«For two years, Gaza has been a place of mass death, starvation, disappearances, attempted erasure, genocide. Now, almost without warning, it is being transformed, rhetorically, into a management problem.
...
European reservations largely focus on the board’s governance structure, compatibility with EU law, and the apparent attempt to usurp the role of the UN. These concerns matter, but they are not at the heart of Gaza’s predicament, which is that its future is being plotted without the consent of its inhabitants. When it comes to Gaza’s future being treated as a development project, managed by outsiders with dubious or outright hostile intentions, European countries and institutions are apparently unconcerned.
...
When the world shifts so quickly into talk of redevelopment, it is not merely changing the subject. It is demonstrating that the cost of Palestinian suffering is politically absorbable. This is why the Board of Peace is not just controversial. It is structurally violent. It is a mechanism that takes catastrophe as given and begins planning around it instead of demanding justice for it. It treats a crime as a starting point for investment.
»
