POLS3222 Case Study

1948 Nakba and Initial Refugee Crisis

• What happened: During the 1948 Arab-Israeli War (the Nakba), over 700,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled from what became the State of Israel. Around 200,000 of these refugees ended up in Gaza.

• Use of displacement: This foundational act of displacement created the refugee population Israel would later refuse to repatriate, thereby embedding demographic engineering and permanent statelessness into Gaza's history.

• Projection of power: Refusal of return enshrined in Israeli law reinforced control over land and sovereignty at the expense of displaced Palestinians.

1967 Occupation of Gaza

• What happened: Following the Six-Day War, Israel occupied Gaza and the West Bank, leading to the displacement of over 350,000 people, many for a second time (first in 1948).

• Use of displacement: Israel’s occupation triggered population movements, house demolitions, and settlement planning.

• Projection of power: This marked the beginning of military governance over Gaza and a long-term strategy of managing Palestinian population mobility.

Demolitions & Buffer Zones (1971 - “Pacification” Campaign)

• What happened: Under Ariel Sharon, Israel demolished thousands of homes in Gaza refugee camps (notably in Shati and Rafah) to create buffer zones and roads for military control.

• Use of displacement: Roughly 16,000 people were displaced in this campaign.

• Projection of power: Sharon explicitly stated this was to “drain the swamp” of resistance—an early case of displacement as counterinsurgency.

June 2007 Israel Blockade

utilised as a hard power play in order to project dominance over Gaza, was a Key example of dominatation over Palestine and hindered attemps of outward migration.

2023–24 War: Forced Displacement of 85% of Gaza's Population

• What happened: After the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, Israel began a massive bombardment campaign. Over 1.9 million Gazans (85%) were displaced.

• Use of displacement: Israel issued evacuation orders for entire regions (e.g. from North Gaza to South), often to places that were later also bombed.

• Projection of power: The “evacuate or die” orders functioned not only militarily but also symbolically—to assert control over geography, movement, and survival.

Blocking Return of Displaced Persons During Ongoing Conflict (2023–2024)

• What happened: Displaced people were not permitted to return to their homes, especially in the north, and some areas were declared uninhabitable or under permanent military control.

• Use of displacement: This mimicked historical precedents of induced abandonment of territory.

• Projection of power: Israel used forced displacement to reconfigure Gaza’s geography, with reports suggesting intentions to create permanent buffer zones.

Manipulating Humanitarian Corridors & Aid Access (2023–2024)

• What happened: Humanitarian corridors were inconsistently opened or bombed; aid convoys were restricted, and people were displaced multiple times due to lack of safe zones.

• Use of displacement: Humanitarian “safe zones” became death traps or zones of administrative control.

• Projection of power: Control over when, where, and how civilians can move or access aid becomes a powerful coercive mechanism—displacement used as leverage.

Gender as a Weapon of War and Humanitarian Impact

• Gaza Strip Context:

  • While documented cases of SGBV by military actors are less visible or underreported in Gaza, the gendered consequences of siege, militarisation, and repeated bombing manifest in:

    • Increased intimate partner violence (IPV) due to economic stress and trauma.

    • Increased risk of child marriage or transactional survival strategies by girls.

    • Restricted access to sanitary products and healthcare—turning female biology into a liability in crisis.

  • Conflict in Gaza amplifies patriarchal control, with protective attitudes often reasserting gender norms, denying women autonomy even in aid access and participation.

1948 Nakba and Gendered Displacement

What happened: During the Nakba, over 700,000 Palestinians were displaced. Many fled to what became refugee camps in Gaza, the West Bank, and surrounding Arab countries.

• Gendered impact:

  • Women disproportionately became carers and protectors of families while men were either killed, arrested, or recruited into militias.

  • UNRWA’s early aid policies were not gender-sensitive, focusing on household units led by men.

• Framework application:

  • Humanitarianism vs. Security: Aid reinforced patriarchal structures—e.g., ration cards often tied to male heads of household—ignoring women-headed households. This reflects the securitised lens of “who is legitimate” in the system.

UNRWA Education Programs and Gender Norms

• What happened: From the 1950s onward, UNRWA established schools in refugee camps. These programs grew to be one of the largest state-like infrastructures in camps.

• Gendered dynamics:

  • While schooling for girls was encouraged, early curricula often reinforced traditional gender roles, promoting domesticity and “proper femininity.”

  • Over time, especially by the 1980s–90s, Palestinian women began to push back, using education as a tool of empowerment.

• Framework application:

  • Aid as a vehicle of power: Curriculum and education funding served both as a soft power projection and as a form of normative discipline, echoing the external imposition of values onto refugees.

Intifadas (1987–93, 2000–2005) and Shifting Gender Roles

• What happened: During the first and second Intifadas, Palestinian women played active roles in resistance, civil disobedience, and support networks.

• Gendered contradictions in aid:

  • Aid often failed to adapt to these shifts, continuing to treat women solely as victims or dependents, despite their political agency.

  • Emergency aid focused on men injured or imprisoned in clashes, overlooking the psychosocial and economic burdens women took on.

• Framework application:

  • Humanitarian responses failed to account for gendered forms of participation and suffering, reproducing hierarchies of value in who deserved aid or visibility.

Gender and Food Aid in Gaza Blockade (Post-2007)

• What happened: After Hamas took control of Gaza, Israel imposed a blockade. Food aid and cash-for-work programs dominated aid efforts.

• Gendered patterns:

  • Male unemployment soared, but aid distribution often reinforced men as breadwinners, leaving women with few economic alternatives.

  • Women’s informal labour (e.g., farming, home-based food production) increased, but was invisible to most aid assessments.

• Framework application:

  • Containment strategy through humanitarianism: Aid acted as a stabilising mechanism in lieu of political resolution, while ignoring the structural gendered impacts of siege economics.

Gender-Based Violence and Securitised Aid Models

• What happened: The rise in GBV (gender-based violence) in Gaza and West Bank (especially post-war) often followed periods of intensified Israeli military activity or economic collapse.

• Aid issues:

  • Many aid agencies imposed external models of GBV response, often ignoring local social norms, causing backlash.

  • Shelters and legal services were sparse, underfunded, or seen as foreign interventions, not integrated into community-led support networks.

• Framework application:

  • Humanitarian logic here mirrors post-9/11 securitisation: GBV is seen as a pathology to be managed externally, rather than a structural issue exacerbated by war, siege, and occupation

Displacement Within Gaza (2008–2024 Conflicts)

• What happened: Repeated wars displaced hundreds of thousands of Gazans, many multiple times.

• Gendered dimensions:

  • Displacement camps and UN shelters often lacked separate facilities or privacy for women, leading to increased risks of harassment.

  • Pregnant women and disabled women were less able to evacuate, often left behind or suffering from poor access to health care.

• Framework application:

  • This mirrors the “evacuation or die” model seen in Australia’s border policies, where the illusion of humanitarian corridors masks an underlying coercive logic.

COVID-19 and Gender in Palestine

• What happened: During the pandemic, lockdowns exacerbated poverty, mobility restrictions, and domestic violence, especially in Gaza.

• Aid failures:

  • Emergency responses often lacked a gender lens, and reports noted a spike in unreported GBV.

  • Women healthcare workers were underprotected and underpaid, despite being central to pandemic responses.

• Framework application:

  • Echoing your notes on Frontex and securitisation, here too health crises became grounds for increased policing and movement restrictions—affecting women differently.

Microfinance and Gendered Neoliberalism

• What happened: In the 2000s–2010s, many international NGOs promoted microfinance programs targeting women in the West Bank and Gaza.

• Gendered contradictions:

  • These programs positioned women as entrepreneurial agents, but in reality often placed them under financial strain with little structural support.

  • It shifted the burden of economic resilience onto women, while avoiding political questions of occupation or blockade.

• Framework application:

  • This reflects how aid collapses structural violence into individualized solutions, much like the humanitarian justification for externalisation in global North borders.

Aid Conditionality and LGBTQ+ Erasure

• What happened: Palestinian LGBTQ+ individuals, especially in Gaza, face multiple levels of persecution—from local society, Hamas governance, and Israeli control.

• Aid erasure:

  • LGBTQ+ needs are often excluded from humanitarian programming, either due to fears of local backlash or donor avoidance.

  • Aid organizations often depoliticise gender and sexuality, treating them as niche or irrelevant.

• Framework application:

  • This mimics how certain lives are rendered illegible in securitised, bureaucratised aid structures—paralleling the exclusion of “irregular migrants” in other contexts