From Hebron to Gaza and Southern Lebanon: Demolition as State Policy

According to Al Jazeera, which publishes a long-form piece on the subject, Israel is demolishing homes from Hebron to Gaza, and as far as southern Lebanon. The Qatari broadcaster argues that these demolitions are wiping out, along with the walls, families' hope of returning home. The summary of the dispatch is thin: we have no figures, no neighbourhood names, no precise testimonies. We will not invent them. What follows is our reading, not an established fact.

Let us start with what the summary does document: three territories, one method. A demolished home is not one more instance of collateral damage. It is one wall fewer between a family and permanent exile. When there is nothing left to return to, the "return" becomes a diplomatic formula.

Cui bono? The question deserves to be asked plainly. First of all of the state apparatus, which turns demolition into an instrument for controlling the ground. Let us recall what a state is, in Lenin's sense: a public force set above society, in the service of the ruling class. Here, it is not a matter of detailing Israeli class interests, for want of material in the dispatch. But one can observe the logic: whoever holds the bulldozers, the army and the legal framework decides what is "habitable" and what no longer is.

Next, the imperialist grid. The Middle East is a space of rivalry between powers, of routes, energy and arms contracts. For Lenin, military alliances and arms deliveries are the political shell of economic competition. We have no information in this dispatch about arms suppliers or reconstruction projects. That is precisely what will need watching: who supplies the equipment, who will finance tomorrow's reconstruction, and on what terms. For destruction has a logical sequel: reconstruction, a lucrative market for whoever knows how to position themselves. This is not an accusation; it is a question the dispatch does not allow us to settle.

Diplomatic vocabulary, for its part, does its job. We speak of "security", of "buffer zones", of "stabilisation". Clean words for rubble. Western governments, so quick to invoke the "rules-based order", often discover that these rules apply with elasticity depending on which ally is concerned. Here again, we quote no specific statement: the dispatch provides none.

What remains essential is human before it is theoretical. Families have lost their roofs, sometimes their history, and with it the material proof of their presence. In a colonial dispossession, the house is a living title deed. To raze it is to erase the file.

What we do not yet know: the exact scale, the official justifications offered, any possible legal recourse. What we do know about the structure: a strong state, weapons in circulation, allies who speak of law. The sequel will tell whether law is anything more than a backdrop.