherwise obvious but seldom talked about in the dominant power narratives. Describing architecture from a unique vantage point, the book draws unprecedented insights into the arena of built environment. The text strongly argues and establishes architecture as an instrument to control occupied territories, instill fear among Palestinians and facilitate illegal usurping of natural and physical resources.

The book specifically takes on architecture as an expression of occupation. It explains with precise detail the role of apartheid wall; a 100 km long and 13-meter-high edifice separating the Palestine and Israel, case of illegal settler colonies, constant invigilation of Palestinian lands through panopticon watch towers, in addition to architectural elements like color coding, detail of cladding and other features pertinent to domain of urban structure.

From demographic prism, the book discusses Israel’s intrusion into Palestinian cities and intentional changing of urban population thresholds to declare scarcely populated settlements as ‘towns.’ Wiezman sees geography, apartheid policies, and politics of domination buttressing each other. Each of the physical element on the ground, he argues is ‘there to express something, it’s just that we need to decode it.’
Architecture reverberates beyond its primary function. Weizman quotes from Lahav Harkov, a retired Israeli general about Israel’s becoming of ‘world champions of occupation’ and alluding that occupation is ‘an art form’. Over the years, Israel’s domination of territory in Palestine areas as demarcated by blue line drafted by the United Nations in 1948 has been constantly modulated and abused by Israel.

Palestine as of today is constituted of three areas: East Jerusalem, West Bank, and the south-west Gaza Strip bordering Egypt. First two were part of conflict from the start whereas the Gaza Strip came under the purview of domination lately in 1967 following the Six-day war. Israel not only successfully thwarted the conglomeration of Arab opponents but also won territory more than it originally had before the war.

The idea of Israel as land of Jews is based on idea of ‘people without land’ in first place. Not is that proposition unethical because it was realized at the cost of throwing out the local Palestinian inhabitants from their land, but also it is based on doubtful historical justification. Palestine as a geographical entity with local inhabitants precedes the advent of Judaism as socio-religious unit. Historical references of the region date back to 12th Century BC during the time of Egyptian King Ramesses II. Later figures like Herodotus, Aristotle, Ptolemy also wrote about Palestine. Nur Masalha’s book, Palestine: A Four Thousand Year History documents the topic is methodical detail.

Three-dimensional Apartheid

The art of apartheid, Israel orchestrates in controlling the Palestinian lands is played out at three levels: the subsoil, the surface, and the air. Palestinian territories reserve the compromised sovereignty only at the surface level whereas the subsoil and air are controlled by the Israeli government resulting in a vertical apartheid. Oslo Accords of 1993 argued for the case that Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem should be connected by road, usually by flyovers surpassing the Israel land below. Projects of such nature would directly connect the masses of Palestine and the flyovers itself would act as facilitators. Israel, however rebutted the idea citing security issues. It remains ironical given how the Israel has constructed thousands of kilometers of road network, both above surface and underground disregarding sovereignty of Palestine.

Dozen tunnels cut through hollow lands of what was once Palestinian farmlands. The roads cut across Palestinian territories and decrease the commute time of Israeli citizens. The constructions are usually aimed to proselytize into Palestinian lands and at the same time to connect mainland Israel with illegal settlements. Israel under the policy of ‘Metropolitan Jerusalem’, enshrined in policies of government mandates Israeli authorities to expand the capital territory far and beyond and in the process engulfing Palestinian lands into its jurisdiction fold.

Settlements are the most aggressive tool used by Israel to induce control to grass root level in West Bank and Gaza Strip, where they permeate almost every tract of land, and the way they are planned in midst of Palestinian towns makes the local Palestinians vulnerable in many ways and at the same time enabling Israel to control more effectively. Ariel Sharon in 1998 remarked what could be attested as the policy of Israel since then; ‘to move, run, and grab as many hilltops as we can.’ It usually starts with the placement of few mobile containers on hilltop until it is captured in its entirety.

Language and Form of Design

It’s surprising how a building material can convey the language of occupation. Throughout its glorious as well as confrontational history, Jerusalem houses architectural sites of importance to Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions. Although the style may differ for each but there is a common denominator: the Jerusalem stone. The yellow tinted stone is available in abundance in and around the region.
When British colonized the Palestine in 1918, the aesthetically sensitive British builders saw the neglected plight of its cities. To them, the built form was mix of congested and haphazardly built houses lacking any sort of unifying appeal.

Determined to find a solution to the Jerusalem’s ‘overcrowding and unsightliness’, the British colonel Ronald Storrs invited influential British engineer, William Mclean to draw a development plan. He instructed to dismantle shackles and old torn out buildings. In the process, the British designers designated Jerusalem stone as mandatory cladding stone in order to achieve the ‘biblical outlook’. For Storrs, stone embodied biblical tradition and ‘Jerusalem literally a city build on rock’. Decades later the same archeological tradition and Jerusalem stone was invoked by the Zionist regime for propagandist purposes.

The 1968 Master plan of Jerusalem, keeping up with the earlier development plans singled out Jerusalem stone’s ability to render a ‘holy city image’ to occupied areas of extended metropolitan areas of Jerusalem. In course of time, certain planners and architects did stand up to challenge this notion due to the emergence of high rise and rising prices of stone but the Israeli government subdued all such voices. In last few decades, Israel’s builders have come up with affordable ways to just put 6-centimeter slates of stone instead of wholesome masonry but nonetheless the stone on the exterior remains the standard.

Topography has also had a huge influence on the occupation. Israel usually places its settlement colonies on the apex of hills. It helps the IDF to patrol the surrounding areas with three sixty degrees vigil. This principle is vividly explicated by the settlements. Apart from stone cladding, the law mandates the settlement buildings to have red colored roofs to help differentiate in case of air raids.
Israel has induced a sort of gentrification effect in Arab neighborhoods which eventually increases the property rates causing Palestinians to retreat to areas beyond ‘metropolitan Jerusalem’ which by law is a condition for Palestinians to acquire citizenship.

Once out of Jerusalem, these people are vulnerable to various kinds of human rights violations.
There are also efforts to constrict physical expansion of Palestinian urban areas. For example, the neighborhoods of Ramat Eshkol and the French Hill north of the old city were laid out to form an elongated arc that cut the Palestinian neighborhood of Shuafat from the Palestinian old city and the neighborhood of Seikh Jarah, which previously comprised a continuous urban area.

Appropriating the Archeology

Archeology possesses the power to dismantle whatever is seen as ‘non-original’. The Maghariba quarters and African quarters were razed overnight by Israel just after the 1967 war ended. David Ben Gurion, the first prime minister of Israel claimed in his memoirs that the Jewish right over Palestine is based on digging soil with our own hands. What he said referred to two practices that would establish and demonstrate Zionist right to the land.

Wherever the Zionists found traces of Hebraic past, they first reverted the names of places followed by demolition of whatever stood on it. Thousands of houses belonging to Palestinians were razed on the same principle. A year later after the 1967 war, Israeli government invited elite planners and architects from across the world for the cause. In one such project to revive the Hebrew past, Architect Louis I. Kahn was commissioned to construct Hurva synagogue on the same design it had existed before going into ruins. Somehow the project couldn’t find the light of the day, but several other projects returned to liveliness.

Resources and Amenities

Land presently under Israel lacks the natural reserves to sufficiently supply water to its residents. The mountain aquifer’s that supply 80% of the water into Israel are in West Bank. Israel cites Hebraic past disputing any authority of Palestine over the resources. Ironically the water, as well as the stone, is extracted from Palestinian lands and for compensation the Palestinians are returned with sewerage that Israel flows downslope to valleys around the West Bank hills. This has resulted in a health crisis for Palestinian people.
Over these years the number of settlers sit at a staggering number of around 7,50,000. The official policy asserts the ratio of Jews to Muslims kept at 78:22 but the actual numbers have always remained more than 22 percent for the Muslim population because of reasons like birthrate and dense neighborhoods.

The Palestinian neighborhoods like Muslim Quarters house at least twice the people of its capacity. The reason for over densification of the Muslim neighborhoods can be reasonably attributed to Israel’s vindictive razing policy which specifically target Muslim houses.
Unemployment is rampant and healthcare infrastructure in the state of no-existence. Palestinians have not only been snatched of their rights but they have also been made dependent at every conjecture.

Palestinians are queued like herds to enter premises which belong to them. In Palestine, violence is perpetuated with the help of architecture. The crime began on drawing board itself and as Weizman remarks, ‘It is architecture only that can rise above this.’

The author is an Urban and Regional Planner and alumnus of CEPT Ahmedabad.

.

.

 

 

Important difference between a humanitarian pause and a ceasefire

Important difference between a humanitarian pause and a ceasefire

The above-featured image is for illustration and is credit to USAToday/AP

In this Israel-Hamas war: there is an important difference between a humanitarian pause and a ceasefire. 

By Malak Benslama-Dabdoub, Royal Holloway University of London

7 November 2023

Israel-Hamas war: there is an important difference between a humanitarian pause and a ceasefire

Xinhua/Alamy Live News

The Labour Party leader, Keir Starmer, has come under fire from members of his own party for refusing to call for a ceasefire in the Hamas-Israel war, instead pushing for a humanitarian pause in the conflict. As a result, 50 Labour councillors have quit the party. The controversy raises the question of the difference between a humanitarian pause and a ceasefire.

The conflict began in the early morning of October 7 2023 when armed Hamas fighters launched a surprise attack against Israel, killing at least 1,400 Israelis and taking more than 200 civilians hostage.

Israel responded to this attack by launching an assault on Gaza beginning with a relentless aerial bombardment and continuing now with a ground offensive. According to the Gaza health ministry, at least 10,000 people – mainly civilians – have been killed in Gaza in the month since the conflict began, including 4,100 children.

A further 25,000 people have been injured and hundreds of thousands have been displaced within the Gaza Strip, unable to leave because of the blockade imposed by Israel.

Israel’s massive bombing campaign has unsurprisingly led to a disastrous humanitarian situation. The UN secretary general, Antonio Guterres, has described the situation in Gaza as a “godawful nightmare”.

This has led the UN and other countries to pressure Israel for a “pause” in the fighting to at least provide temporary humanitarian relief to the people of Gaza.

A number of resolutions calling for a ceasefire or some form of truce have been raised in the UN security council, but on each occasion they have been vetoed by one or more of the permanent members. A non-binding resolution passed the UN general assembly on October 27, but this has been ignored by the Israeli government.

A humanitarian pause

Gaza has no access to basic humanitarian aid due to the siege and blockade that Israel has inflicted on the strip. Even before the beginning of the war, Gaza had been subject to a 16-year blockade after Hamas took political control of the strip in June 2007.

After the October 7 Hamas attack, the Israeli defence minister Yoav Gallant ordered a “complete siege” on Gaza, which included cutting off supplies of electricity, food, water and gas. These shortages have put the country’s health system at risk – hospitals are now being run on power from electric generators and with severe shortages of vital medical supplies.

According to the UN, a humanitarian pause is defined as “a temporary cessation of hostilities purely for humanitarian purposes”. It is carried out for a certain period of time and in a specific geographic location.

The pause allows civilians trapped in conflict areas to safely flee, access assistance or receive medical treatment. It also enables the passage of essential supplies such as food, fuel and medicines.

A Egyptian ambulance evacuates a Palestinian from Gaza through the Rafah crossing.

An ambulance carries an injured Palestinian evacuee to a hostpial in Egypt after passing the Rafah crossing from Gaza, November 1. EPA-EFE/Khaled Elfiqi

In the context of Gaza, a pause could, for example, enable civilians to flee the enclave through the Rafah crossing into Egypt. The crossing has been opened for limited periods to allow some evacuees to leave and some supplies to enter. But not enough.

There is an increasing international consensus, including from countries supporting Israel such as the US, that at least a humanitarian pause is needed.

Nonetheless, some argue that using a humanitarian pause to provide a temporary halt in the bombing of Gaza is not enough. In a report calling for a general ceasefire, Oxfam said its experience is that such pauses can even put civilians at a greater risk, as there is usually less clarity involved about safe zones and the duration of pauses.

“Rumours and misinformation spreads that this road or that ‘safe zone’ has been declared a demilitarised area, but that is often not true, leaving people walking into a warzone believing it is safe,” the report said. At the beginning of the war, routes that were thought to have been designated safe passages for evacuation from Gaza were bombed.

As a result, the only true humanitarian solution that appears ideal is a complete ceasefire.

A ceasefire: roadmap for an end to hostilities

A ceasefire is a political process rather than simply a humanitarian one. It urges parties to come together to find a political solution to the conflict.

It is meant to a be a longer-term process than a “pause” and should apply to the entire geographical area of the conflict. In this case, it would mean the whole of Gaza strip but also all others affected by the conflict such as the south of Lebanon where Israeli troops are battling with Hezbollah.

In the context of Gaza, a ceasefire would mean a complete stop of fighting on all sides, and the eventual release or exchange of hostages. It would not only mean the end of the bombardment of Gaza, but would also obligate Hamas to stop its attacks on Israel.

It is important to note that, like a pause, a ceasefire is not a permanent peace agreement. That said, the aim would be to create the conditions for a permanent settlement.

A man searches through rubble after an Israeli strike on the Gaza Strip in Rafah on Monday, November 6 2023.

Meanwhile, Israel’s bombardment of Gaza continues. AP Photo/Hatem Ali

Reaching a ceasefire would likely require the involvement of a third party mediator, such as the US, Qatar or Iran.

In the previous Hamas-Israel war in 2021, both parties eventually managed to reach a ceasefire after 11 days of destruction which left more than 200 people dead. In that conflict, Egypt played a major role as a mediator.

Since the latest conflict began on October 7, the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has resisted all calls for a humanitarian pause and a ceasefire.

But the US and other allies of Israel continue to press Netanyahu for at least a pause in Israel’s assault. He insists that while “little pauses” might be arranged to allow for the exit of hostages or to facilitate the entry of humanitarian aid, a longer halt in hostilities is not possible until all hostages taken by Hamas are released. And so the killing continuesThe Conversation

Malak Benslama-Dabdoub, Lecturer in law, Royal Holloway University of London

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

.

.