The Resource Dimension of The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Oil, Gas, and The Struggle for Land
Historical Context: British Involvement and Resource Exploration
The British Mandate in Palestine (1920–1948) marked a pivotal era of Western influence in the Middle East, a region increasingly vital for its oil wealth. During this period, Britain controlled Palestine following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, a time when oil discoveries in Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia underscored the strategic importance of the area. While the British did not unearth significant oil reserves in what is now Gaza or the West Bank during the Mandate, their administration laid the groundwork for later resource exploration by establishing control over the territory and its potential assets.
It was not until decades later that substantial energy reserves came to light. In 1999, British Gas (now part of Shell) discovered the Gaza Marine gas field, located approximately 36 kilometers off the Gaza coast in the Mediterranean Sea. This field holds an estimated 1 trillion cubic feet of natural gas—a resource that could significantly bolster the Palestinian economy if accessible. The discovery, though postdating British colonial rule, ties back to Britain through the involvement of a British company, highlighting a continuity of Western interest in the region’s energy potential.
In the West Bank, evidence of oil reserves has also emerged. A 2019 report by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) estimated that the occupied Palestinian territories sit atop considerable oil and gas reserves, including approximately 1.5 billion barrels of oil in Area C of the West Bank, which remains under full Israeli control.
Additional resources, such as fertile land and water, further enhance the West Bank’s economic value. However, the Israeli occupation and blockade of Gaza have prevented Palestinians from exploiting these assets, leaving them under Israel’s de facto control—a situation that echoes the colonial legacy of resource domination.
The Clean Break Memo and Strategic Interests
In 1996, a group of neoconservative thinkers, including Richard Perle and Douglas Feith, drafted "A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm" for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This policy document urged Israel to adopt a more assertive stance in the Middle East, advocating for preemptive actions, the rejection of the Oslo peace process, and a focus on reshaping the region’s power dynamics—such as removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. While the memo does not explicitly mention oil or gas reserves in Gaza and the West Bank, its vision of "securing the realm" implicitly encompasses control over strategic resources.
The Clean Break strategy aligns with Israel’s broader approach to the occupied territories, where maintaining dominance over land and resources serves both security and economic interests. The continued expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank—where potential oil reserves lie—and the tight control over Gaza’s offshore gas fields can be seen as practical extensions of this doctrine. By prioritizing territorial control over negotiated peace, Israel ensures that valuable assets remain out of Palestinian hands, reinforcing a policy of resource acquisition that critics argue mirrors colonial practices.
Recent Events: October 7, 2023, and Beyond
The Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, marked a dramatic escalation in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Militants breached Israeli borders, killed over 1,200 people, and took more than 200 hostages, prompting a massive Israeli military response. Israel launched extensive airstrikes and a ground invasion of Gaza, coupled with a tightened blockade, resulting in widespread devastation. As of late 2024, the death toll in Gaza has surpassed 40,000, with the majority being civilians—disproportionately women and children—according to local health authorities and international monitors.
The humanitarian crisis in Gaza has reached catastrophic levels. The blockade has restricted access to food, water, medicine, and fuel, while the destruction of infrastructure—hospitals, schools, and homes—has left millions displaced. The United Nations and other organizations have labeled the response as disproportionate, arguing that it exceeds legitimate self-defense and constitutes collective punishment, a violation of international humanitarian law.
International reactions have shifted noticeably. Even traditional allies of Israel, such as the United States and several European nations, have voiced concerns over the scale of the violence. Calls for a ceasefire have grown louder, with figures like U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken urging restraint, while countries like France and Spain have openly criticized Israel’s actions. This growing unease reflects a broader recognition that the conflict’s toll on Palestinians is excessive, particularly when viewed against the backdrop of resource control and territorial ambitions.
The Role of Resources in the Conflict
Natural resources are a critical but often overshadowed dimension of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Gaza Marine gas field represents a potential economic lifeline for Palestinians, yet Israel’s control over Gaza’s coastal waters has prevented its development. Negotiations involving international firms have proceeded under Israeli oversight, effectively excluding Palestinian authorities from reaping the benefits. Similarly, the oil reserves in the West Bank’s Area C remain untapped by Palestinians due to Israeli administrative and military dominance.
This resource denial has profound implications. Economically, access to these reserves could reduce Palestinian dependence on foreign aid and alleviate chronic poverty and unemployment. Politically, it underscores a fundamental issue of sovereignty: under international law, an occupying power is prohibited from exploiting the resources of occupied territory for its own gain. Critics argue that Israel’s actions contravene these principles, perpetuating an economic stranglehold that deepens Palestinian suffering while bolstering Israel’s strategic position.
The pursuit of resources also ties into the broader pattern of land acquisition. Settlement expansion in the West Bank not only claims territory but also secures access to fertile land, water, and potential oil deposits. This dual strategy of territorial and resource control fuels accusations that Israel’s policies prioritize dominance over coexistence, a stance that aligns with the Clean Break memo’s emphasis on strength over compromise.
Zionism and Its Implications
Zionism, the ideological bedrock of Israel, emerged in the late 19th century as a response to widespread antisemitism in Europe. Led by figures like Theodor Herzl, it sought to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine, then under Ottoman rule, as a means of ensuring Jewish safety and self-determination. The movement gained momentum with the 1917 Balfour Declaration, in which Britain endorsed the idea of a "national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine, setting the stage for the British Mandate and eventual Israeli statehood in 1948.
While Zionism achieved its goal of creating Israel, its implementation has been fraught with controversy. The 1948 Arab-Israeli War led to the displacement of over 700,000 Palestinians—the Nakba—while the 1967 Six-Day War saw Israel occupy the West Bank and Gaza, initiating a decades-long process of settlement building. Today, over 700,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank, a presence that many Palestinians and international observers view as an obstacle to peace and a mechanism for land appropriation.
Zionism’s evolution has produced varied interpretations, from cultural aspirations to territorial maximalism. In its more expansionist forms, it justifies policies that prioritize Jewish claims to the land over Palestinian rights, including access to resources. Critics contend that this ideology, when paired with military and economic power, has facilitated the occupation and its attendant inequities, framing the conflict as a struggle not just for security but for dominance over a resource-rich region.