APOLOGIA: Chapter 12 of Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments

March 25, 2024

Chapter 12 of Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments

Untangling Popular Anti-Israel Arguments: Critical Thinking about the Israel-Hamas War

Note to readers: See previous APOLOGIA post for Chapter 11. (Also, Table of Contents with links is listed below. Or download pdf of the whole book here.)

Note to critics: Please read the whole of my little book (including notes) before offering criticism. Thanks.

Chapter 12: Israel’s response to Hamas is not proportional?

Objection: Compared to the harm done by Hamas to Israel, Israel’s military response is not proportional and thus wrong.

Reply 1

From British journalist Douglas Murray:

Proportionality in conflict rarely exists. But if we were to decide that we should have this fetish about proportionality, then that would mean that in retaliation for what Hamas did in Israel on Saturday [October 7, 2023], then Israel should try and locate a music festival in Gaza, for instance (and good luck with that), and rape precisely the number of women that Hamas raped, kill precisely the number of young people that Hamas killed.

They should find a town of exactly the same size of Sderot, and make sure they go door to door and kill precisely the correct number of babies that Hamas killed in Sderot and shoot in the head precisely the same number of old-age pensioners that Hamas shot in the head on Saturday.

Proportionality in conflict [in this mathematical sense] is a joke…. It is only the Israelis that, when attacked, are expected to have precisely a proportionate response.¹

In other words, the notion of proportionality as a principle in just war is not a mere mathematical concept whereby casualties are balanced equally. It’s something much more nuanced—as we will see in the next three replies.

Reply 2

IDF Lieutenant Colonel (reserve) Maurice Hirsch explains the just war principle of proportionality as follows:

In IHL [International Humanitarian Law, a.k.a. the Laws of War], proportionality refers to a situation in which a military target is attacked and that attack causes incidental or collateral damage. Attacks of this nature are perfectly legitimate, so long as the loss of life and dam-age to property incidental to the attacks are not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage expected to be gained. As the value of the military target grows, so too does the extent of permitted incidental damage.

In other words, IHL accepts the fact that in war, civilian lives may be lost and civilian property might be damaged. Neither of these outcomes is necessarily prohibited, so long as the object being attacked is a military target of sufficient value.²

In the case of Gaza, then, we should ask: Is the destruction of the military target of sufficient value, i.e., morally advantageous to Israel, such that Gazan civilians and their homes may also be destroyed, albeit unintentionally? Sadly, because the targets in Gaza, if not destroyed, will at any cost brutally destroy all of Israel—as vowed by Hamas—the answer is yes.

Hirsch adds:

The deaths of legitimate civilians and ostensibly high level of destruction in urban neighborhoods do not reflect Israel’s disregard for the principle of distinction or proportionality, but rather are reflective of the fact that terrorists intentionally use civilians, including women and children, as human shields and intentionally place their military infrastructure in the heart of the civilian population.

While the death of every non-combatant is unfortunate, the people who bear the responsibility for each and every one of those deaths are the terrorists.³

The terrorists are promising the destruction of Israel (and have shown on October 7 that the promised destruction is not merely hypothetical); the terrorists have made it impossible for Israel to stop the terrorists without significant destruction of Gazan civilians (it’s either Israel goes to war or allows itself, including women and children, to be brutally destroyed); so the destruction of significant numbers of Gazan civilians is a tragic cost—for which Hamas is responsible.

Reply 3

From Michael Walzer, Princeton professor (emeritus) and author of Just and Unjust Wars:

Hamas’s decision to embed itself in the civilian population…was designed [by Hamas] to make Israel look as if it is fighting illegally and unjustly, no matter how it fights. So Hamas should be held responsible for launching a war that was intended to produce large numbers of deaths among its own people. And Israel is responsible for all the deaths it causes beyond those that are unavoidable in the war Hamas designed.⁴

Reply 4

From me, a retired philosophy professor (who is trying to seek truth and make sense of the goings-on in Gaza): I often hear claims on social media about excessively large numbers of Gazan innocent civilians being unjustly killed by Israel. Certainly, many Gazan children and other innocents have been killed and for these people I mourn. Nevertheless, four points should be kept in mind for the sake of clarity and truth.

First, the innocence of large numbers of Gaza’s civilians is dubious. In fact, it very much seems that large numbers of Gaza’s civilians are either terrorists or supporters of terrorists. There is much evidence to support this view. Consider the following:

Evidence of many Gazan civilians cheering when dead Israelis were paraded in Gaza shortly after the Hamas October 7 attack.⁵
Evidence that many Gazans (including children) were involved in the looting during the October 7 attack.⁶
Evidence that many Gazan young people have been for years indoctrinated with a murderous anti-Jewish/anti-Israel ideology (in UN schools) and have helped Hamas terrorists by carrying messages and munitions.⁷
Evidence of 560 to 700 kilometres (350 to 450 miles!) of cement tunnels⁸ that were built in Gaza over the past 16 years—so surely many Gazan civilians were aware of this.
Evidence of the tunnel shafts being hosted by (i.e., coming out of) homes, schools, mosques, and hospitals all across tiny Gaza—and again, surely, many Gazan civilians were aware of this. And surely many Gazan civilians were aware that the tunnels’ purpose was for war against Israel and to wipe out Jews (per the Hamas charter), yet Gazans did not protest.⁹

Second, it also is important to keep in mind that before and during the war with Hamas, Israel engaged in extraordinary efforts to protect Gazan civilians from potential harm. How? By warning them of Israel’s invasion by dropping millions of leaflets, sending millions of text and voice messages, and “knocking” (hitting a building’s roof with an unexploding “bomb” to warn residents that the next bomb will explode).¹⁰ And Israel has provided humanitarian corridors and safe zones (often made unsafe by Hamas).¹¹

Third, and related to the previous point, we should keep in mind the fact that the civilian-combatant death ratio in Gaza is low when it is compared to other cases of urban warfare in recent history. That is, the other cases of urban warfare by Western democracies have more civilian deaths per combatant death than is the case in Israel’s war against Hamas (even though Hamas has, unlike the other cases, spent years not only embedding itself among civilians in Gaza but also fortifying its underground war machine). And add to this the fact that the misfiring of many Hamas rockets caused many Gazan casualties.¹²

(I acknowledge that speaking of civilian-to-combatant death ratios seems cold-hearted and calculating. After all, we are talking about the tragic deaths of people. But keep in mind that the alleged lack-of-proportionality objection itself requires such a response.)

Fourth, we should keep in mind that the Gazans, led by Hamas, started the war with Israel, a war in which it was not only foreseeable but also planned by Gazans, led by Hamas, that Israel’s military response would appear to observers in the West to be lacking proportionality. How so? By using Western moral qualms (which Hamas does not have) against Westerners. Reminder: Hamas terrorists embedded themselves among Gazan civilians (of whom many have aided and abetted the terrorists; see evidence in point 1 above), knowing there would be huge numbers of civilian casualties which constitute, for Hamas, a military strategy, not a moral tragedy. Moreover, the foreseeable-to-Hamas vividness of the horrors of dead civilians, especially children—vividness provided to the world in abundance via photos and video on the internet, as foreseen by Hamas—is intended by Hamas to play on the oft-emotion-based moral reasoning of Western observers. For many Westerners, bloodshed of civilians is repulsive, full stop, and no further moral reasoning is done to discern who is actually responsible. This is sometimes called the CNN effect. The byline of Rabbi Shlomo Brody’s article “Israel and the CNN Effect” is helpful here: “Images of bloodshed in Gaza should upset anyone with a healthy moral sense. But they don’t help determine whether the actions that brought these scenes about were ethical.”¹³ Brody adds:

We might be saddened by these deaths, but our moral analysis must remain sober. Good reasoning must overcome our instinctive revulsion to bloodshed. We cannot fixate on body counts or CNN coverage. Instead, we must determine with whom culpability lies.¹⁴

Sober-minded moral reasoning based on evidence shows that the culpability lies with Hamas, but Hamas hides its culpability (along with its fighters) behind the broken and bloody bodies of its Gazan human shields, children included. Thereby Hamas gains world sympathy and Israel loses allies. The alleged lack of proportionality, then, is more apparent than real—and more by Hamas design than by Israeli intent—due to Hamas’s wicked machinations coupled with civilian help and Western gullibility.¹⁵

All this to say: Yes, war is truly terrible and there have been many tragic civilian losses in Gaza, including children, but Israel’s military response to its neighbouring terror regime has not been disproportionate and thus not morally inappropriate. In fact, Israel has worked hard and, when compared to other cases of urban warfare, effectively to avoid deaths beyond those that Hamas designed to be unavoidable. Yes, the deaths of Gazan civilians—especially children—are horrible and our hearts should break. But keep in mind that those tragic deaths are the fault of Hamas and Gazans who support Hamas. Of course, because of human fallibility complete moral success in war is not inevitable and probably not attainable. Nevertheless, British Forces Colonel Richard Kemp goes so far as to describe Israel as having “the world’s most moral army.”¹⁶ And rightly so.¹⁷

NOTES

1. Gabriel Emanuel, Douglas Murray, Col. Richard Kemp explain uphill battle for Israel, The Jerusalem Post, December 29, 2023.

2. Maurice Hirsch, What is proportionality in international law when it comes to Israel?–opinion, The Jerusalem Post, August 10, 2022.

3. Hirsch, “What is proportionality.”

4. Michael Walzer, Gaza and the Asymmetry Trap, Quillette, December 1, 2023.

5. See Douglas Murray, Douglas Murray blasts Gazans for cheering on as woman paraded half-naked, Piers Morgan Uncensored, Sky News Australia, November 8, 2023 (11 minute video).

6. Andrew Tobin, Children as Young as 10 Took Part in Hamas's Oct. 7 Terror Attack, Survivors Say, The Washington Free Beacon, November 14, 2023.

7. See the section (12:19–22:55) about the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (a.k.a. UNRWA) in CBN News Jerusalem Dateline, January 19, 2024.

8. See Google.

9. Add to this the apparent fact that some (many?) Gazans are Muslims who embrace martyrdom and death for themselves and their families on behalf of the Islamic-jihadist cause against Israel. Dying in a jihad (war against enemies of Islam) assures them of paradise in the hereafter and avoidance of hell. Indeed, the vast majority of Gazan’s citizens are Muslim. Because they support Hamas and many are members of Hamas, which is a jihadist Islamic organization, it would be reasonable to describe Gazan citizens as what Ayaan Hirsi Ali calls “Medina Muslims,” i.e., they follow the violent teachings of the Prophet Mohammed when in Medina the prophet effectively became a warlord after his peaceful approach to spreading Islam in Mecca was rejected (“Mecca Muslims” follow the Prophet Mohammad’s peaceful teachings when he first began his religion in Mecca). For more on the distinction between Medina and Mecca Muslims, see Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Islam Is a Religion of Violence, Foreign Policy Magazine, November 9, 2015. See too Oren Cahanovitc, Israelis must listen to the Palestinians! Travelling Israel, March 9, 2024 (15 minute video).

10. Richard Kemp, Israel: The World's Most Moral Army, PragerU, December 7, 2015 (5 minute video).

11. This evidence can easily be found via news reports that are not biased against Israel. For examples, see reports from CBN News, ILTV Israel News, Douglas Murray, Eylon Levy.

12. See Richard Kemp, UN says global civilian to combatant death ratio [in urban conflict] is 9:1. In Gaza IDF seem to have achieved only 1.5:1, X (formerly Twitter), January 17, 2024. See too Alan Dershowitz, Civilian Deaths in Gaza: Relatively Low, Philadelphia Jewish Exponent, January 31, 2024.

13. Shlomo Brody, Israel and the CNN Effect, Mosaic, January 4, 2024.

14. Brody, “Israel and the CNN Effect.”

15. In my opinion the mistaken reasoning that Hamas exploits via the CNN Effect could be called a version of the fallacy of appeal to emotion or fallacy of misleading vividness. Arguably, the emotional impact of the ugly and horrific vividness of the many dead bodies impinges on and distorts careful reasoning concerning who is in fact morally responsible for those deaths.

16. Kemp, “Israel: The World's Most Moral Army.”

17. I sometimes hear (from Palestine supporters in Canada and the U.S.) that Israel should not be supplied with funds and weaponry from the West. It seems to me, however, that if one desires Israel to use (expensive) precision-guided munitions which minimize Gazan civilian casualties, then one should resist such calls. I also sometimes hear (from critics of Israel) that Israeli bombing is indiscriminate. It seems to me, however, that if Israeli bombing were indiscriminate (contrary to fact), then the Israel-Gaza war would have ended before the end of October 2023!

Table of Contents (links)

Introduction

Chapter 1. Israel is engaging in colonial retaliation?

Chapter 2. Israel is a powerful state and thus the oppressor?

Chapter 3. Israel is not a legitimate state?

Chapter 4. Israel occupies Gaza?

Chapter 5. Gaza is like a Jewish ghetto?

Chapter 6. What about Gabor Maté?

Chapter 7. What about Gabor Maté, again?

Chapter 8. Israel targets a hospital?

Chapter 9. Israel’s attack on Gaza is as bad (or worse) as Gaza’s attack on Israel?

Chapter 10. Israel is wrong to cause Gaza to suffer?