COVID-19 in Palestine: Nationalism and Sovereignty.

• Author: Aljamal, Yousef M.

Introduction

COVID-19 demonstrated the fragility of the health system in developed countries and created severe challenges for the developing world, with the World Health Organization (WHO) proclaiming it a global pandemic on March 11, 2020. (1) The world is still dealing with its social, economic, and political implications. These implications have been particularly significant for Palestinians who found themselves without national unity and with limited sovereignty over resources and borders during the global pandemic.

The article investigates the early responses to COVID-19 in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPTs) between March and October 2020, which saw the peak of the pandemic in Palestine, by highlighting the concepts of nationalism and sovereignty, and how they have shaped the Palestinian response to the crisis, imposing limitations on and providing opportunities for Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. We argue that the lack of Palestinian sovereignty over borders and resources and their dependence on Israel exacerbated the spread of COVID-19.

The paper unfolds as follows: first, the theoretical framework is explained and then the findings of the empirical research are presented. Nationalism and sovereignty are investigated as factors impacting the spread of COVID-19 in the OPTs to shed light on how it was dealt with in both the West Bank and Gaza, showing the exceptional conditions for Palestinians that impacted their ability to respond to the pandemic.

Theoretical Framework

To understand the unique situation of Palestine, we draw upon the theoretical constructs of nationalism and sovereignty. These broader theoretical concepts give insight into the particulars of Palestine and the OPTs.

Arab Nationalism

As European colonialism continued worldwide, so did nationalist struggles for independence. Though Western nationalism understood itself as a 'gift' and form of modernity, it continued to pursue forms of domination. (2) Nationalism in the global South threatened the goals of the West because it specifically rejected colonial control and struggled against it, as was seen when some Middle Eastern leaders pursued a united Arab front based on the concept of regional nationalism. This regional unification goal, however, was undermined by secretive and broken British and French agreements and communications. (3)

With the breakdown of the Ottoman Empire came struggles for independence and against Western rule throughout the Arab world, the impact of the British and French colonial mandate, and British support of a Jewish state in Palestine. Disagreements between leadership and fragmentation in the Arab world in struggles for political and personal power meant that the notion of one collective Arab national movement was shattered, including the hopes and failures of Arab unity and regional nationalism as a response to colonization. Arab nationalism was reshaped toward separate independent movements for statehood and freedom and necessitated different struggles throughout the region. (4)

Palestinian Self-determination

The shifting dynamics in the Middle East could be seen in the effects on Palestine and Palestinian Arabs in the British support for a Jewish state in Palestine, the Zionist movement's momentum, in Palestinian resistance. Palestinian nationalism was born out of these conditions and as a rejection of dispossession and erasure. Palestinian self-determination comes from shared struggles and history under Ottoman, British, Jordanian, Egyptian, and Israeli rule/occupation while centering the critical relationship to land, identity, freedom, and independence.

Sovereignty

Sovereignty is described historically as containing three main elements: authority, supremacy (or supreme authority,) and territoriality. (5) State sovereignty implies control over territories and borders, laws and regulations, social and political institutions, and the decision-making in implementing control over a nation/people/group. Understanding sovereignty also depends on whether one sees it positioned through existence, power, or legality, what frameworks are being used to define it, and by whom.

Sovereignty, for example, in relation to indigenous people whose lands have been stolen and confiscated, is excluded in discussions of a nation-state sovereignty framework. European colonizers forcibly took control of land, dispossessing indigenous people while carrying out genocide on native peoples. Colonizers sometimes 'negotiated' agreements for autonomy while enforcing brutality and containment of the indigenous people that survived, creating laws justifying colonial sovereignty. Whereas the sovereignty for indigenous people was imposed through the creation of laws, this undermined the existing sovereignty of indigenous connections with their lands, territories, and cultures. Sovereignty is not determined by a political economy related to land ownership or supreme authority by the state but rather by acknowledging the presence of indigenous people and practices pertaining to territorial understanding and historical and contextual relationships to location, place, and culture. (6) McNeil states that one can:

Attribute sovereignty to any society that functions as an independent political entity, regardless of the way it governs itself or the manner in which it enforces compliance with societal norms. (7) Palestinian Limited Sovereignty under Israel's Supreme Authority

Palestine is stuck in limbo between de jure and de facto sovereignty. This can be seen in how Israeli control produces Palestinian fragmentation by separating Gaza, the West Bank, and Jerusalem, enforcing different ID statuses for Palestinian citizens and residents in different regions in Israel or the OPTs, and how clans and extended families, who have lived in Palestine continuously for hundreds of years, are misunderstood. (8) Israel 'negotiates' autonomy as a policy of containment, cutting off Palestinian territories from each other, using a permit regime to control movement and natural growth, and constructing highways and settlements to entrench Israeli expansion further. Palestinians in the OPTs have a relationship with their lands and the UN's status as a non-voting member state. However, their territory has been under constant threat of annexation during five decades of Israeli military occupation and (in Gaza) 15 years of siege, while the international world does not intervene. Israeli laws become the supreme authority while Palestinians, who had been living on this land, are warehoused and displaced. Without international support and recognition and an end to Israeli control, the authority of the Israeli regime limits any absolute Palestinian independence or sovereignty over their lives.

In light of these theoretical concepts and their specificities related to Palestine, the outbreak and spread of COVID-19 in the OPTs cannot be seen in isolation from Palestinian nationalism and how sovereignty is manifested there.

Nationalism, Political Legitimacy, and COVID-19 in Palestine

Palestinian nationalism and political legitimacy impacted the PA and Palestinians' response to the spread of COVID-19, highlighting how nationalism and political legitimacy in Palestine between Palestinians and in relation to Israel formulated their policy response. With limited sovereignty, Palestinian nationalism fluctuates as it is affected by the Israeli occupation and its internal struggles for political legitimacy across Palestinian parties and factions.

The first confirmed case of COVID-19 in the OPTs appeared in Bethlehem on March 5, 2020. Immediately, the PA declared a state of emergency within PA-controlled areas, imposing a closure of Bethlehem and, subsequently, the entire West Bank, banning public gatherings, shutting schools, and asking people to stay home. (9) Palestinians generally abided by these instructions, indicating that concern for the Palestinian collective health was welcomed as a unifying factor consistent with Palestinian nationalism, except for celebrations when Palestinian prisoners were released from Israeli jails. These measures sent a message of relief among Palestinians that their national authority was dealing seriously with the pandemic, although the implications of this declaration were not entirely clear. (10)

Hamas issued a statement on COVID-19, which called on the PA to dedicate resources and medical teams to protect Palestinians, described as "a national duty" and responsibility that all concerned bodies should carry out. (11) In an unusual move, during the state of emergency, the Hamas-run Ministry of Health in Gaza sent a medical delegation to the West Bank to help combat the spreading pandemic. (12) The politics of Palestinian division prevailed, with Hamas Ministry of Health officials in Gaza holding press briefings independently but in line with the PA. After the PA declared a state of emergency, Hamas said it would not apply this to the coastal enclave, prompting the Palestinian People's Party to form a unified committee to...