Geopolitics of genocide: An interview with Rafeef Ziadah

The genocide in Gaza lays bare the harsh realities of modern geopolitics, highlighting the mechanisms of power in a world shaped by imperial ambitions and the strategic exploitation of resources. Central to this crisis is the alignment of Western power structures with settler colonialism and authoritarianism in the Middle East, in order to sustain economic dominance and geopolitical control.

The unwavering support for Israel from the US and key European powers is deeply entwined with their enduring imperial interests in the region. As a settler colony, Israel serves as a Western foothold in the Middle East. This settler-colonial project is not an isolated phenomenon; it is embedded in a wider architecture of control, working in concert with the oil-rich Gulf monarchies, such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), to uphold a regional and global system that privileges Western economic and military power.

Agreements like the normalisation deals between Israel and several Gulf nations reflect a consolidation of forces that are designed to marginalise Palestinian liberation entirely and aim to secure the status quo of authoritarian rule and resource extraction at the expense of the peoples of the region. While the genocide has thrown this project into question, it is unlikely to be abandoned and will almost certainly resurface in a rebranded form.

We also need to clearly understand the bigger historical trajectory at play, especially the role of the Oslo Accords and hollow promises of a two-state solution.1 The Oslo Accords sought to transform the struggle for Palestinian liberation into a restricted state-building project confined to the West Bank and Gaza, deliberately erasing the broader colonial reality of Israel as a settler state.

Its unwavering support for Israel reveals a great deal about the nature and trajectory of US imperialism. At its core, this relationship is not about ideological alignment or cultural ties but about the strategic importance of Israel as a settler colony in securing and projecting US power.

Israel’s settler-colonial project has made it a uniquely steadfast partner in the region, one whose survival is inextricably tied to continued Western support. Unlike other allies in the Middle East, whose alliances with the US are often transactional or conditional, Israel’s dependency on US backing ensures that it operates as a consistent extension of US interests.

One of the most significant ways in which Israel facilitates US imperial goals is by helping to secure control over the Middle East’s critical trade corridors and energy resources. This is less about ensuring oil flows to the US or Europe, which have diversified their energy sources, and more about controlling access to these resources as a geopolitical weapon. As China emerges as a potential rival to the US, the ability of the US to influence the availability and pricing of Middle Eastern oil becomes a key tool in restricting China’s economic growth and strategic options and to head off other potential challengers to its global supremacy.

The US strategy has also been to encourage a normalisation process between the Gulf states and Israel, which reflects a calculated effort to reassert its primacy in a region where its influence has seen relative decline in recent years. These US-sponsored agreements seek to reinforce Israel’s role as a central pillar of US power in the region and tie the Gulf States more closely to US influence. In essence, normalisation is not just about diplomacy; it’s a strategic move to manage the shifting balance of power in the region.

This strategy has significant costs, however, particularly as Israel’s increasingly genocidal actions provoke regional instability and further erode US standing in international public opinion. It risks undermining the broader system of alliances on which the US relies. While the Gulf States like the UAE have normalised ties with Israel, the region’s populations remain deeply opposed to Israeli actions, creating a tension that could destabilise various regimes and, by extension, the US regional strategy.

The genocide in Gaza has sparked an unprecedented wave of global solidarity, with millions taking to the streets, university campus encampments, and activists blocking ports and arms factories. This surge of protest challenges not only Israel’s actions but also the global systems that enable them. However, while this brought visibility to the Palestinian cause, the way Palestine is often framed can obscure the true nature of the struggle. Too often, discussions are limited to Israel’s immediate human rights abuses — killings, arrests, and land theft — without addressing the underlying systems of power that make these abuses possible. Framing the issue through a human rights lens alone depoliticises the Palestinian struggle, reducing it to isolated violations rather than a systematic campaign of settler colonialism backed by Western imperialism.

In essence, this genocide has been sponsored by the US and the European Union (EU), particularly by some EU member states, giving Israel the green light at every turn to continue its attacks and starvation policies, while diplomatically shielding it and arming its military. Discussions about Israeli politics often focus narrowly on the actions of individual prime ministers, particularly Benjamin Netanyahu, as if they alone shape the state’s trajectory. While these figures are significant, we need to pan back to grasp the deeper, long-term dynamics that underpin Israel’s policies. This requires analysing the structural and historical forces driving its settler-colonial project and its broader role in maintaining Western hegemony.

Compounding this problem is the persistent narrative that attributes Western support for Israel solely to the influence of a ‘pro-Israel lobby’. This is a dangerously simplistic view that misunderstands the deeper geopolitical relationship. The unwavering alliance between the West and Israel is not merely a matter of lobbying or influence; it is a strategic partnership rooted in shared imperial goals.

Understanding the broader geopolitical map is essential for building effective alliances and crafting a strategy that goes beyond reactive solidarity. It enables us to identify and confront the systems and actors that sustain Israel’s settler-colonial project while avoiding the trap of viewing authoritarian regimes in the region as allies in the struggle for Palestinian liberation. These regimes have their own interests, often rooted in preserving power or securing economic and military benefits, and aligning with them uncritically can undermine the broader goals of justice and liberation.

Also, such an analysis allows us to target the corporations and industries that profit from and sustain Israel’s colonial violence. Arms manufacturers, IT companies, and multinational corporations (MNCs) play a critical role in enabling Israel’s settler-colonial project, and exposing their complicity is key to disrupting the networks of profit that underpin oppression. By identifying these actors and their connections, we can better strategise and direct interventions that strike at the economic foundations of settler-colonial domination.

Finally, a deeper understanding of the broader picture equips movements for the long haul. It ensures we remain focused and strategic, especially when confronted with initiatives like statehood discussions or diplomatic agreements that leave the situation on the ground unchanged. By maintaining clarity on the realities of occupation and dispossession, we can resist being swayed by superficial progress or symbolic gestures. Instead, we continue to expose the ongoing settler-colonial violence and work towards a genuinely anti-colonial future.

It's too early to predict exactly what will happen in Syria, as there are many players involved, each with their own interests and agendas. We need to stay alert to the political economy of the situation, including proposed pipelines, transport routes, and reconstruction efforts. In the region, ‘reconstruction’ has often served as a cover for corporate control, deepened divisions, and the consolidation of power by external actors.

For now, Israel appears focused on controlling the situation — it has invaded more territory, targeted the Syrian army, and seems to prefer a federated Syria where it can exert influence. This approach aligns with its broader goals as a settler-colonial state seeking to expand territory and shape future trajectories in its favour. However, Israel's plans will depend heavily on the actions and interests of other key players.

The Assad regime carries responsibility for leaving the Syrian state in disarray. Weak and propped up by external forces, with no genuine internal support, the regime’s reliance on Russia and Iran to maintain Assad’s grip on power has left the situation ripe for fragmentation. This fragility has created fertile ground for competing actors to pursue their interests in Syria, both regional powers and global player. As well as Israel, Turkey, for example, is deeply invested in expanding its control while simultaneously suppressing Kurdish movements.

As always in these geopolitical constellations, the regimes and external actors involved are not concerned with freedom or democracy for ordinary Syrians. Rather, they pursue their own strategic and economic gains. Ultimately, it will be up to the Syrian people to determine their own fate, though this will be an incredibly difficult task given the current configuration of local actors and their backers.

The European Union’s complicity in the genocide in Palestine reflects not so much subordination to the US as a convergence of interests. While the EU often projects an image of adhering to a different framework — claiming to prioritise international law, human rights and multilateralism – it ultimately benefits from and aligns with the broader imperial project that underpins Western dominance in the Middle East. The EU’s policies and relationships with Israel, including free trade agreements (FTAs), military contracts, and strategic partnerships, demonstrate that its interests are deeply entangled with maintaining the status quo.

The EU plays a strategic role in presenting itself as less overtly aggressive than the US. Even within this framework, it has failed to take meaningful steps to pressure Israel, such as suspending trade privileges or military cooperation, revealing its lack of commitment to genuine accountability.

Free trade agreements between the EU and Israel, such as the EU-Israel Association Agreement, facilitate economic cooperation and provide Israel with critical access to European markets. These agreements persist despite Israel’s clear violations. Military contracts and partnerships further cement this relationship, as some EU member states engage in arms sales and technology exchanges that directly support Israel’s military-industrial complex. These activities highlight the EU’s material stake in the systems that sustain Israeli aggression.

Within Europe, there is a division between countries like Germany and the UK, which provide overt support for Israel, and others such as Belgium, Ireland and Spain, which advocate for a more critical stance, often framed within the two-state solution. However, even the latter group operates within narrow constraints, focusing on softer criticism while avoiding actions that could fundamentally challenge the EU’s ties with Israel.

The EU’s alignment with the US and Israel also serves its own strategic interests in the Middle East. By supporting Israel, the EU helps to maintain a regional order that secures trade routes, stabilises energy supplies and suppresses anti-imperialist movements. Like the US, the EU has an interest in containing rival powers, particularly in the context of global competition with Russia and China. Israel’s role as a regional enforcer complements these objectives, making it a valuable ally for European states.

In essence, the EU’s approach to Palestine is not an alternative to US policy but rather a complementary one. Its dual role of alignment and differentiation allows the EU to maintain its economic and strategic benefits from the relationship while projecting an image of neutrality or moderation.

China’s response to the genocide in Gaza has been notably restrained, characterised by calls for ceasefires and humanitarian assistance but lacking in robust action. While it has voiced support for Palestinian self-determination at the United Nations, it has not taken a leading role in directly opposing Israel or providing substantial material support to the Palestinian cause. This restrained approach reflects China’s broader foreign policy, which prioritises non-intervention and maintaining relationships with a range of actors, including Israel, for economic and strategic reasons.

China’s actions reveal its prioritisation of economic interests over ideological alignment with anti-imperialist movements. While it positions itself as an alternative to US hegemony, its approach often mirrors the pragmatic calculus of traditional powers. Its growing interdependencies with Gulf monarchies and broader East Asia-Middle East trade corridors suggest a focus on economic integration rather than a direct challenge to US influence in the region. This leaves China appearing to be non-committal in moments of acute crisis.

South Africa’s decision to bring Israel before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) resonates deeply, particularly given its own history of apartheid and its solidarity with the Palestinian struggle. For Israel to be officially accused of genocide at an international level is a powerful step, highlighting the gravity of its actions and strengthening the narrative against its settler-colonial project.

However, the limitations and contradictions of international law must be recognised. Legal proceedings like those at the ICJ are protracted, often taking years, with a high bar for proving crimes such as genocide. Even when rulings favour justice, enforcement depends on the political will of powerful states and institutions. States like the US and its allies, which shield Israel diplomatically and militarily, can undermine or outright ignore ICJ rulings, making the law a tool of selective justice rather than universal accountability.

This move must also be understood within the broader context of South Africa’s internal political dynamics. While the African National Congress (ANC) historically positioned itself as a champion of anti-imperialism and solidarity with Palestine, its current trajectory is fraught with contradictions. The ANC faces internal challenges, including governance failures and the promotion of neoliberal economic policies, as well as a growing disconnect with grassroots movements.

At the same time, we must remain attentive to the voices of South Africa’s vibrant social movements, which have long demanded the country sever ties with Israel. These movements have led the call for concrete actions, such as ending diplomatic relations and enforcing boycotts, divestments, and sanctions (BDS). While the ICJ case is symbolically powerful, it is grassroots pressure that ensures such symbolic gestures translate into meaningful change.

Unfortunately, numerous corporations across a wide range of sectors profit from and sustain Israel’s actions, from consumer goods producers to IT firms providing surveillance infrastructure. While arms and energy companies play particularly critical roles in enabling the genocide and have rightly been a focus for Palestinian trade unions and organisers, it is most effective when individuals and groups challenge complicity within their own sectors. This broad-based approach ensures the movement targets the full scope of corporate involvement, strengthening the campaign for accountability and justice.

On 16 October 2023, Palestinian trade unions and professional associations issued a powerful call to international unions, urging them to ‘Stop Arming Israel’. This appeal highlighted the vast scale of military and diplomatic support provided to Israel, particularly by the US and the EU. The figures are staggering. Under the current US agreement, which runs from 2019 to 2028, $3.8 billion in military aid is provided to Israel annually. In response to Israel’s latest assault on Gaza, the US approved an additional $14.5 billion in military aid as part of a $106 billion national security package.

European member states also play a significant role. Germany, for instance, finalised 218 export licences for arms to Israel in 2023, with 85% issued after 7 October 2023. Meanwhile, arms manufacturers have seen immense profits. The stock value of the top five US weapons companies — Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon – has soared by $24.7 billion since the assault began. These figures underscore the arms industry’s direct complicity in genocide and highlight the potential for organised labour and grassroots campaigns to disrupt these supply chains and halt the arms trade.

The global fossil fuel industry also plays a crucial role in sustaining Israel’s genocidal campaign. Energy, in the form of coal, crude oil, jet fuel, and gas, powers the military machinery used in the assault on Palestinians. Given that Israel also functions as a critical node in regional energy networks, targeting the transport of energy supplies aligns the struggles for Palestinian liberation and climate justice, exposing how fossil capitalism fuels both genocide and broader systems of exploitation.

For example, a critical development in Israel’s gas strategy has been the energy agreements with the United Arab Emirates (UAE), formalised following the Abraham Accords in 2020.2 These gas deals reflect the deepening of economic ties between Israel and Gulf states, with significant geopolitical implications In 2021, the UAE’s Mubadala Petroleum acquired a $1 billion stake in Israel’s Tamar gas field, signalling the UAE’s strategic interest in Israel’s natural gas reserves. These deals enable Israel to position itself as a regional energy hub, projecting power across the region while deepening its alliances with Western-backed Gulf states. At the same time, the extraction and export of gas – often from Palestinian waters – reinforce Israel’s colonial domination and resource theft, exacerbating Palestinian dispossession. Similar normalisation deals over gas have been signed with Jordan and Egypt. These partnerships strengthen Israel’s regional influence, as gas exports flow through pipelines and maritime routes that are heavily securitised and militarised.

Disrupting these industries — whether through blocking weapons shipments, targeting fossil fuel flows, or challenging the financial backers of militarisation — provides a tangible path to undermining and dismantling the infrastructure of settler-colonialism and genocide.

Tracing these arms shipments and energy flows, however, is a deeply challenging task. These supply chains are intentionally opaque, and corporations often rely on complex, hidden networks to avoid accountability. It also comes with tension. There is an urgent need for swift action to halt the ongoing genocide, but meaningful and strategic interventions often require extensive research, organising and coalition-building.

International solidarity for Palestine has reached an extraordinary level of support in recent months, with mass protests erupting across cities worldwide, demonstrating a growing global recognition of the urgency of the Palestinian struggle for justice, liberation and return. Yet, while these demonstrations have been powerful, the challenge now is to channel this widespread outrage and solidarity into organised, sustained action that can create real, lasting change for Palestine. To do so, we must move beyond the surge of mass rallies (which are important in their own right) and focus on building infrastructure for long-term, strategic organising. One way to deepen this movement is by focusing on labour solidarity, particularly through organising in workplaces to ensure that every space ends all forms of complicity with Israel.

In recent calls from Palestinian unions, workers have been urged to stop arming Israel by refusing to handle goods and military equipment bound for the Israeli regime. This demand represents a key turning point in the solidarity movement, where the fight for Palestinian liberation is being linked directly to the power of labour to disrupt systems of oppression. International unions have already started to take action, from dock workers in Barcelona and Italy blocking shipments to arms factories in Canada and the UK being shut down. These actions show that when workers take a stand, they can meaningfully challenge the industries fuelling Israel’s settler-colonial project.

This worker-led approach also brings with it the potential to revitalise trade unions themselves, shifting their focus away from merely symbolic actions. For example, while motions passed in trade unions supporting Palestine are important, they seldom come with actionable demands. To truly build power, these motions must evolve into rank-and-file organising, education and outreach that can lead to workers blocking shipments, disrupting production lines, or engaging in broader boycotts of companies complicit in the Israeli genocide. It requires a shift from symbolic gestures to taking concrete steps to halt the systems supporting Israel’s violence.

Building workers’ power requires a deep, strategic approach, one that focuses on long-term education and solidarity. Palestinian unions have emphasised the importance of engaging rank-and-file workers in political education, helping them understand the connection between their labour and the systems of oppression that perpetuate the violence in Gaza. Many trade unionists are new to the Palestinian struggle, and not every activist is well-versed in the history of Israeli settler-colonialism. Therefore, it’s crucial to create spaces for education, and solidarity-building that focus on the here and now, but also on how to build sustainable, worker-led movements that can continue to push for justice beyond the immediate moment.

The history of labour internationalism offers a valuable framework here. Just as workers around the world played a decisive role in the struggle against apartheid in South Africa or in supporting liberation movements in Chile and Ethiopia, the global trade union movement has an opportunity to build a similar legacy of solidarity with Palestine. Workers have always been at the forefront of challenging imperialism, and it’s clear that they can play a transformative role in this struggle. The history of successful worker-led struggles teaches us that building lasting solidarity takes time, but it also has the potential to fundamentally shift the balance of power, not just to end Israel’s military occupation but also the broader systems of oppression that sustain it.