Israel Ziv, a 66 year-old retired Israeli Army general, is being celebrated in Israel and in the pages of the New York Times, and for good reason. He’s a genuine hero. When he realized that Hamas had breached the security fence and starting attacking communities in the south, he hopped in his Audi armed with nothing but 9 millimeter pistol and raced off into the breach. He came across disorganized Israel soldiers and rallied them to battle Hamas, rescuing many before arriving at the tragic grounds of the doomed all-night rave where hundreds of young men and women lay dead. I imagine it was much like the experience American soldiers felt when they liberated Nazi Germany’s concentration camps.
There were bodies everywhere: in the campsite; in the field where everyone had been dancing; in car after car after car lining the road, filled with young people trying to escape.
He ran to one young man slumped out of a car and felt his neck. No pulse.
The sorrow and rage he felt must have been indescribable, and wholly justified. And, naturally, his first impulse was that those responsible must not get away with it.
“People don’t understand how fragile the situation is,” Mr. Ziv said. “Hamas has to pay for this.” He paused. “With their existence.”
But when asked how this might be accomplished, Gen. Ziv said, “Level the ground.”
And lest you think this is idle talk, Gen. Ziv is very much involved in crafting Israel’s response.
Mr. Ziv is still welcome in Israel’s corridors of power. On Wednesday, he held several teleconferences with captains of industry about raising tens of millions of dollars to help victims and their families.
“Just for civilians,” he shouted into his phone. “None of it for the army.”
He spoke to the top brass of the military and the police about shoring up a civilian defense force that had clearly been overwhelmed.
He even walked into Israel’s Defense Ministry, where he met with the defense minister, Yoav Gallant, and held secret meetings with national security officials in which they left their mobile phones on the hallway floor before stepping inside a small office for a chat that, the hope was, could not be tracked.
It’s true that the general won’t be making decisions about how to attack to Gaza Strip. But it matters that one of the most celebrated people in Israel now, who has earned tremendous credibility and has access to the decision-makers, is saying Gaza, with a population of two million, should be leveled to the ground.
Believe me, I understand how he feels. But, my god, we’re talking about two million mostly innocent people. The general’s moral compass has been jostled out of whack, and I’m concerned that his position is shared at the highest levels of government, including by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who probably will overcompensate for his all-encompassing failures.
I sympathize, too, with Ameen Hakim, a Brooklynite Palestinian American who “was born in Jordan as a refugee after his parents, who were from Nazareth, fled their homeland.” Hakim is quoted in the New York Times, offering “complicated opinions about the war — horror at the loss of life, anger about the underlying conditions, hope for a more sustainable solution.” But then he says this: “We’re glad the Palestinians’ story is back on the surface,” Mr. Hakim said, and “we pray that the killing will stop, from both parties.”
That quote stopped me in my tracks. He says “We’re (meaning Palestinian Americans) glad” that the story of Palestine is “back on the surface.” And, believe me, I can understand this, too. The Abraham Accords were celebrated here at home. They were an agreement between between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain signed in 2020 allowing for a normalization of relations. As part of the deal, those Arab nations recognized Israel’s sovereignty. The Biden administration has been seeking to build on that achievement by negotiating a similar deal between Israel and Saudi Arabia. But the Palestinians stand to gain nothing from these agreements. Rather, it amounts to the Arab world giving up on a two-state solution or any meaningful resistance to the inexorable annexation of the West Bank by Israeli settlers.
In this sense, the plight of the Palestinians had fallen below the surface. Hamas’s brutal unspeakable attack certainly reversed that trend, but not in a way any sane person would welcome. If the Palestinians were suffering from abandonment and neglect before, now they’ve lost the moral high ground that was their best asset. If they were suffering under a right-wing Israeli government’s relentless pursuit of territory, now they face generals who don’t think twice before advocating that Gaza be leveled.
In theory, some kind of attack could have put a halt to the Israeli-Saudi negotiations and gotten Palestine some renewed attention. I can see how that was in Palestine’s interests. But not this kind of attack. Not gunning down concert-goers and left-wing kibbutzers in their homes. Not through rapes and baby-killing and mutilations. It’s impossible to defend or even to tolerate, and no Palestinian, American or otherwise, should be glad that this is how Palestinians are represented in the press.
Consider the case of Rep. Rashida Tlaib, the only ethnically Palestinian member of Congress. She is being censored for saying the following:
“I grieve the Palestinian and Israeli lives lost yesterday, today, and every day. I am determined as ever to fight for a just future where everyone can live in peace, without fear and with true freedom, equal rights, and human dignity. The path to that future must include lifting the blockade, ending the occupation, and dismantling the apartheid system that creates the suffocating, dehumanizing conditions that can lead to resistance.”
What was her transgression? She had nothing to say about the atrocities carried about by Hamas. She appeared to grieve equally for those who were slaughtered and those who lost their lives while doing the slaughtering. What she actually said was otherwise unremarkable, a call for peace, equal rights and human dignity, and an end to right-wing Israeli policies towards the Palestinians, including the blockade of Gaza. But, because of the magnitude of what Hamas had done, those words were politically toxic. She felt compelled to follow them up with a more balanced stance.
Speaking to the [Detroit] Free Press, Tlaib − who is the target of a censure resolution filed by another member of the Michigan congressional delegation for her comments − said there is no defense for the atrocities committed by the group, which the U.S. government labels a terrorist organization.
Only after making that essential point did she follow up by saying, “But neither is there [any defense] for any extreme retribution exacted by Israel on the civilians in the Gaza Strip from where the attacks were launched or the human rights violations committed by Israel against Palestinians under its control.”
Many, many people would agree with that statement, and are calling for Israel to show some restraint as they go after Hamas in Gaza. But the idea that there is a moral equivalence here, as still expressed in her statement, is broadly seen as repugnant, and it’s politically perilous for just that reason. This shows how much damage Hamas has done to the Palestinians’ moral argument. You can see this throughout the New York Times’ coverage:
Many U.S. Palestinians interviewed said they were reluctant to speak out on the unfolding situation. Several people declined to be interviewed, citing fear of legal and professional backlash, distrust of the American news media or concern that they could place loved ones at risk overseas. In recent days, the police in some U.S. cities have stepped up security around synagogues and mosques.
“It’s impossible to say anything and not receive harsh criticism or anger,” said Aziza Hasan, a Palestinian American who is the executive director of a group that seeks to forge ties between Jewish and Muslim people in Los Angeles.
And it’s not just Palestinian Americans, but also their American allies. For example, the Democratic Socialists of America have a strong pro-Palestinian position, but in issuing tone-deaf responses to the tragedy that place primary blame on Israel and do not express appropriate outrage at Hamas, they’ve been widely denounced (including by star member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez) and lost members.
And justifiably so.
The more Palestinians and friends of their cause fail to distinguish themselves from Hamas, the less sympathy there will be for innocent Gazans suffering under Israeli retaliation. Similarly, the Israelis will see less distinction between Hamas and the rest of the Gazan population, and be more inclined to ‘level’ the Strip.
This kind of shocking brutality is a shock to everyone’s system and we understandably don’t respond with thoughtfulness and careful planning. Shaken assumptions may take time to recalibrate. I get all that.
But there are people I sympathize with on all sides of this tragedy that are saying truly crazy things. Everyone should agree that it’s not justified to slaughter civilians. If we could just agree on that, we can see about a way forward.
