This interdisciplinary workshop will be dedicated to a critical examination of the role of law in the context of governance in the Gaza strip. When it comes to Gaza, international law has failed to fulfill its stated purposes of peace and security, as the escalation of human suffering in Gaza continues to rise and intervention stops at humanitarian aid. Yet all parties involved constantly return to the international legal vocabulary. What, if anything, can this iterative paradox teach us not only about Gaza, but about transnational governance more generally? How does Gaza shift our ideas about sovereignty, occupation and international intervention?

In 2005, the Israeli military exited the Gaza Strip, and the Israeli government declared its occupation over.  Soon afterwards, Israel imposed a military blockade on Gaza, in effect since 2005. Rounds of attacks of Israel’s military on Gaza, in retribution for rocket launchings on southern Israel, have killed hundreds of civilians and created ongoing devastation. Under these conditions, scholars, Israeli civil society organizations, and international legal bodies advanced the argument that Gaza is still occupied, even if there are no “boots on the ground”.

Meanwhile, and despite Israel’s continued military occupation in the West Bank, more and more governments have recognized the State of Palestine, governed from Ramallah. International law regards Gaza as part of the same territory, but the Palestinian Authority has no capacity to govern in Gaza. The Hamas, on the other hand, does exercise governmental functions in Gaza, but does not enjoy international recognition.

What is the international legal framework that applies to Gaza? Is the occupation paradigm still appropriate? Should the Hamas government in Gaza be recognized as the sovereign? Or is there some third, sui generis framework that ascribes international responsibility in a different way?

This workshop aims to examine these questions in light of the fast approaching two-decade mark of the Gaza blockade. Rather than engaging only in doctrinal and normative debate about the appropriate legal framework, it aims to engage in a dual exercise: on the one hand, to critically examine the role of international law in entrenching the extreme suffering of Gaza’s population; On the other hand, assuming the legal-political condition of Gaza must be regarded as normalized, how does that reflect on the current state of transnational governance? We believe that such scholarly attention on Gaza is urgent and still insufficient. And the situation of Gaza continues to present some of the most challenging political-legal conundrums of our time.

We seek interdisciplinary proposals that situate the debate on the legal status of Gaza within social and historical contexts, inviting a variety of theoretical and empirical perspectives from political theory and legal history to sociology, anthropology, geography and political economy. Where does the Gaza model come from? How does Gaza influence world politics and political standards?  And where in the world may it reappear? Finally, what if any can be the role of lawyers and academics in offering legal or political vocabularies with the aim to end the blockade and promote rights for the people of Gaza.  

Abstracts of 500 words maximum should be sent to Itamar Mann and Yael Berda via minervaextreme@univ.haifa.ac.il by 1.10.22. Think pieces of about 2,000 – 3,000 words that will be the basis for our discussion are due 15.11.22. The Workshop will take place in hybrid form at the University of Haifa, Minerva Center for the Rule of Law under Extreme Conditions, Faculty of Law, on 12-13.12.22. Draft papers will form the basis for a journal special issue.