The Complexity of the Israel-Hamas War (Cancel Culture Series #5)
- Dan Best
- Apr 27, 2024
- 15 min read
Updated: May 11, 2024
Originally published Apr 27th. Some updates added at the bottom May 11th.
Preliminary Points
I'm a Learner. I am approaching this topic as a learner!! I'm not an expert. The more I learn the more I realize that the history of Israel-Palestine is PROFOUNDLY long and complex, and that behind every one thing that I learn there are five new things that I don't know and need to learn more about. I am taking the attitude of contributing to an ongoing discussion, and I am open to hearing other voices, to being corrected, disagreed with, etc. I am simply one learner sharing things I'm learning about, not presenting the "once-and-for-all" perspective. It is with fear and trembling that I share my thoughts on this topic.
Understanding Israel. In this blog post I am intentionally and self-consciously trying to provide greater understanding to Israel's situation. To be clear, I am not doing this to be "pro-Israel" or because I'm "on Israel's side". Indeed, I'm trying to do the very opposite of "taking a side". A theme I'm trying to develop in this Cancel Culture Series is the importance of trying to understand both sides in contentious debates, even if you strongly disagree with the other side. As I alluded to in the first post in this series, the social circles I swim in and the social media content most often presented to me leans in a progressive (and in this case, pro-Palestinian) direction, therefore I think it is both more interesting and vital for people in my context to try to hear "the other side". If I lived in a strongly pro-Israel bubble I'd be writing a blog post trying to bring understanding to the Palestinian situation.
What I'm Not Saying
Trying to have a greater understanding of Israel's situation DOES NOT MEAN we need to support their military attacks. We can hope and pray for a ceasefire. The scenes from Gaza are horrifying, nightmarish, and almost unimaginable. Every death of a civilian (and as a Christian I would add every death of even the soldiers!) is a tragedy.
Trying to have a greater understanding of Israel's situation DOES NOT MEAN we need to support Israel's government. Israel's government is something I haven't looked into much yet, but everything I've heard about Benjamin Netanyahu (the Prime Minister of Israel) is bad. Even the pro-Israel voices I've listened to don't like him.
Widening the Lens: Understanding the Context of the War
Is Israel a "Settler-Colonialist" Oppressor?
There is so much history of Gaza and the West Bank that I have yet to learn about, but even just based on the modest amount I've learnt so far I think it is fair to say that there have been times through their history when Israel has unfairly taken control of Palestinian land. So there is at least some measure of truth in the "settler-colonialist" label.
However, we can't equate Israel with (for example) what the Europeans did to the indigenous people when they colonized North America. That equation would be too simplistic for a few reasons:
The Jewish people have roots in the land of Israel going back thousands of years. Just open up the first few pages of your bible to see. So that at least complicates the question of "whose land" it is.
Typically when we speak of "colonizers" we are thinking of a big powerful nation sending people to create a separate colony on a foreign land. However, the nation of Israel was created precisely because the Jewish people had no home. When protestors chant "from the river to the sea Palestine will be free", suggesting that all the Jewish people should just leave the land and go somewhere else, there is no other "homeland" for them to go back to. That was not the case with the Europeans colonizing North America.
Building off the previous point, the Jewish people established the nation of Israel because they were fleeing the countries they were a part of essentially as refugees. I think there is a strong case to be made that the Jewish people are among the most persecuted people groups in human history. From their enslavement in Egypt in the second book of the bible to World War 2 and the Holocaust, and almost every century in between they have been persecuted in some way. It's vital to understand that it was not just in Germany that they faced painful antisemitism in the early 1900s but in tons of other countries too. So at least at the founding of their nation they were more like refugees than mighty oppressors.
Recommended resources to learn more:
The Moral Evil of Hamas
When thinking about this war we need to differentiate between the Palestinian people and their group in government, Hamas. In my mind understanding the moral evil of Hamas is the key to comprehending the complexity of this war.
Hamas is an authoritarian, extremist, radical Islamic terrorist group, similar to and related to groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda. They are the group in charge of Gaza, and they are the group responsible for the October 7 attack on Israel. They are openly antisemitic and explicitly say in their founding charter document that they seek the "obliteration" of Israel. Spokesmen for the group have said that what they did on October 7th they want to do "again and again". And what they did on October 7th included intentionally targeting civilians, raping women, executing parents in front of children and vice versa, torturing and dismembering people, and taking civilian hostages (many of which are still being held captive).
Let's pause to make a quick point. None of this is said to excuse or justify what Israel is doing now. Rather, with important and contentious topics like this we must be honest about all the facts at hand, making sure we have the full picture. Think of it as "laying out all the pieces on the table" of this discussion.
Not only do they intentionally target Israel civilians, but the death of Palestinian civilians is an intentional part of their political and military strategy as well. One way this manifests is that they strap bombs to women and children and use them as suicide bombers. And on a bigger scale, using civilians as human shields is a core component of their military strategy. Despite being both horrifyingly unethical and against international law, Hamas intentionally places its military bases, offices, storage units (etc.) in the middle of locations populated by civilians like schools, hospitals, mosques, residential apartment buildings, and so on. They know this makes it profoundly more difficult for Israel to attack them (both strategically and ethically), and that if Israel does attack them in those locations it will make Israel look bad in the international community. The international community will then pressure Israel for a ceasefire, thus protecting Hamas from any further attack.
Furthermore, another key component of Hamas' strategy is the extensive military tunnels it has invested hundreds of millions of dollars into constructing. Firstly it needs to be pointed out that much of the money and supplies that Palestine has received from the international community and humanitarian organizations has gone directly to the building of these tunnels instead of to provide for the basic needs of the Palestinian people and improve their living conditions. Secondly, these tunnels also play into the "human shield" strategy because they are all located beneath civilian areas of Gaza, meaning that Israel is forced to go through Palestinian civilians and risk their lives if they are going to attack those tunnels.
To use an imperfect metaphor, think of cancer. When cancer is bad enough we attack it with chemotherapy and radiation knowing there is a high price to pay because although the chemo and radiation will eliminate the cancer, they will also cause damage and sickness to the rest of the body as well. Or, if the person believes that the price is too high, they may choose not to use the chemo and radiation, but in that case the cancer will continue to grow and spread. Something like this is the predicament Israel is in in this conflict with Hamas.
Recommended resources as food for thought:
Is War Worse Than We Thought?
When most people think of justifiable causes to go to war and use violence, they understandably think of what the Allied Forces did in World War 2 to defeat Hitler and the Nazis. Seems like the epitome of a just cause right? But historians say that up to a horrifying 500,000 German civilians were killed by Allied bombing raids in WW2. Now imagine if they had smartphones, the internet, and TikTok back then, and the world was receiving up-close high-res pictures and videos of those German civilian casualties and injuries on a daily basis. It's worth asking if we would feel differently if that was the case.
It turns out there are in fact actual "laws of war" that the international community has agreed upon, one of which is the principle of proportionality. The principle of proportionality assumes that there will be civilian casualties as a tragic but inevitable part of war, but it dictates that civilian casualties must be proportional to the military advantages a particular strike or attack would generate. In other words, a small military gain would justify a small number of civilian casualties, but a bigger military gain would justify a bigger number of civilian casualties.
The horrifying fact is that in urban warfare (war taking place in urban highly populated places) the United Nations says that for every 1 military combatant killed there are typically 9 civilians killed (a 1:9 ratio). That is the average and expected ratio. So as you can imagine, in debates regarding the ethics of the Israel-Hamas war, the numbers of combatants and civilians killed are hotly contested. The best guess we have for how many casualties there have been in Gaza is somewhere in the realm of 30,000 total, including both civilians and military combatants. The catch is that this statistic is provided by the Gaza Health Ministry, which is a Hamas-controlled organization and therefore it's to Hamas' benefit to inflate those numbers. But to be generous for the sake of the argument, let's stick with the number 30,000. According to Israeli Defense Forces (the IDF), they have killed over 12,000 Hamas combatants. Not surprisingly Hamas contests this number, asserting that the number is closer to 6,000. So if we are to believe Hamas (a terrorist organization, remember) the ratio is 6,000 combatants to 24,000 civilians (1:4), or if we want to believe the IDF the ratio is 12,000 combatants to 18,000 civilians (1:1.5). Either way the ratio is way better than the UN average for urban warfare.
Let's pause to make a quick point. None of this is intended to make the level of death and suffering happening in Gaza more "tolerable". We can never and should never tolerate death and suffering. All death and suffering is tragic, no matter the ratio. Again, this discussion is simply trying to lay all the facts out on the table. And the fact is that the IDF has achieved a better ratio than most other wars of a similar kind —which does not necessarily mean what they're doing is therefore ethical, but maybe it means that war (even a war with a comparatively "good ratio") is more horrifying than we thought.
According to the IDF, they take active measures to minimize civilian deaths as much as possible. They call and send text messages to building owners (e.g. the owner of an apartment building) to warn people to evacuate before an attack. Sometimes they air-drop flyers telling civilians when, where, and how to evacuate before an attack. They broadcast warnings over radio and over social media. They have also developed a method called "roof-knocking" in which they drop a tiny explosive (small enough that it is unlikely to cause any human harm) on top of a roof to alert civilians to flee before an attack. Before any attack is called a military lawyer is consulted to make sure the attack would be within the bounds of the laws of war. And the military drawback to all these measures should be obvious: these warnings potentially alert Hamas combatants about a coming attack. But the IDF claims to accept this military drawback for the sake of preserving civilian lives.
Now, if you are a skeptical person, or if you've been watching the scenes of destruction in Gaza on social media or the news, or if you're generally anti-Israel, you'll likely be skeptical of any of these IDF claims. And that is fair. We would expect a representative of the Israeli military to try to cast Israel in the best light possible. But personally I find it hard to believe that all of those IDF claims could be entirely fabricated and fictional. Even if those claims are 75% exaggeration, there is still a 25% kernel of truth. And the key here is that whereas Hamas is intentionally trying to inflict terror and death among civilians as part of their strategy (see previous section above), the IDF is trying to minimize civilian deaths. We might be justified in arguing that the IDF is not doing enough to minimize civilian deaths or they aren't doing it effectively, but at least it is on their radar and they are (to some extent) making efforts to do it.
Civilians are collateral damage to Israel. To Hamas civilians are targets. Both are tragic, but there is an important ethical difference.
Recommended resources as food for thought:
Conclusion: So What's the Point?
When I told my wife that I was writing this post, she rolled her eyes at me and asked if I was worried about posting about such a heated topic. And I have to admit, I am somewhat scared to post about such a heated topic.
So what's my intention in writing this post?
Well, first of all, it is NOT to dissuade anybody from praying and advocating for a ceasefire. Heaven knows Gaza needs peace. What they are experiencing is a humanitarian crisis that cannot continue. Deep grief and/or anger is the only appropriate response to seeing the extent of the suffering there. If you are someone who has been passionately advocating for Palestinians, please continue to do so and I have no intention of trying to take the fire or passion out of your cause.
I posted this for four reasons:
1 - Laying Out the Facts.
On one level I simply wanted to (as I've said a couple of times already) lay out all the facts. If all you know about the war is brief pictures you see on Instagram, you may not have a full understanding of the context of the war (I certainly had no idea before I looked into it). Importantly, if you don't know the context (and you swim in progressive circles), it would be easy to think in overly reductionistic categories that see Israel as nothing more than a barbaric Bad Guy that is attacking harmless Palestinians for no other reason than to inflict mindless suffering and domination. Hopefully my post has shown the situation is more complicated than that.
2 - Humility and Sober Realism.
Secondly, while I think it is right for us to advocate for a ceasefire, I think we should also have the humility to acknowledge that we don't have a good alternative to suggest. If Israel cannot defeat Hamas with military might, how should they defeat Hamas? I've heard some people say that "Hamas is an idea" and that ideas need to be defeated by better ideas, not by bombs. And in the big picture that is true: the root issue of Hamas is their extremist jihadist worldview, and the only way that will change is by the slow process of dialogue, empathy, persuasion, and so on. But that will be a tremendously slow process (many generations long at best). So in addition to humility, when we call for a ceasefire we also need to have the sober realism to admit what it is we are asking of Israel. What we are essentially asking is for Israel to sit and wait for Hamas to regroup, re-arm, and attack again. There was a "ceasefire" on Oct 6 2023 and Hamas chose to break it on Oct 7th, as they have repeatedly done in the past. And perhaps Israel sitting and waiting is the "least worst" option, but let's at least admit it's not ideal (and that it's easy for us to say from the safety of North America!).
3 - Compassion & Grief Aren't Zero-Sum
If you are outraged at the suffering of the Palestinians it can be tempting to feel like you can't admit to any sympathy for Israelis. It's as if adding one point of sympathy on the Israel side means we need to subtract one point of sympathy from the Palestinian side, which of course is just not true. And in extreme cases solidarity with the Palestinians has turned into anti-semitism towards Jewish people in general, even Jewish people on the other side of the world from Israel-Palestine who have nothing to do with the war. In the name of supporting Palestinians people have torn down posters bringing awareness to the Israeli hostages that Hamas took on Oct 7th. Why in the world would someone feel the need to do that? Or in other cases people supporting Palestinians have tried to minimize the atrocities of Oct 7th, such as denying that Hamas combatants committed rape and sexual assault. Of course it's always important to get our facts straight, but the intention seems to be to downplay the barbarism that Israel was victim to on Oct 7th. Again, why do that? We can have compassion for Palestinian people while also having compassion on Israeli people; we can mourn both Palestinian suffering and Israeli suffering; we can seek to understand Palestinian history and Israeli history; and we can acknowledge that certain Palestinians (specifically Hamas) have committed evil while also acknowledging that Israel has committed evil.
4 - Modelling Dialogue on Contentious Issues.
The more I thought about it, the more I realized that my fear to write this post is precisely the reason to write it. An overarching idea of this Cancel Culture blog series is that we need to have respectful dialogue about important cultural issues, that we need to get better at dialoguing respectfully, and that nobody should be afraid to do so. Surely if we have created a culture in which people are afraid to respectfully contribute their thoughts on important issues we have done something wrong? So I have humbly tried in a small way to do what it is I am advocating for in this Cancel Culture series: try to engage in discussion on a contentious issue in a way that is balanced, nuanced, researched, patient, and humble; valuing all human life and grieving the loss and harm of any human life; acknowledging that I am but one voice among many in this discussion and I am open to being disagreed with or corrected where applicable. I'm sure I've done that imperfectly, and where that is the case please forgive me and feel free to disregard what I've said! But hopefully to some extent I did what I set out to do.
Updates
Here are some good podcast episodes that I've listened to since posting the original blog post. I would recommend listening to them to any progressive-leaning person wanting to do the hard work of trying to truly comprehend the many factors of this war.
This is one of the best podcast episodes I've heard about the Israel-Hamas war. It successfully embodies many of the values I'm trying to communicate: the nuance needed to adequately understand the complexity of the situation, a balanced view of the evil of Hamas and the failures of Israel, and ultimately compassion for the trauma that both Palestinians and Israelis have endured. Israel can be both an oppressor and a victim, and until we come to acknowledge that we are letting our bias cloud our ability to see reality. They highlight the different political groups in Israel, grieving the fact that the far-right in Israel would like to proceed in the war in a callous and vengeful way, and that Netanyahu is strongly influenced by that faction. Yet they also helpfully point out that that far-right group doesn't represent all of Israel. Likewise, they have the nuance to oppose Israel advancing into Rafah, while also maintaining that Hamas must still be eliminated somehow.
This was a really interesting podcast episode because the person being interviewed, Yair Lapid, is an Israeli politician, so he represents an Israeli point of view. But his political party is the opposition to Prime Minister Netanyahu, which is a good reminder that there is diversity and disagreement among Israelis themselves. Although Lapid firmly believes in Israel's right to defend itself and the need to permanently defeat Hamas, he critiques Netanyahu's government for not explaining and defending Israel's situation and decisions well enough to the wider world looking on, and for not apologizing when mistakes are made.
John Spencer is an expert in modern urban warfare, has studied wars all over the world, and has extensive personal experience in battle himself. He expands on points I made above: the barbarism of the Hamas Oct 7th attack, how this is one of the most difficult wars a nation has had to fight because of Hamas's strategy of tunnels and civilian shields, and how much Israel has done to actually minimize civilian casualties. They make a persuasive case that all of us grieving the war and calling for a ceasefire care more about Palestinian lives than Hamas does.
One of the biggest pieces of news since I did my original post has of course been the spread of campus protests through the US and other places as well. This episode interviews a Jewish professor at Columbia who witnessed the beginning of the protests first-hand. I found him more biased than I would have liked, speaking in black-and-white terms rather than nuance, but if you look past the bias his perspective is still an important one to hear. There's all sorts of things happening at these protests—some good and some bad, some compassionate and some hateful—due to the diversity of individuals and groups participating in them. This Columbia professor shines a light on the dark side of these protests.
