I think it’s safe to say that all reasonable people recognize and condemn the insidious and unjustifiable nature of the October 7th Hamas attack against Israeli civilians.  As well as the sickening and infuriating wave of international antisemitism that has followed in its wake.  But it is equally incumbent upon rational, ethical observers to condemn the Israeli Government’s response as arbitrary, immoral, and beyond the pale.

Those of you who know me know that I’m deeply conflicted on the Israeli-Palestine issue.  I have many great friends in Israel from my time living there who were so kind and welcoming to me, and I unequivocally support Israel’s right to peaceful co-existence.  But I’ve also visited Palestinian homes in the West Bank that were endangered or threatened by violent Israeli settlers and settlements, and I couldn’t help but be moved by their plight and the appalling lack of protection from the Israeli Government that has only worsened under the current regime.

I’ve already written about how I thought the Israeli response should have proceeded, and it seems that the Israeli Government has learned none of the lessons that I and others hoped it would.  It seems bent on repeating the mistakes of similar disastrous responses like the US one to 9/11.  The Israeli Government has not employed a measured strategy and has instead been guided by emotion and revenge, rather than rationality and strategy.  It has not adhered to Just War Theory, including the principle of proportionality, as the mounting death toll in Gaza illustrates (Just War principles go beyond the mere counting of bodies, but even by this cynical measure, the disequilibrium is glaring).  And finally, the Israeli Government has jettisoned all considerations of international law, indiscriminately targeting civilians to achieve their aim of killing Hamas fighters, seemingly making the calculation that one senior Hamas commander is worth a hundred collateral civilian lives.

Throughout its history, Israel has largely been judged by a different standard by the international community.  They have been condemned for behaviors that others routinely commit without reproach (in particular by the grossly hypocritical UN Human Rights Council which has featured such leading lights as China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela).  They have been excoriated within the UN General Assembly when Israel has routinely applied greater standards of transparency than many of these same members.  Israel, conceived of as a liberal democracy, should hold itself to higher standards, and those of us who love the country should do the same.  But this episode is different.  Though a democracy (for some but not all), the Israeli Government is today failing many basic litmus tests of decency and morality.

The world is judging Israel, and they have found it wanting.  The international double standard for Israel still exists, of course, but the judgment in this case is not wrong.  The numbers don’t lie: the 1,400 Israelis killed and 230 hostages were an appalling affront to humanity and civilization and merited a firm response; but how does that excuse the more than 10,000 people killed in Gaza thus far, almost 4,000 of them children?  Many pundits and observers are condemning Israeli apologists for a double standard regarding the worth of Israeli and Palestinian lives.  Even a passing, cynical look at the death tolls will tell you that this is the sad truth.  We should not attempt to calculate a one-for-one body count unless we’re applying a truly cynical eye-for-an-eye approach to conflict and warfare.  But the disproportionate numbers tell a deeply saddening and distressing tale.  One where the Israeli Government has lost its ethical moorings and sees fit to commit war crimes to avenge an admittedly heinous act.  Liberal democracies are supposed to be above these kinds of base calculations and wide-scale human rights abuses.  The US, sadly, wasn’t after 9/11 with the torture and killings of Afghan and Iraqi civilians.  And Israel isn’t now.

President Biden has been panned by the domestic left and the international community for not criticizing the Israeli Government’s attacks on civilians more forcefully and for not reigning in the actions of a close ally.  On the latter, I imagine his hands are rather tied, and the Israeli Government and its military are going to do what they are going to do.  But I do agree with critics that President Biden can and should condemn attacks on civilians in Gaza more forcefully.  When your friends are actively harming themselves (not to mention others), you don’t stand by and let it happen.  And Israel is trashing its international reputation (long since having squandered any goodwill that resulted from the initial attacks) while endangering its long-term security.  President Obama understood this when he abstained in the UN Security Council on a resolution condemning Israeli settlements in 2016.  US-based pro-Israel actors were incensed at the time.  But you don’t help your friends by withholding hard truths—you tell it to them like it is.  And Israel is harming itself by its current actions, in addition to the horrors visited upon Gazan civilians.

Israel has an absolute sovereign right to pursue justice for its murdered and kidnapped.  And the pain that Israelis feel for lost loved ones, loved ones still in limbo, and a lost sense of security remains real and heartbreaking.  But no amount of Gazan civilians bombed and killed will bring them back.  Israel, as they have done in the past (think Munich or Entebbe), would be better served with a strategic and calculated reaction.  Revenge served cold.  A strategy that served their long-term interests and got at what they really want—the destruction of Hamas (which, let’s be honest—Hamas is a group of vile, barbaric scumbags who deserve to be eliminated).  The current scorched-earth strategy will not achieve Israel’s long-term aims; it will not eliminate the threat of future terrorist attacks in Israel.  It will create legions of future terrorists, and it will turn all of its neighbors against them.  The Abraham Accords look great on paper, but if no Arab leader dare embrace Israel, for fear of the public backlash against them, then they’re not worth the paper they’re printed on.

So what should Israel do?  It may be somewhat late to backpedal toward a more measured approach, but late is always better than never.  Given the current horrific toll on civilian lives and livelihoods, I am in favor of an immediate cease-fire or at the very least a humanitarian pause.  Both for the humanitarian necessities of the civilians in Gaza and for the long-term strategic objectives of Israel. The first reason is the obvious moral imperative of protecting innocent lives in Gaza.  But a cease-fire can be to Israeli benefit as well.  In addition to providing a desperately needed pause for humanitarian aid to reach the battered civilian population of Gaza and somewhat repair Israel’s battered international reputation, it would allow Israel to pause in order to recalculate and recalibrate its strategy.  Which has been misguided and counter-productive to this point, to say the least.  A pause would also afford the government (and by extension the nation) the time to define what the objectives of the operation really are and then construct a targeted strategy to achieve those objectives.  And, perhaps more importantly, give the country a chance to have a political reckoning and apportion blame where it is deserved: certainly primarily with Hamas and its hateful, loathsome ideology but also at the feet of Benjamin Netanyahu and his extremist government.

It is long past time to jettison the disastrous Netanyahu government which is in many ways responsible for the current predicament and to put in place a more rational and responsible government.  I do understand the Israeli opposition to a cease-fire as it leaves Hamas in place and doesn’t resolve any of the outstanding security issues it faces, but the current strategy doesn’t seem to be accomplishing that either.  And cease-fires are by their nature temporary—so it would not commit Israel to a determined path going forward.  But hopefully, a better way can be found in the interim period with more representative and sage leadership at the country’s helm.

Short of a cease-fire, there are other approaches that don’t exact a similar toll on the innocent.  Bret Stephens (who I am not generally a fan of but who has produced some more measured, thoughtful articles recently), in The New York Times, wrote about just such an approach proposed by a former Israeli prime minister that I thought was interesting (which you can read here).  It is not a cease-fire but proposes a more measured military intervention that tries to protect civilian lives and maintain humanitarian access while crippling Hamas.  The best responses are not necessarily the most immediate or parallel responses; they are the ones that pursue clear, attainable objectives.  The Israeli Government has demonstrated the capability to do this in the past and should return to a more analytical, cerebral approach.

The Israeli Government has yet to outline what its objectives are and what it hopes to achieve by its actions.  As of now, they have only achieved a horrific death toll and elicited a scornful international response.  Israelis deserve security, but this approach will not attain it; they also deserve a better government and should demand it.  Innocent Gazans also deserve a life of peace, stability, and economic opportunity.  Neither group is served by the current approach.