Choosing a side during a war is not necessarily showing understanding. On Saturday morning, the Western world woke up to the sound and fury of an attack on the State of Israel by the armed group Hamas, which, in five days, left 1,200 dead in Israel, in addition to Hundreds of civilians taken hostage.
The Mossad, Israel’s military intelligence, saw nothing coming. It is therefore understandable that, for Israelis, this is both an unprecedented humiliation and a vicious attack, which has aroused a powerful feeling of revenge.
In the other camp, where there were 1,055 dead, in addition to the 1,500 bodies of Hamas militants that Israel claims to have found on its territory, Hamas justifies its attack by the strangulation of Gaza, which has lasted for 14 years and which forces 2.3 million Palestinians to live like prisoners. He also judges that the presence of the Israeli state is in fact an illegitimate occupation of Palestine which has lasted for more than 75 years, from which results in inhumane treatment of Palestinians, and Muslims in general.
Western governments, including those of the United States, France and Canada, have been unequivocal in their expressed solidarity with Israel, as heated pro-Palestinian protests erupted in many major cities around the world, including Sydney, New York and even Montreal last weekend.
But we must remember that this war is deeply rooted in the religious and ethnic differences that separate the two camps. For Israel as for Hamas, the other is a mortal enemy that they dehumanize in their respective speeches. Final victory, for Hamas, requires the destruction of the Israeli state and the restitution of Palestine as the only nation on the territory. Whereas for Israel, victory requires the destruction of any threat to the security of its people, which means the carnage of the inhabitants of Gaza, among whom a call to arms to join Hamas will always be present.
Although some mediating powers such as China have recalled the proposal to create two states, it is a solution that neither side is considering in the context of this war. A Palestinian state capable of defending itself would necessarily be capable of threatening the security of Israel.
In a context where the objectives of the two factions are absolutely not compatible, is our role as observer really to take sides? Knowing what each side is going through, and knowing the horrible price that will have to be paid in terms of human lives and dignity for one of the two peoples if the other should triumph?
We must realize that, in a war fueled by vengeance, supporting one side or the other will only encourage violence. US President Joe Biden, for example, fully encourages Israel’s attacks on Gaza without considering Israel’s human rights violations — including the deprivation of electricity and food for residents of the enclave, who cannot get out. He goes so far as to call Hamas “pure evil”, thus legitimizing any military action that Israel could carry out. This is a very poor example of a mediator in times of war.
We are lucky not to be at war and to be able to think about things other than our own survival. If we really want to support one people or another, our first duty is to seek to understand the situation and to think about solutions in order to build a better future, in which we can avoid massacres.
This future requires more courage to imagine than it takes to react to those who unleash hateful messages in the streets or on social networks. In a war where the only possible victory consists of mutual massacre, there is no possibility of an outcome that both peoples could rejoice in.
Taking sides would not honor justice. Nothing obliges us to fall into one of the camps.