Israel, Palestine, and Moral Myopia
A brief geopolitical and ethical analysis of the current conflict in light of recent escalations.
Moral myopia, in a geopolitical context, can be described as a recognizable collective psychosis wherein a pattern of constant tension and divisive ideology comprehensively manipulates a collective to the extent that blind hatred becomes a critical component of their collective identity. While not a new or singular phenomenon, in the age of hyper-monetized militarization and tightly controlled news media, the prevalence of this myopic relational condition has grown all the more prevalent and destructive. Perhaps best exampled by the ever-escalating hostilities between Israel and Palestine, the recent attack from Hamas provides a chilling example of the real consequences of deluded ideologies.
I have yet to read any account or opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that accurately traces it’s documented history. Most accounts trace the roots of Zionism to 1897 when Theodore Herzl founded the Zionist Organization is Basel, Switzerland. This was certainly a significant moment in history, but geopolitical events rarely just “happen.” Rather, they build over time… Zionism is no exception.
Jewish settlements in Palestine began to grow in the mid-1800s with the majority of the population emigrating from what was then the Russian Empire. Without taking you too deep into the historical rabbit hole (tempted as I may be), the migration was largely a result of restrictive laws, violent pogroms, and the establishment of Jerusalems first printing house. The idea that the creation of the Israeli state was ever in any way a response to the events of the Second World War is demonstrably false due to the vast amounts of documentary evidence from almost every major city in the Western world.
The Zionist justifications for the occupation were are surprisingly comparable to those provided to many of the Native American populations by the monarchy of 15th century Spain. The conquistadors’ Requerimiento, a document read aloud to the natives to justify their subjugation, shares striking similarities to the Balfour Declaration of 1917, both of which claiming territorial ownership on vague religious grounds and historical misrepresentations.
For modern Palestinians, the experience of occupation and exile crystalized with the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, creating a rift in the collective Palestinian psyche that would come to be filled with frenzied violence, the dramatic escalation of which the world is currently witnessing through the global media. Videos showing horrific acts of brutality following a crippling Hamas attack that occurred last Saturday are circulating the internet and receiving immense international attention. It should go without saying that the sadistic behaviors recorded and reported in the attack are without justification, regardless of historical context.
That said, the Israeli government’s persistent neglect towards the rights and needs of the opposing side has fortified a continuous cycle where each act of aggression or injustice justifies the next in a never-ending spiral of retaliation and hostility. The bloody perpetual cycle not only sustains the conflict - fattening the military industrial complex with billions of dollars - but also intensifies it by carving narratives of victimhood and righteousness in unquestionable stone.
Similarly, the Israeli narrative, shaped by real and perceived existential threats and shifty historical narratives, has fostered a collective identity rooted in prejudiced ideology and militaristic paranoia. At a certain point, you have to wonder what exactly anyone expected the Palestinians to do. Demonization and dehumanization, no matter how brutal they play out, have become integral to the survival of a people. The methodology is unjustified and in my personal opinion, barbaric. But to ignore the context surrounding the attack, as well as the arguably comparable inhumane attacks from Israeli forces, would be disingenuous.
The problem with this sort of collective psychosis is that it is completely irrational, and therefore it is not susceptible to any kind of logic or reason, prolonged by deeply embedded and deceptive narratives. In the midst of the turmoil, the Palestinians remain one of the only groups of people in the world who are not allowed to govern themselves. This is a people who have been living under a brutal military occupation for the past 70 years and threatened by Zionism since the late 19th century.
Exploring the possibility of a future where both Palestinians and Israelis coexist must be done, despite all difficulty. Allowing the violence to proliferate unchecked until it drags the world into yet another unnecessary war by provoking Iran is unacceptable and uncivilized. A peaceful resolution, to this conflict as well as others, necessitates a recalibration of our moral and geopolitical lens. A lens that isn’t clouded by tautological, predetermined rhetoric that never has to stand up to scrutiny, and a return to true diplomacy, if ever such a thing existed.
-The Shultz Report by M. Shultz