Gaza's reconstruction must be holistic, addressing infrastructure and essential services while prioritising economic rebuilding, currency stabilisation, and renewing public services for long-term peace.
The Israel-Hamas war in Gaza has resulted in damage equivalent to 97 percent of the combined GDP of the occupied West Bank and Gaza in 2022. This is well-depicted in the rising civilian death toll of 30,000, with nearly 80,000 homes razed, more than 80 percent of Gaza's schools damaged, including one in every 12 universities severely destroyed and around 200 sites of cultural and religious repute desecrated. The recent estimate by the UNDP states that post-war reconstruction in Gaza will cost around US$50 billion and might take as long as 80 years before Gaza is fully rebuilt. After the war between Israel and Hamas comes to an end, the big question that would be looming over the future of Gaza and can delay the transition to peace and reconciliation is that of post-war reconstruction.
The recent estimate by the UNDP states that post-war reconstruction in Gaza will cost around US $50 Billion and might take as long as 80 years before Gaza is fully rebuilt.
Within the context of World War II, the Lebanese Civil War, and the Civil War in Syria, among others, history has constantly depicted that post-war reconstruction not only costs billions of dollars but also takes several decades to fully rebuild and restore cities razed during armed conflicts. There is a recognition that deliberate destruction of civilian infrastructure and disruption of essential services causes insecurity that often goes beyond the harm incurred by physical death. This is well depicted by the United Nations Security Council in its promulgation of Resolution 2573 (2021), adopted unanimously to condemn the deliberate destruction of civilian infrastructure in armed conflicts. However, post-war reconstruction can also open a Pandora's box for further conflict and contest over what to reconstruct, when and where, and what to leave behind which might exacerbate insecurity.
Allied bombing raids on Dresden, during World War II, almost levelled the once thriving and vibrant German city. While Germany was one of the most controversial Axis Powers during the war, the allied campaign against German cities also became a symbol of ‘terror bombing’. ‘Urbicide’ or deliberate destruction of the built environment during the war became disturbingly commonplace, underpinning the allied action. Albeit indicative, after the war, the biggest question was how to rebuild Dresden and other cities destroyed during World War II.
Dresden underwent two phases of reconstruction: initially post-war and again in the early 1990s. The reconstruction of Dresden opened avenues for new conflicts over historic-modernist, socialism-capitalism and East-West dichotomies. Some of the major urban heritage sites destroyed during the bombings such as the Dresden Opera House—a cultural hub for both elites and commoners—and Frauenkirche—the main church of Dresden—took several decades before the efforts to reconstruct these symbolic sites could be materialised fully. The reconstruction of Dresden, marred by ideological differences, is still ongoing.
There are crucial lessons to be learned from the reconstruction of Beirut, a city reduced to rubble, following the end of the Lebanese Civil War in the 1990s. The reconstruction strategy of Lebanon was focused on downtown Beirut. ‘Beirut Central District (BCD) Reconstruction,’ as the project was colloquially known, was undertaken by a real estate company called Solidère. The project involved razing many of Beirut’s damaged buildings, upgrading infrastructure and building new spaces aimed at neo-liberal economic development.
However, the project resulted in the displacement of the original property and landowners, through expropriation, including the war-displaced Shia community living in ‘illegal’ settlements. The owners who were forced to transfer their property rights to Solidère in return for shares in the real estate company, later mobilised and protested the scheme as a form of grievance and justice-seeking. Furthermore, non-state actors such as the Iranian-backed fundamentalist group, Hezbollah, also became active in showing resistance. The BCD reconstruction produced a new socio-economic and political order fueling newer conflicts among civilians, former militia leaders and political-economic elites. Sustained via the extraction of social wealth, these conflicts rested on who would benefit from the reconstruction, when and where within the post-war Beirut.
The Syrian case is a poignant example of how reconstruction in (post)conflict settings could not only face prolonged delays underpinned by the lack of political will and underlying geopolitical motives of the state actors but also prolong the war. An ongoing civil war wherein the Assad regime has already been declared triumphed, reconciliation appears to be a far cry. Research published by SWP Berlin in 2020 clearly shows how rebuilding in Syria would require international efforts beyond the rebuilding of infrastructure and housing to “restart its economy, stabilise its currency and renew its public services, in particular education, health, electricity and water.”
The Syrian case is a poignant example of how reconstruction in (post)conflict settings could not only face prolonged delays underpinned by the lack of political will and underlying geopolitical motives of the state actors but also prolong the war.
Due to Western sanctions on the current regime, it is highly unlikely that such intentional efforts will be mobilised anytime soon. While the international community has largely neglected the comprehensive reconstruction of Syrian cities ravaged by the civil war, British-Syrian architect Ammar Azzouz highlights how the same international community has been steadfast in rebuilding celebrated cultural heritage sites, such as the Aleppo Souks and Palmyra, which were destroyed by ISIS. Azzouz criticises these efforts as a form of whitewashing that fails to address the broader needs of actual rebuilding of the lives and homes of Syrian communities. Further, diverse actors have been implementing a variety of reconstruction projects in Syria, mainly at the local level wherein the major beneficiaries are not the Syrian people, and which serve the interests and priorities to prolong the continuation of the civil war.
Regarding the ongoing destruction in Gaza, the UN has labelled the destruction levels the most severe the world has seen since the Second World War. One can only imagine the mobilisation of resources as well as the political will and international funding it would take to rebuild Gaza after the war. According to a UN assessment, amid the ongoing Israel-Hamas War, around 1.74 million people have fallen into poverty across the State of Palestine. Further, acknowledging the fate of the historic cities that have been razed during conflicts, denotes that Gaza might take 80 years to restore its destroyed housing units. Another report by the UN, employing satellite imagery to assess the damage done to schools in Gaza, notes that over 70 percent of schools will require major or full reconstruction.
For Gaza, to avoid the debacles witnessed during the post-war reconstruction of historic cities, the international community must facilitate a reconstruction strategy that respects diverse perspectives. Engaging local communities and stakeholders in the decision-making process can help ensure that reconstruction efforts are inclusive and considerate of Gaza’s unique historical and cultural heritage. Avoiding the imposition of external ideologies and promoting local ownership can mitigate potential conflicts. Moving forward, the reconstruction of Gaza will have to prioritize transparency and equity. Mechanisms should be put in place to prevent political corruption and ensure that reconstruction benefits all communities, particularly the most affected and marginalized. Engaging civil society organizations and ensuring robust oversight can help maintain accountability and fairness in the reconstruction process.
For Gaza, to avoid the debacles witnessed during the post-war reconstruction of historic cities, the international community must facilitate a reconstruction strategy that respects diverse perspectives.
The reconstruction of Gaza will have to be holistic such that it addresses not only physical infrastructure but also essential services such as healthcare, education, water, and electricity. International efforts focused on rebuilding the economy, stabilising the currency, and renewing public services will have to be prioritised to foster long-term stability and peace. With the loss of home, life and livelihood as well as critical and civilian infrastructure, and institutional capacities severely marred, post-war reconstruction of Gaza would be largely dependent on international funding. However, the international community will have to work collaboratively, in partnership with the local community, setting aside their own geopolitical motives, to ensure a sustainable and inclusive reconstruction process.
Deliberate destruction—or what scholars have labelled as “domicide”—of strategic cities during armed conflict is not new or uncommon. However, with the advent of urbanisation and subsequent blurring of civilian and non-civilian boundaries, wars are increasingly waged in cities destroying their social, physical, economic, and cultural infrastructure and razing to the ground the once vibrant neighbourhoods. While the destruction of the built environment can very well cause insecurity, reconstruction in (post)war settings does not always build peace and security.
While the reconstruction of Gaza would be largely dependent on international funding, the involvement of international actors might create new cleavages along various dichotomies such as local-global, socialism-conservatism, and humanitarian-for profit, among others. Further, when international actors are involved in rebuilding, the focus remains on symbolic sites, in some cases, on spaces which have established linkages with the West. This focus is often at the expense of the everyday urban spaces and cultural heritage sites of local repute. Scholars, practitioners, and policymakers must ensure that this is not the case with Gaza’s rebuilding, but that a reconstruction approach that values rebuilding everyday spaces and sites of local repute in partnership with the local community is valued and prioritised.
Sabine Ameer is a doctoral researcher in Politics and International Relations at the University of Glasgow, United Kingdom.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
Sabine Ameer is a doctoral researcher in Politics and International Relations at the University of Glasgow, United Kingdom. Her research analyses whether there has been ...
Read More +
PREV
