Narratives pave the way for endless war against Israel – analysis

The goal of recent discussions about the war between Israel and Hamas has sought to shift the discussion from one about Hamas rockets and Israeli airstrikes, to a discussion of the “right to resist” and whether all of Israel is “occupied” and a “settler” state. This narrative push has been made among western critics of Israel and by state media such as Turkey’s TRT as well as popular politicians and media in English, Arabic and other languages. 

For instance, The New Arab in the UK has an article about clashes in “occupied Haifa.” It speaks of the “Zionist criminals” and their “independence,” an apparent reference to Israel’s independence day. The increase in the view that all of Israel is “occupied” and reference to Israel as a “settler” state or even claims that Jewish far-right mobs are “Jewish white supremacists,” as one person called them, is part of a narrative that portrays every Israeli as foreign. Arabs in Israel are called “48 Arabs” in this narrative, as if time stopped when Israel was created and they await the return to that time.  

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the member of Congress said in the House of Representatives that the current conflict “is not about both sides. This is about an imbalance of power…The president stated that Israel has a right to self-defense…But do Palestinians have a right to survive?” That would indicate that Hamas rockets are “self-defense”? 

Other discussions about the recent conflict have argued that Israel uses disproportionate force. Another member of Congress suggested that Palestinians need US-supplied air defense. Together with the argument that Palestinians have a “right” to resist and that all of Israel is “occupied”, this presents a case for endless war against Israel excused and justified as some kind of right. Proportionate response means Hamas can fire rockets whenever it wants and put millions in bomb shelters and suffer no real consequences. For instance, in the early days of the recent conflict there was controversy about Israel targeting buildings in Gaza. Can a military target a building that civilians might live near or be in? The argument shifted to positing that Hamas has a right to target Israeli cities because of the presence of some Israeli military in them. In short, Israel cannot target a building in Gaza, but Hamas has a right to indiscriminate “resistance” rocket fire against everywhere in Israel. Israel must only do a proportionate response to the rockets.  

The overall logic here presents a case for endless justified terror war on Israel. Rockets are seen as “resistance” and Palestinians have a “right to resist occupation,” some voices say. For instance Susan Sarandon, the celebrity, posted on social media some supposed facts about the conflict. In the question and answer, the question is posed whether there is a “conflict” and the answer is “what is happening in Palestine is settler colonialism, military occupation, land theft and ethnic cleansing.” Palestinians are “colonized” and “oppressed” in the telling. That means there is no “conflict” because apparently when the “oppressed” fire missiles at cities killing civilians it is an acceptable method of fighting “colonialism.” 

Another argument in favor of this narrative presents it in the following way: “As events in Israeli occupied east Jerusalem and Gaza have illustrated, today in Palestine, no home is safe, no civic institution secure, no holy site sacred as long as the promise of the Palestinians’ inalienable rights, including the right to return remains unfulfilled.” This was written on the website of Medical Aid for Palestinians. It would appear to mean that until every claim of Palestinians is fulfilled, including millions of Palestinian descendants of those who fled in the 1948 war “return” then there can be no peace. Once again, this is about setting the clock back to 1948. 

Another criticism raised in the US is against military aid to Israel, part of a ten-year package that is more than three billion a year. This money is spent primarily in the US on US defense products. However the critics say that it should be ended or it should be used as leverage to get Israel to stop its airstrikes. This appears to mean that while Hamas can fire 2,500 rockets at Israel, as punishment for the Hamas rocket fire, Israel shouldn’t receive military aid. It was unclear if the more Hamas rockets fired, the more aid would be reduced, in this line of argument. 

Taken together these arguments envision endless conflict due to often framing the rocket attacks as “resistance.”