I do not like the way Israel has carried out its war in Gaza. The Netanyahu government is literally criminal, and has been for a long time.
But there is no action that Israel could have taken in Gaza that would not have attracted international condemnation. Hamas has always used civilian locations for attacks. Even a much less monstrous Israeli government was going to result in a lot of civilian casualties. And, to be blunt, the knee-jerk antisemitism in a lot of the world would end up with Israel receiving just about as much criticism -- fair and unfair -- as it is today.
Consider, instead, what might have happened if the UN had gotten together on October 8 and said, "This is horrific and will not be tolerated, but Israel must not retaliate. Instead, we will send in a multinational peacekeeping force, including Muslim and Arabic countries. They will prevent future attacks, bring the responsible leadership to justice in an international court, and re-establish democratic elections in Gaza."
I do not doubt that the Netanyahu government would have balked. Maybe the Americans could have forced them to accept it. Maybe Israel would have gone on anyway.
Instead, we reinforced the reasons why Netanyahu got elected in the first place. Israelis are convinced that they're going to be under attack, and the world will clutch its pearls, do nothing, and promptly forget that anything ever happened. And then set about roundly condemning the Israelis regardless of what they do to prevent a recurrence.
That "deterioration of social peace" is not solely Israel's fault. And blaming it on Israel right now -- on the anniversary of the attacks that started this -- demonstrates why that peace is deteriorating. They are not safe and the world does not care, and they will respond.
With any luck Israel will democratically throw out the Netanyahu government and replace it with somebody who is in some kind of position to settle this. That's going to surely involve removing the West Bank settlements that are being built right now -- a crime of which Israel is guilty. But Gaza is going to remain a horrific danger, and no Israeli government can solve that. Only getting the rest of the world involved will ever make that any better.
This is a cute "moderate" description of the situation if you ignore all history leading up to October 7th and the massive number of Palestinian civilians Israel has murdered and displaced. The year leading up to October 7th was already one of the deadliest recent years for Palestinians in both the weat bank and Gaza.
The main problem has always been Israel forcefully occupying the Palestinians indigenous land while denying them their humanity.
Israel can never be in the right until it acknowledges some form of Palestinian sovereignty.
And you're giving a cute "moderate" description that ignores all of the Israeli civilians murdered by Palestinians. That didn't start on October 7.
I don't think it's meaningful to trace back vengeances back through the English to the Ottomans and further. I'm only interested in what we do from here.
I don't think abolishing the state of Israel is worth discussing. And I don't think it's going to be feasible to find a solution while there is still such a large contingent who insist on abolishing Israel. That was literally part of Hamas' constitution until recently, and nobody seriously believes that they've changed their attitude despite a change in language.
I believe that "some form of Palestinian sovereignty" would be a recognized nation on the West Bank (and including Gaza, despite the logistical challenges). And from there, the two states could look into normalizing relations.
Unfortunately, hard liners on both sides hate that solution. Israel, at least, might vote out its hardliners. Fatah on the West Bank has actually been doing pretty well, and it's infuriating that Israeli hard liners stand in the way of making them a sovereign country. Some nations are starting to recognize them despite that, and I hope more do.
What Israel is showing all (intentionally or not) is that there was no real rules-based world order, although there was probably a convention-based one. Before you condemn Israel, note that:
- The Arab nations in conflict with Israel are cesspools of horrible oppression, and yet this situation has become normalized to the extent that virtually no one bats an eyelid. You certainly don't hear of UN resolutions calling for a stop to the murder of dissident and women deemed as acting impurely.
- The West does business with nations that engage in what Israel is accused of, with far less justification. For example, until recently Russia was a major gas supplier to Europe. Saudi Arabia provides a lot of the world's oil. China is still the worlds factory, despite a history of brutal responses to activities seeking freedom, oppression of the Uighurs, etc.
- The ill-advised (and probably criminal) actions of the western countries in Iraq, and later with the Arab spring, led to the death of 100s of thousands of people.
There are many other examples of double standards all over the world.
So there was never a rules-based world order; there was a convention-based one, a state of affairs that everyone was content to let be, and that has now started to unravel. Israel's actions are an acknowledgement of this fact, and not in any way what is causing it. Fixating on Israel misses the shifting geo-political winds that are blowing.
Oh, I'm well aware there never was one, it's just particularily egregious how badly western leaders are trying to pretend there is one and that they are in the right.
I would prefer if they just took the mask off and said directly that they want to project power and gain access to natural resources through force. That's an honest position that the public should get to hear.