22 May 2024
When does self-defense slip into over-offense? When does “proportionate” slide into “disproportionate”?
I don’t know where one ends and the other begins, but I know that Israel has long ago crossed the line and plunged headlong down the slippery slope. Only crazed fanatics believe that Israel is still perched on some narrow ledge of the moral high ground.
There are those, even among peace activists in Israel, who feel that the actions of Hamas on October 7 justified the vicious pummeling to which the Gazans were subjected during the initial stages of the war. Aerial bombing of civilian areas was somehow still considered within the bounds of self-defense or at least “teaching them a lesson” so they won’t do it again. Even left-wing journalists justified the IDF response, such as respected columnist Uri Misgav who wrote in Haaretz (January 24), “Nearly every sensible person understands that there was an essential need to react militarily to the barbaric invasion of the western Negev, to exact a high price from Hamas and also to make it clear to its supporters within the Gaza Strip and elsewhere that it is not possible to slaughter people in Israel without paying tenfold.” Paying “tenfold”?
Yes, even those who hit back not in revenge, but to teach Hamas a lesson, felt that the bombardments, including of civilians, were justified. But the onslaught has now gone on for months as the IDF kills and wounds thousands of people, most innocent of any wrongdoing. Has the Hamas leadership “learned its lesson” – that one must not engage in atrocities, even against those who have oppressed you for decades? Not likely, as senior Hamas officials enjoy the high life in Qatar, or hunker down in the megalopolis of underground tunnels, perhaps thinking they are protected by Israeli hostages serving as human shields. It’s not likely that Hamas learned the lesson that Israel was hoping to convey.
As a pretext for the merciless assault, Israel’s prime minister claims that the harder Israel hits Hamas, the more willing they will be to free the hostages. Does this make sense? Months of this strategy have not vindicated the theory. On the contrary, experience has shown that more terrorists are born out of this level of political violence. Advocates of the strategy surely realize by now that the lives of the hostages are also imperiled by Israeli aggression – some have already been killed. Why would Hamas leaders release hostages in response to Israeli strikes? These leaders care little how much the Gazan population is suffering. The ten plagues never softened the heart of Pharoah; why should the IDF plagues soften the heart of Yahya Sinwar, the Hamas commander?
Now that Israel finds itself at the very bottom of the slippery slope; now that revenge or lesson-teaching has elided into massive death, injury, destruction, and social crisis; now that revelations emerge that the stated military goals are not (and perhaps never were) attainable; now that it has become clear to all but the chronic jingoists that the war serves only the self-interest of Prime Minister Netanyahu to stay out of jail; now that we have reached the rock bottom, what is a morally centered Israeli to do?
The options are few: One can refuse to serve in the army and be thrown into military lockup. One can demonstrate against the war on the streets and risk the violent response of the police, now egged on by a gangster – the minister of internal security. One can advocate internationally that arms shipments to Israel be discontinued and that Israel be isolated diplomatically – all at risk of being accused of anti-Semitism. Many brave people are engaged in these efforts and hats off to all of them.
For the rest of us, I believe that the core strategy must be spreading the word about the brutality of Israel’s military behavior and condemning it (without providing ammunition to actual anti-Semites, many of whom take a free ride on criticism of Israel). Resistance can take many forms – op eds, letters to the editor, calls to one’s elected officials, public protests, art, songs, even private conversations. This is how social and cultural change has always taken place, slowly, cumulatively.
Said Margaret Mead, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”
Eventually the message takes hold. Start – or keep – spreading the message. You will be saving lives.
_____________________________________________________
Published in the Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 22, 61–62 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-024-10353-z