Hamas’ Visual Statement: ‘We’re Still in Command’
With images such as the photo above, Hamas displays its continued command of Gaza and, therefore, Israel’s failure to achieve a key war aim.
More generally, it shows the current-Western Liberal Democratic Model isn’t sufficiently attractive to Gazans (as, apparently, it isn’t to the Greater Middle East and the Islamic World per se); understanding why is a prerequisite for solving the Palestinian/Israel issue.
…
Author Background: 1990’s Kurdish-Iraq Kerosene Distribution
In 1993/4, in northern Iraq, the author was part of the UN’s largest kerosene distribution.
Triggered by Saddam Hussein Iraq’s 1990 invasion of Kuwait, ‘The First Gulf War’ involved the United States leading a 42-country coalition against Iraq during which Shia (in the south) and Kurds (in the north) rose-up attempting to overthrow the secularist nationalist Baathist government.
In the Kurds case, though formidable fighters, having no answer to Saddam’s Air Force, 2 million were driven into the mountains creating a humanitarian catastrophe such that, in April 1991, a no-fly zone was implemented, which, by October 1991, had enabled the Kurds to gain control of the 3 northeastern-most provinces and establish a Kurdish Autonomous Republic.
[The Kurds are one of the largest ‘stateless nations’ with a population over 30 million.]
However, with U.N. sanctions on Iraq (and Iraqi Kurdistan not excepted lest Iraqi sovereignty be violated), the U.N. mainly contributed via implementing the kerosene program, which involved registering every household then, periodically, delivering each a barrel of kerosene.
The cost of gathering, trucking in from Turkey, unloading, storing then reloading, trucking out and delivering including to remote destinations was significant. Also inefficiently, it precipitated a massive secondary kerosene market – i.e. many used the kerosene as a currency to buy other priorities such as food.
Nevertheless, regarding present-day Gaza, perhaps this general idea can be improved upon to assist in:
- Enhancing security
- Facilitating humanitarian aid
- Wedging and sidelining (rather than attempting to destroy) Hamas
- Ending the war
- Providing conditions for a 2-state solution, which is welcomed by both Israelis and Palestinians.
[Aside: while the author has no direct experience of Gaza, he has been to Israel, the West Bank and numerous other parts of the Greater Middle East, which highlights a big problem for Israeli society – i.e. non-covertly, its citizens are prevented from gaining such experience, which must restrict their society’s understanding of their neighbours.]
…
If Gaza’s an Open Air Prison, Then So is Singapore
HO Ching (Temasek Trust Chair & wife of Singapore’s 3rd Prime Minister, Lee Hsien Loong), Quora, October 17, 2023
I am puzzled.
Maybe I am missing something.
A highly intelligent group of people, who spent hundreds of millions, if not billions, to build tunnels, buy rockets and other weapons, train people for suicide missions to murder and massacre others.
The Gaza strip is half the size of Sg, with half the population of Sg.
A 40km long strip of land in Gaza vs 42km wide island of Sg.
So in terms of density, it is the same as Sg. Probably less too since Sg reserves a lot of land for parks and water catchment, and SAF training area.
With the talents they have, Gaza could prosper like Sg, building up capabilities, getting investments, and creating good opportunities for its people, no different from Sg in the early days when Sg was poor and squalid with lots of slums.
So why would a capable and well organised group not choose the path to provide a better life and pride of place for millions of their people, instead of sending their young to murder and be mostly killed?
A deliberate attempt to invite the wrath of another insecure people who are determined never again to be threatened by Holocaust.
A deliberate attempt to rain death on one’s own people, first by a massive and well executed massacre, and then by telling one’s people to stay and be killed by a massive retaliation.
For what?
Are murder and the stoking of hate the only skills they have?
It’s painful to read the news of man made death and destruction.
… in Israel and Gaza, already over 2,000 have died – mostly innocent people, bright people, young people, families of young and old, who could have lived their lives to the fullest in peace under a wise leadership.
All those wanton wasting of lives is so very sad …
No country and certainly no people can be great if all they do is to teach their people to wrap themselves up in the cloak of victimhood.
Really senseless time with more deaths and pain to come …
Over at Sg, we must treasure and guard this precious harmony and peace among our much more diverse people.
And not do to others what we don’t want done to us …
…
Jihad: ‘Greater’ & ‘Lesser’
Islam has 2 types of jihad (i.e. struggle or striving):
- ‘The greater jihad,’ which is most both challenging and important, is the struggle against the inner self, to purify one’s heart, avoid sin and do good.
- ‘The lesser jihad’ is a struggle for self-defence in Islam, and is sometimes called, ‘A Holy War.’
Regarding the lesser jihad, it is:
- A struggle to defend Islam from threats
- A struggle that can be carried out with the tongue, pen, or sword
- A struggle that must be approved by a religious leader
- A struggle that must be fought in self-defence
- A struggle that must not be used to convert people to Islam or gain land.
The lesser jihad’s rules are:
- It must be fought in defence of Allah
- No harm must be done
- Every attempt should be made to defend Islam peacefully first
- Mercy must be shown
- Peace must be restored.
…
‘Isramaginative’
“I am certain that peace can only happen with an act of imagination from Israel”
Daniel Finkelstein, The Times, October 9, 2024
January 31, 2025
Hello
Herein it is argued, there is a policy path, which may be termed, ‘Islamised-Coopetism,’ that will, within 3 years, create the conditions for a Palestinian State, which both Palestinians and Israelis will welcome because it will provide long-term security and prosperity for both – i.e. out of the current ‘forever’ disaster, a classic ‘win-win.’
Defining the Problem
Authoritarianism is the problem
– an age old one with many guises –
and Islamic-Authoritarianism (discussed below) is probably its most powerful version.
Regarding seemingly intransigent issues such as Gaza, it’s often said, “Rather than there being a military solution, in the end, a political solution needs to be found.”
While this is fair enough, first, mindfulness is needed of who is saying such and the circumstances – i.e. invariably, it’s said by those who are governed within a current-Western Model (for example, the US or Israel) who wish to impose as full a version as possible of that same Model on a hitherto Authoritarian adversary.
Regarding their reasons, typically, it’s both self-centred and, though some may argue it, altruistic – i.e.: it’s to
- Safeguard their own people’s security
- Help their adversary’s oppressed people.
Regarding attempts by countries with a Western Model to achieve such a political solution, we have 4 good recent/ongoing examples – i.e.:
- Afghanistan.
- Iraq
- The West Bank
- Gaza
Regarding the commonalities, first, all 4 locations are Islamic and, second, there hasn’t been much success – i.e. The Western Model has either been totally rebuffed as in Afghanistan & Gaza or predominantly rebuffed as in Iraq & The West Bank where, in time, it may yet also be fully-rebuffed.
[Notably, the most Islamic-Authoritarian regimes pre-war were in Afghanistan and Gaza where there’s been the least success.]
In the Israel/Palestine context, one crucial reason Democracies are important is, notwithstanding the recent threats to Greenland and Panama, they don’t go to war against each other.
So, in the examples listed, why hasn’t there been much success in transferring the current-Western Model?
There are 2 reasons of which one is obvious and the other utterly overlooked.
Regarding the obvious: Islam has Authoritarian aspects/tendencies, which are incompatible with Universal Liberal Democracy; however, political-correctness/double-think impedes highlighting it.
Regarding the overlooked: our current-Western Model’s Democracy is flawed – i.e. it also has Authoritarian elements, which means, despite any ‘End of History’ conviction, it isn’t Universal Liberal Democracy.
Thus, already forced to compromise the imposed model by making it an Islamised-Western Model, the West hasn’t been optimising its chance of success because:
- Its own societies, though arguably having a superior system to most, still project Authoritarian-related social inequalities and inefficiencies, which makes it suboptimally attractive to others
- The Islamised-Western Model they’re attempting to impose on their adversary’s citizens isn’t the optimal Islamised-Western Model.
Next, this analysis considers the Authoritarian aspects of:
- The current-Western Model
- Islam.
The Current-Western Model’s Authoritarianism
Task Number 1:
Throw-out the pretension we’ve reached ‘The End of History’ such that there currently exists an optimised Universal Liberal Democracy – there doesn’t – far from it – the current-Western Model is only relatively better.
Conceptually, ‘The Optimised Western Model’ is a government-system that’s optimally civilised – i.e. its ‘Coopetism’ whose social-infrastructure is optimally Coopetive:
‘Cooperation first & foremost and, within that context, Competition as the treasured second.’
Specifically, Coopetism possesses 5 citizen-interaction-&-Empowerment social-infrastructures, which, in order of importance, are:
- Universal Rule of Personal & Property Coopetivity-Catalysing Law
- Universal Subsistence Income (USI)
- Universal Liberal Democracy
- Universal Education
- Universal Healthcare.
Accordingly, the current-Western Model’s greatest flaw is The USI-absence, which, ideally, should have been implemented at The Industrial Revolution as a Science, Human-Organisation & Technology (SHOT) insurance-inheritance – i.e. it should have been implemented when subsistence-farmers were encouraged to give-up direct control over the production of their survival needs to become factory-machinists earning a money-income, which enabled the indirect acquirement of survival needs and, perhaps, luxuries.
As a result of The USI-absence, the present-Western Model has 3 Authoritarian elements – i.e.:
- Subsistence-Income-Servitude (SIS)
- Universal Minimum Hourly Wages (UMHoW)
- Income-Welfare.
While SIS is a circumstance, UMHoW and income-Welfare are policies, which, collectively, are a proxy for The USI – i.e. if The USI had been implemented, there wouldn’t have been an impetus for either, which means we also wouldn’t have heard of, let alone experienced, either.
Regarding UMHoW and income-Welfare’s collective efficacy as a proxy for The USI, they’re inefficient – i.e. they don’t eradicate SIS, which, afflicting all those who aren’t independently wealthy, in a Developed country like Australia, still afflicts around 80% of the population.
As for the idea freedom from SIS will make everyone lazy, examples abound of the opposite, for example, Rupert Murdoch who, born independently wealthy, has never suffered either SIS or laziness and, moreover, has maximally self-actualised.
In terms of how each of SIS, UMHoW and income-Welfare are Authoritarian, regarding the first, obviously with ‘Servitude’ in its name, it’s Authoritarian/anti-freedom.
Mostly due to SIS, we have:
- Employee-exploitation
- Parents prevented from prioritising their family’s non-financial needs
- Vast mental-illness from citizens prevented from maximising their ‘societally-contributive self-actualisation.’
SIS also detracts from all 4 non-USI social-infrastructures – i.e.: it generates poverty and stress, which detract from:
- Law via catalysing crime including theft and domestic violence
- Democracy via limiting the capacity to consider/investigate issues, communicate with elected representatives/the press or run for office oneself/assist others to run
- Education – for example, a child living precariously in terms of access to food, a home and domestic tranquillity
- Health – for example, increasing mental-illness.
Regarding UMHoW’s Authoritarianism, it detracts from choice whether:
- Running a business
- Looking for paid-work – i.e. it’s the sole cause of unemployment defined as, ‘those who want paid-work at the going wage but cannot find it’
- Being a consumer – i.e. it distorts the labour market, which distorts the goods & services market.
UMHoW’s Authoritarian damage extends across:
- The economy as Inefficiency
- Society as Disempowerment
- Governments as, due to unemployment, they create jobs-for-jobs’-sake paid-work.
Regarding income-Welfare’s Authoritarianism, our most vulnerable and damaged citizens, as well as being ostracised and socially-outcast, are also compelled to jump through hoops on threat of losing their Subsistence-Income. Plus, it infrastructurally divides & conquers the Disempowered between ‘dole-bludgers’ and those in low-paid-work who, given the system, are understandably particularly ‘dole-bludger’-vilifiers.
In contrast, with The USI, everyone receives it and everyone can add to it with paid-work or wealth-income – i.e. they never lose it unless they’re in jail or oversees.
Put together, SIS, UMHoW and income-Welfare are also catastrophic for government-budgets – i.e. business is handicapped, which means they pay less tax, and citizens damaged, which means they consume more costly government assistance – such that they’re the singular reason Western governments have high taxes yet also deficits.
Lastly, that there’s a Cost-of-Living Crisis across the Western World is curious – i.e. since The Industrial Revolution, our potential productivity has increased about 10,000 times and is still doubling at least every 7 years (recently, AI has come to the fore) yet citizen-subsistence is a challenge?
The ubiquitous idea, ‘we need everyone buzzing around like ‘blue-back-sided-flies’ to have an economy that still struggles to produce what we need’ is also intriguing.
The problem with our economy is it’s inefficient – as per Coopetism 5.5, it’s a squandering-economy (a ‘Squandonomy’) whose inefficiency is at least 90% (and increasing).
This inefficiency is mostly via a never-ending ‘tug-of-war’ economy – i.e. rather than producing wanted goods-and-services such as housing, health, education, technology and entertainment, it involves industries of squabble, whinging, vilifying, spin, Left versus Right antagonising, excess bureaucracy, regulation and Band-Aiding.
For instance, while we need some regulation to maximally catalyse Coopetivity, every excess or suboptimal regulation requires additional bureaucracy and if the policy affects business (especially the labour-market or tax) then businesses must have more administrator, accountant, lawyer and HR paid-workers.
And, the greatest tug-of-war contributor, which is worthy of its own essay, is UMHoW via its creation of unemployment.
Regarding the totality of the never-ending blue-fly tug-of-war ‘economy,’ everyone is working very hard (and using enormous resources) including attracting more paid-workers to their side of the rope; however, their efforts cancel each other out without, at best, producing or achieving anything useful.
Hence, our Cost-of-Living Crisis isn’t due to inflation but to this inefficiency and, moreover, this inefficiency is also producing most of the inflation.
Thus, if we eradicate the ‘tug-of-war’ inefficiency, for the same amount of human-effort and environment-damaging-resource-use, we can be 10 times as prosperous.
Conclusion (using a politer form of stupid): We are foolish, foolish, foolish – hopefully our leaders are enjoying themselves because they’re failing to improve the social-infrastructure affecting our lives.
So, how do we clean-up this Squandonomy?
Just as there are 2 ways to build a Tesla – i.e. manually (by hand) or automatically – there are 2 ways to deal with inefficiency – i.e. the manual inefficient bureaucratic confrontational comparatively trivial way such as having a Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) or the automatic efficient comprehensive ‘Golden Age’ ‘easy way’ of having ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform.’
The USI-4-UMHoW Reform is self-capitalising (paying for itself is only the start), incentivising and eradicates SIS, poverty, UMHoW, employee-exploitation, unemployment & income-Welfare.
In addition, it automatically ‘clears the decks’ on inefficiency because security, hope, opportunity and good-neighbourliness are infrastructurally universalised – i.e. all citizens are taken care of, governments don’t need to anti-Coopetively interfere in the economy and all can focus on ‘societally-contributively self-actualising.’
Regarding nations becoming manifoldly more prosperous, while ‘the citizen-taxpayer net USI’ (i.e. the amount taxpayers pay above receiving The USI) will be about the same as it is with the current income-Welfare system, the GDP-to-USI ratio, which is currently around 5, will increase to about 50.
Epiphany: most prefer being indecisive, which, in the case of The USI results in a solution vacuum, which, in turn, is filled with wishful-thinking, dithering and messing around including waffling, obsessing with incrementalism, attempting to solve symptoms & ‘kicking the can down the road.’
For example: the waffle-regurgitating-symbiosis between the media & the social-services-industry on how best to Band-Aid infrastructural-Disempowerment. Currently, mental-health is topical in which, rather than pre-emption and, no matter the government-budget, it’s all about more facilities and mental-health professionals – rather than “Mummy/Daddy, we need to fly to Disneyland today,” we need someone to ‘get a grip’ – i.e. if we solve Subsistence-Income-Servitude (SIS) & unemployment, we will require about 10% of our current mental-health-professionals. There’s a saying, ‘not worth their salt’; we need someone worth their salt.
For example, if ‘The Voice’ had passed the referendum, given its purpose was to ‘Close the Gap’ on Australia’s indigenous disadvantage, the best advice it could have given was to implement ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform,’ which will singlehandedly achieve this because it universalises security, hope, opportunity and good-neighbourliness, yet, to implement it, we don’t need ‘The Voice.’
Regarding Israel, it has also been messing around, though recent circumstances have forced it, reluctantly, to ‘bite the bullet’ – i.e. fancy the still-in-living-memory-Holocaust-born-nation thinking fences and ‘mowing the grass’ could be a substitute for getting to the source of a self-governing exceptionally-motivated well-supplied-of-arms-and-tunnel-paraphernalia terrorist-neighbour problem whose stated intent is, effectively, to finish ‘The Final Solution.’
Two other observations:
- To the extent Authoritarians are respected, it’s mostly their ‘strength’ – i.e. decisiveness
- Our foolishness’ reckoning is exponentially approaching – an eyewitness’ account of a bushfire is relevant, ‘They say when it comes, you don’t have time to act but, it ripped across the close-shaven lawn so quick, I didn’t have time to think’ – Israel (no matter its recent tactical successes) and Taiwan may have less time than others but, then again, at ‘culmination,’ perhaps, we’ll all find ourselves in the same boat at the same time.
Regarding Gaza, maximising the probability of the imposed Democratic Model taking hold, it must be maximally attractive to Gazans.
Islamic-Authoritarianism
Regarding Islam’s Authoritarian aspects, first, God is dictator – i.e. in both ‘the current-Western Model’ and Coopetism (or, ‘The Optimised Universal Liberal Democracy Western Model’), citizens are responsible for the constitution; however, in Islam, the constitution comes from Allah via the interpretation of the Koran, Hadith and Sunnah.
Specifically, there is the combination of:
- Invasive rules
- ‘Lesser jihad’ enforcement.
Islam’s rules are many as reflected by Sharia Law’s entirety and, just to take 3, include:
- Prohibiting renouncement of Islam (i.e. apostasy), which is a direct violation of Universal Liberal Democracy’s ‘freedom of association’ and ‘freedom of worship’
- Prohibiting gay sex
- Restrictions on women’s rights.
Regarding they’re ‘lesser jihad’ enforcement, despite its ‘No harm must be done’ clause, the rules are often stringent and emphatic, if not ruthless.
Regarding Hamas, incorporated within its particularly Authoritarian interpretation of Islam is also a quasi-‘China-like’ nationalist territorial expansionism.
Hamas’ Islamic-Chauvinism: A Territorial-Expansionist Version of Islamic-Authoritarianism
The Hamas (and Islamic Jihad etc.) argument is something like:
‘Because Palestine was previously mostly Muslim, it must become Palestinian-Muslim.’
The entire Greater Middle East (and Islamic World) stares at Israel and goes, ‘What the freak?’
In the Greater Middle East (and the world), Israel is a freak – i.e. of resilience, self-reliance, self-generated-dynamism, vitality, vibrance, innovativeness [Isrovative?], prosperity and Democracy.
In the Greater Middle East, the only ones who vaguely compare are Christian-majority EU-member Cyprus and some, benefiting from ridiculous ground-wealth, who import prosperity but not Democracy.
In the case of Hamas, it suffers Islamic-chauvinism and chauvinism is also Authoritarian.
Accordingly, as well as a bit of childlike and ‘scratch the armpits’-like ‘I want the whole cake’ territorialism, with Israel’s success pricking Hamas’ Islamic-superiority-complex, it feeds the latter’s jealousy, insecurity, embarrassment and infuriation.
Taiwan does this to China, which is why a mind-washed someone living in Beijing, who has never been to Taiwan and would never go, insists they cannot feel complete unless Taiwan ‘returns to being under the governance of the Chinese Communist Party.’
Regarding the 1948 Nakba (the exodus) and ‘the right to return,’ isn’t home where family and friends are?
Apart from 1948 being a long-time ago with few who were directly affected still alive, globally and historically, many groups and individuals get displaced for a variety of reasons without clinging so aggressively to the past – for instance, the exoduses following the Indian sub-continent secessions of India and Pakistan then Pakistan and Bangladesh.
While ‘the right to return’ focus (even if they don’t want to ‘return’ and even if most are not returnees) serves as a nice excuse for justifying extinguishing the Jewish state, as HO Ching points out, Gaza could be glorious – it’s a 40 km stretch of incredible Mediterranean coastline – so, to Gazans who really want to live in Israel, instead of trying to murder people, why not develop what you’ve got, become a nation, get a passport and apply to emigrate?
In terms of the Model to be imposed on Gaza, obviously, it cannot be either the current-Western Model or Coopetism but, at most, must be restricted to an Islamised-Coopetism (i.e. Islamised-Liberal Democracy) in which the Coopetism aspects are maximised given the Islamic-Authoritarian reality yet are sufficient to encourage Gazans to resist Hamas’ more extreme anti-Coopetivity/Authoritarianism.
This is possible – after all, Palestinians do find some aspects of the Western Model attractive, which is reflected via sizeable Palestinian communities existing in the West.
Accordingly, why not aim for Gaza to become the most Liberal Democratic Islamic society on earth?
The Optimal Islamised-Coopetism Model
To determine the Optimised Islamised-Coopetism Model, each of Coopetism’s 5 social-infrastructures are compared against what Islam will allow.
Regarding ‘Universal Rule of Personal & Property Coopetivity-Catalysing Law,’ it will be compromised by Sharia Law.
Regarding ‘Universal Liberal Democracy,’ there can be elections; however, the press, free speech, freedom of association will be compromised.
These are facts which, while there’s some room for pressure, overall, must be accepted.
Regarding ‘Universal Education,’ while it will also be compromised, this is an area where there is scope for ensuring girls have equal access, the curriculum is science-based and not victimhood/snobbery/terrorism catalysing.
‘Universal Healthcare,’ though bias may occur, is possible and must be ensured.
This only leaves ‘The Universal Subsistence Income (USI).’
Regarding The USI, it’s entirely possible.
Moreover, over-and-above Universal Healthcare, which only impacts when one is sick or injured, The USI pervasively impacts citizens’ day-to-day lives.
Thus, the one Universal Liberal Democracy-consistent social-infrastructure that’s fully possible in Islam is the one that’s never been attempted.
Yet, its benefits are enormous – for instance, women receive it, which is singularly empowering for them.
The author has heard from women in India, who, involved in a USI pilot program, explained along the lines of: ‘Suddenly I was holding my head high, embarking on a small-business and, even, discussing finances with my husband.’
Moreover (and, though it makes the heart weep), if The USI had been implemented in Afghanistan, the Taliban would have been sidelined such that, not only could they never have returned to power, they would have suffered mass defections and probably become defunct.
Just $40 a month for every adult would have been enough.
Putting aside The USI is self-funding, even the headline ‘cost’ of $8 billion per year – i.e. 16 million (adults) x USD 500 – is miniscule compared to the cost of the failed Coalition-soldiering (USA alone was over a $100 billion per year), not to mention the additional product aid of which The USI is also a substitute.
With The USI in place, the Taliban would have had no hope of returning because, in that warrior culture, every villager, though not necessarily prepared to fight for girls’ education and a security-deficient corrupted-‘democracy,’ would have taken their AK and pointed it at the Taliban’s noses because, they would have understood, if the Taliban retook control, they would lose their individualised monthly USI, which they, their family and village were largely dependent upon.
[While in most Western nations, security is taken for granted, in much of the Greater Middle East, it’s most important yet, in Afghanistan, the Coalition occupation never achieved it.]
Thus, The USI would have bought a whole-of-nation civilian army, which would have protected everything – i.e. Democracy, girls’ education, the communication & banking infrastructure etc.
Also, many Taliban fighters would have wanted The USI (and, in general, the new system’s success) and, to receive it, would have renounced their allegiance and defected.
So, as well as The USI being freedom-facilitating, it would have all but eradicated the big 3 problems in most Afghans’ lives:
- Poverty
- Corruption
- Deficient-security.
Certainly, The USI directly solves poverty and, regarding corruption, it solves it via a 2-way pincer – i.e.:
- Like salary, it’s transparent such that everyone knows whether they are receiving it or not, which means it can’t be surreptitiously siphoned-off
- Recipients are not nearly as susceptible to being corrupted (i.e. they and their family can survive on The USI), which creates a critical mass such that the societal-zeitgeist becomes anti-corruption.
Without poverty and corruption plus decreasing Taliban (and with a monthly individualised USI reminder of what good guys the government & the foreigners are), there would have been security, which would have meant the vacuum that was always pulling the Taliban back to power would have been extinguished thereby sidelining the Taliban into obscurity.
Security, security, security and The USI is the tool for it including because it’s the ultimate indirect underminer of Authoritarianism.
So, how does all this become a plan for Gaza?
‘The Gaza Plan’: The Practical Implementation of The Optimal Islamised-Coopetism Model
Whereas humanitarian-aid convoys suit Hamas’ design, The USI is antithetical to it.
In general, ‘The Gazan Optimised Islamised-Coopetism Plan’ must have the goal of, rather than directly militarily destroying Hamas, which, in any case, appears unfeasible, sidelining Hamas by making its ideas irrelevant to people’s daily lives.
This sidelining method must be defter – i.e. more carrot less stick – such that it avoids:
- ‘Collateral damage’
- Being interpreted as an attack on Islam.
Accordingly, rather than driving civilians into Hamas’ arms, it must not only peel them away but also encourage the Hamas-elite and other members (especially combatants) to defect.
Lastly, it should be humanitarianly/internationally (including Arab governments) acceptable.
Specifically, the plan must start with and be built-on the one Universal Liberal Democratic-consistent social-infrastructure that’s fully possible and whose effects are pervasive – i.e. The USI (plus, it must be remembered that efficiency & non-Authoritarianism requires no UMHoW).
Implicit to ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform,’ the current humanitarian-aid trucks (with non-medical/education product) must stop – i.e. currently there are 600 aid trucks a day entering Gaza so whatever portion is non-medical/educational must be replaced by The USI-propelled-market.
The reasons are 2-fold:
- Money aid (for non-health/education) is more efficient than product
- Security.
Regarding money, which should probably be Israeli shekels, being most efficient, it’s far more efficient than shipping and trucking in product and then having secondary markets (a la the northern-Iraq kerosene distribution) – i.e. money is easier and infinitely less costly to deliver (including electronically) than the current aid deliveries.
Regarding becoming a USI beneficiary, one must:
- Register biometrically, which, on a mass scale, India has expertise in
- Renounce Hamas/violence.
The money is either picked-up in person or is electronically delivered to a bank account (when such facilities are up and running) with verifying mechanisms to minimise fraud.
Regarding getting The USI system operational, let’s say it takes 3 months – i.e. to register civilians’ biometric data, get the means of distributing the money established and have the market import of goods into Gaza occurring – during the process, the non-medical/education humanitarian aid product is commensurately wound down until, after 3 months, it completely stops. [And, if the population is voluntarily tardy in registering then, nevertheless, the aid trucks must still stop.]
So, what are the effects on security?
At the outset, civilians must decide – i.e. do I want to stay with Hamas and have no USI (and no humanitarian aid) or officially renounce Hamas and receive sustenance for myself and my family?
Also, while previously Hamas benefited from smuggling in weapons and other products (usually via Egypt) from Iran and others plus, overwhelmingly, from the corruption of humanitarian aid (including contracts) whether governance-related (including health, education, physical-infrastructure and other services) or theft of electricity, currently, it’s via the aid trucks.
And, Hamas (vis-à-vis civilians) is getting the ‘lion’s share,’ which is also fuelled by the understanding, the more they take, the poorer civilians are kept, which helps fuel the victim narrative of it being all Israel’s fault.
However, while with aid trucks there’s no control over who eventually gets the product, with The USI, this is turned on its head – i.e. The USI is controlled down to the individual.
While for Gazan-civilians, in-hand monthly money is best, in the case of Hamas, they’ll all but be shut-out from receiving it – i.e. Hamas operatives will be reluctant to register for The USI (and, those registered who are known to commit crime will have their payments stopped).
Second, in comparison to confiscating humanitarian aid product, it’s far more difficult to steal Palestinians’ USI and, if they try, it will create resentment, which will act against their Authoritarian intentions – i.e. The USI peels the civilian population away from the corrupt including Hamas.
This wedges Hamas because if they don’t get sustenance from The USI or steal from Palestinians conducting business then they’ll starve.
Accordingly, this changes the entire security paradigm – i.e. The USI’s benefits include:
- Subsistence-Income-Servitude (SIS) eradication (including poverty-eradication), which is foundationally civilising
- Corruption-minimisation as financing earmarked for the USI cannot be diverted to feed the Hamas elite & combatants, build tunnels or purchase weapons
- Looting will plummet because the aid trucks will be no more
- Hamas/violence will be sidelined and starved
- With perception important, Hamas will immediately be seen as beggars/criminals such that their perceived power is undermined
- Even without the war being completely over, it can be implemented and will assist in hastening peace
- As it would have in Afghanistan, The USI will buy a civilian army and will entice many current Hamas to defect.
Given Hamas (like the Taliban), when in power, enforce security and, when not in power, become a security problem (so that they can then become the security solution), it may attack markets, banks, USI-stations and USI-recipients.
In that case, let them draw that battleline then Israel can fight them from the Palestinian civilian-side of that line – i.e. as well as wedging Hamas against Israel, it will also wedge Hamas against Palestinian civilians, Arab governments and the non-Israel-West.
Regarding maximising Israel being seen as the civilian-Gazans’ friend, The USI provides enormous soft-power potential – i.e. the connection between whoever is supplying The USI and the individual recipient will be crystal clear – accordingly, it’s recommended that Israel be and be known to be, until its self-generating, the supplier of that money.
In this way, Israel will be seen as initiating and doing something that’s unequivocally seen by Palestinians as good for them – i.e. even when the Gazan production/supply economy takes hold such that taxes can be used to finance The USI, Gazans will see Israelis as having done them the huge ongoing favour of creating the system.
In sum, The USI creates the conditions for law, order, civility and, therefore, a new state.
The remaining question is, how much should The USI be?
Perhaps, the equivalent of $US 100 a month for adults and $50 for children (paid to their guardian)?
Another way to calculate it is, how much would the non-medical/educational product in the aid trucks cost to purchase in Israel (with a discount for a deregulated labour market) and, with adult/child weightings, divide that by the Gazan population.
Regarding non-USI elements of this plan, first, an arms buyback should be implemented, which, though concurrent with The USI system, must be separate – i.e. no questions asked and no biometric data used.
Regarding the ‘Rule of Gun,’ it’s uncivilised/anti-Coopetive so needs to be taken out of non-policing-hands.
Second, at least in the short-term, the UN must have no role in Gaza – i.e. though Hamas is a corrupt vicious terrorist Authoritarian regime, no organisation has done more to help Hamas (including legitimise it) than the UN.
Accordingly, they have failed both the Palestinians and Israelis: at a minimum, pre-October 2023, the UN failed to resist being manipulated by Hamas including with the education system, the victimhood narrative and the stolen power and, since October 2023, they’ve failed with their words and recalcitrance.
The UN’s bias and the ease with which it has been comprehensively played both on the ground and in New York is one of the most terrifying aspects of this terrorism story.
Third, in the Coopetive spirit, there needs to be compassion for the Palestinians – i.e. they need to overcome a lot including their entire UN-backed Hamas-Authoritarian mind-washed society, the trauma (including from the war) and that their only civilian institutions are Authoritarian.
Fourth, while in Afghanistan, at least in the short-term, the USA could afford to fail because it’s so far away, Israel can’t afford any more strategic failure (tactical successes won’t do) in next-door-neighbour Gaza where Hamas is determined to take its land, homes and lives.
Also, if Israel chooses to ‘Isramaginatively’/‘Isrovatively’ implement this plan then it will be doing itself and the world the greatest favour – i.e. as well as helping Gazans and promoting peace, it will be testing Coopetism’s USI portion in the most testing of environments.
Lastly, perhaps the Red Cross can administer (including keeping the biometric database) both The USI and the gun-buy-back until the conditions emerge for the 2-state solution, at which time, it can be handed over to the Palestinians as a key plank in their new state.
Wrap-Up
The problem in Gaza is an extreme Islamist and territorial-expansionism version of the same problem throughout the rest of the world (including in the current-Western Model) – i.e. Authoritarianism, which is the antithesis of civility/Coopetition.
In the case of Gaza, the solution is the Optimised Islamised-Coopetism Model whose foundation is ‘The USI-4-UMHoW Reform,’ which as well as being self-capitalising, incentivising and SIS-&-unemployment-eradicating also helps universalise security, hope, opportunity and good-neighbourliness.
This Reform is the world’s greatest unused tool against Authoritarianism including because The USI eradicates Subsistence-Income-Servitude (SIS); accordingly, it should be wielded in Gaza against Hamas and for the benefit of Palestinian civilians.
In sum, ‘The Gaza Optimised Islamised-Coopetism Plan’ will, in addition to maximising civility, put Israel in the best light possible for Gazans and thereby maximise the possibility of achieving conditions for a 2-state solution.
How long the window for this plan will stay open is uncertain; however, the opportunity was missed in Afghanistan and, if it’s missed in Gaza then Israel, no matter its recent tactical successes, may be doomed.
Thank you.
Best regards
Paul Ross
The Citizens’ Dividend Organisation (CDO)