Gaza: A year of blood and tears.
the world needs to rest its moral compass.
We have spent a whole year, all 365 days of them, wondering how much revenge a nation needs to satisfy its bloodlust. When does our moral compass find its bearings to understand the difference between ‘self-defense’ and ‘revenge’? The killing fields of Gaza have been swamped with more than enough blood to wash the horrors of Oct 7th. However, one must admit that the pain of losing loved ones, whether Israeli or Palestinian, can never be forgotten or washed over. When Oct 7th happened, even though those familiar with the history of the conflict knew otherwise, there was sympathy for Israel in that civilians should not have been targeted. It was a moral high ground for Israel, which soon was lost and eroded with the weight of 85,000 tons of bombs dropped on Gaza.
The ordinance dropped by Israel on Gaza exceeds the combined tonnage dropped on Nagasaki, Hiroshima, Dresden, Hamburg, and London during World War II. It’s all the more horrific, considering it was during one year. Unsurprisingly, 70% of buildings are flattened, and 60% of the sewerage and water supply has been destroyed. Every single university has been destroyed, 80% of the hospitals have ceased to function, and almost every school has been bombed. Over 42,000 people have died, and 93,000 injured with illness, malnutrition, and starvation still taking its toll. It is estimated that over 10,000 dead are buried in the millions of tons of rubble of the buildings.
This has not been fought only in Gaza. It has occupied a major space in the media, including social media and various forums. Palestinian voices have talked of the killings, which the ICJ calls a ‘plausible genocide, and some are being cornered to be apologetic about the Hamas attack on Oct 7th. Israelis and their supporting voices have collective amnesia and insist the war started on Oct 7th. A sense of collective blame is placed on Gazans for having ‘supported Hamas and thus, in their eyes, deserve death and destruction
The option of a graduated and proportional military response by Israel was abandoned to a slash-and-burn strategy. Every hospital bombed, every school destroyed, was accompanied by the claim that Hamas had a command center or tunnels underneath the structures. When civilian deaths mounted, Israeli spokespersons insisted they were human shields without being able to prove where the bodies of the Hamas, who were supposedly hiding behind the civilians went. UN workers were killed (224), Journalists were targeted, (174), and all along we were told that the IDF is the most moral army in modern history. Sadly the international media decided it had to take sides.
As the ICJ and ICC stepped up with condemnation of Israel (by ICJ) and of both Hamas and Israel (ICC) the media who applauded the ICC for charging Putin with war crimes were suddenly the bad guys. It was a moral insult for the Israeli leadership to be accused of war crimes in the same breath as the Hamas leaders. It was not dissimilar to pro-Israeli talk show hosts to insist with Palestinian guests to condemn Oct 7th but not ask Israeli guests to condemn the killings in Gaza.
The conflict has expanded into Lebanon and a military confrontation with Iran. Not many will come forward and admit that it was Israel who fired the first shot at Iran by attacking their embassy in Syria. The argument, ostensibly, was that it was Iran’s proxy that attacked Israel on Oct 7th. This begs the moral question does this logic justify attacks on countries that support Israel with weapons and ammunition? The ethical and right answer is “absolutely not”. But moral equivalency demands that this principle should also apply to all parties in the conflict in Palestine.
We stand at the precipice of a regional conflict. Many parties are working to defuse the tensions, and there is a singular consensus that this requires a ceasefire and the return of all hostages and prisoners from both sides. There is a great deal at stake for regional peace, and most certainly, there will be sponsors of a ceasefire who would be willing to put boots on the ground to ensure the ceasefire will hold, whether under the UN flag or any other arrangement.
It is hoped that sane minds prevail on both sides. Israel is clearly a military power in the region, fully armed and loaded by the United States, but its vulnerability has shown there are chinks in its armor. For the Palestinian side, there should be a realization that a strategy of violence cannot be a solution either. It is recognized that as much as Israel wants to ensure its security and the cessation of attacks on it, so too does the Palestinian side deserve to be treated with dignity and the freedom to manage their territories as a sovereign country. Just as Palestinians have to remove the radical elements from their political and social society, Israel has to also remove the far-right warmongers from their society.
Humanity owes it to the blood of 40,000 dead (from both sides) to find a path to peace. Israeli political hawks have to understand that this war has not made them safer. Palestinians also have to accept that escalation to violence only begets more suffering. Will we see a new and compassionate leadership emerge on both sides of the divide who can forge a lasting solution? The current model has failed at the cost of tragic loss of life. Without sounding negative, sadly, where we stand today, it seems unlikely that such an approach will emerge so long as Israel feels it must ‘finish the job’ and in that, it implies ending the Palestinian presence or reducing it to a state of subservience.
The United States, which could have played a positive role, has, in an election year, become hostage to the AIPAC (the Israeli interest group) and lost its ability to influence the Israeli decision-makers. This is the first time in history that the Israeli leadership feels they can ignore Washington without consequence. A fractured and disjointed Palestinian leadership has also not made things any better. In all this quagmire the common man in Palestine has suffered and carried the brunt of Israeli’s revenge. A revenge that is tainted with accusations of plausible genocide and war crimes the charge sheet of which is tainted, page by page, with the blood of innocent civilians.