By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Prior to the 2023 Israel-Hamas war, Israel provided roughly half of Gaza’s electricity needs, supplementing the Gaza Power Plant and Egyptian supplies. This dependency stemmed from Gaza’s limited domestic energy infrastructure and Israel’s control over borders and resource access. Following the war, Israel initially cut off electricity as part of a siege, severely impacting Gaza’s already fragile infrastructure and leading to widespread power outages. While Israel later resumed limited fuel deliveries and connected a power line to a UN desalination plant, a complete electricity cutoff persists as of March 9, 2025, leaving Gaza in a prolonged crisis. The situation highlights the complex interplay of political tensions, resource control, and humanitarian needs in the region.
Read the original article here
Israel’s recent decision to cut off electricity to the Gaza Strip has sparked considerable debate and raised numerous questions. The move, while seemingly drastic, is presented by some as a necessary response to ongoing conflict and the actions of Hamas. It’s crucial to understand the context surrounding this action to grasp its full implications.
The narrative often portrays this as a complete severance of electricity, but in reality, the electricity supply was already severely limited before the cutoff. Prior to the decision, only a single line remained, primarily powering a water purification plant. This limited supply highlights the precarious situation in Gaza and the extent to which the territory relies on external support, even from its adversaries.
The question of why Gaza depends on Israel, a nation it doesn’t recognize, for electricity is complex. The answer appears to be a combination of factors, including historical dependencies and the absence of a robust internal energy infrastructure. This reliance, however, shouldn’t be mistaken for a functional relationship; some argue that the electricity previously supplied was essentially a donation, paid for by Israeli citizens through higher electricity bills, rather than a reciprocal exchange with the Palestinian Authority.
The Israeli government’s decision to halt this “donation” underscores the precarious nature of the situation. While Israel maintains that it’s under no obligation to provide assistance to an entity actively engaged in conflict against it, this action inevitably has severe humanitarian consequences for the civilian population.
The timing of the electricity cut-off is also significant. It follows a period of intense conflict, with Hamas launching a large-scale attack on Israel. The action is viewed by some as a form of pressure to secure the release of hostages and secure an end to hostilities. Simultaneously, this decision is seen by others as potentially exacerbating an already dire humanitarian situation in Gaza, impacting access to clean water and basic services.
The ongoing criticism regarding the decision points to the lack of viable alternatives within Gaza itself. While the territory possesses some solar power capacity and diesel generators, these sources are insufficient to meet the energy needs of the population. Furthermore, concerns regarding fuel mismanagement and the diversion of resources toward other purposes, such as tunnel construction, have been raised. This situation places the onus of responsibility squarely on Hamas to ensure the well-being of its citizens.
Egypt’s role is also noteworthy. As a neighboring country with closer ties to Gaza, Egypt has the potential to increase its electricity supply. However, the reality appears to be more nuanced. While Egypt does provide some electricity and could theoretically increase its contributions, this is limited by its own energy needs and potentially complicated by geopolitical factors.
Adding to the complexity, the narrative suggests that a significant portion of funds intended for the development of Gaza’s infrastructure have been misappropriated, fueling conflicts rather than improving the lives of Gazans. This misallocation of resources underscores the systemic challenges that hinder development and self-sufficiency in Gaza.
The situation in Gaza is undoubtedly dire, and the implications of cutting off electricity are severe. While it serves as a political lever in the conflict, it also risks exacerbating the already dire humanitarian crisis. The decision raises questions about the balance between political strategy and humanitarian responsibility, highlighting the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This multifaceted issue calls for a multifaceted solution and requires a nuanced understanding beyond simplistic narratives.