September 11, 2014
When the Gaza-Israel conflict first broke out this summer, it seemed similar to many of the previous conflicts that have happened in the region. The death of three teenage Israelis sparked this latest itineration. Hamas launched Stone Age rockets, and Israel reacted with a full scale military operation. However, this time the war was horrifyingly different. Seven weeks of dehumanizing stupidity from both sides have yielded more than 1,473 civilian losses in Gaza, including 501 children, according to the UN.
There was an extreme sense of despair in the border town of Rafah. Relief trucks lined up waiting for approval to enter the Gaza Strip, with border security carefully inspecting every truck before allowing it into the warzone. Tireless volunteers stood in the desert sun, fuelled by the hope that their effort might save innocent lives. Unfortunately, most of these efforts were in vain. Even if the supplies were allowed to enter, the lack of electricity and limited medical facilities would guarantee their uselessness. Gaza is not simply a warzone; it is a large open air prison and a poorly equipped one at that.
Since my arrival to campus, I have regularly read the pink-sheet publication, Enquiry. It has always provided me with an alternative, thought-provoking perspective that is often not publicly discussed on campus. Nevertheless, in the first issue of the year, Enquiry editors provided a brief review of the summer events, including the war in Gaza. But to me, the editorial line they took with regard to Gaza was shocking for three reasons.
First, the article was seriously misinformed. Failing to provide honest, clear and precise information on such a sensitive topic is unacceptable. Second, the article was charged with McCarthyism. It stated: “Pro-Palestinian protestors in both the United States and Europe have been recorded using anti-Jewish slurs,” essentially accusing those who opposed Israel’s reaction of being anti-Semitic. The third and most important reason that their view on Gaza personally shocked me is the obvious lack of sympathy in the article. The authors’ stress on the right to self-defense seemed indifferent to the civilian death toll.
It is difficult for any writer to envision the horror that the Gazans experienced last summer and have been experiencing for almost a decade. It is difficult to imagine the fear that the sound of a jet fighter could produce, carrying the possibility that the next bomb it drops is going to hit your house. It is difficult to imagine what it is like to live every day trapped between the lash of Hamas and the gun of Israel. However, that difficulty is not an excuse for lack of sympathy, a natural trait that should exist regardless of any political or ideological inclination. If we accept the death of 501 children as collateral damage, there must be something seriously wrong with our moral compass.
July 5, 2013 was the most frightening and life-threatening night of my life. Hundreds of armed protestors of the Muslim Brotherhood (the parent organization of Hamas) marched through my neighborhood in Egypt on their way to Tahrir Square, in downtown Cairo. Minor clashes started breaking out among the residents, later escalating into a full-scale street fight that lasted for hours. I was trapped in the altercation’s “no man’s land” for several hours, on a day that ended with 12 deaths just from my small neighborhood. Less than two months later, my family and I were protesting against the military cruelty during the crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood, the same organization that threatened my neighborhood, my family and my life. My protest was not due to any unique or superior moral quality but rather due to the very basic trait of sympathy that is shared by most humans. Distinguishing between ideologies you detest and the unexcused death of hundreds of innocent civilians should not be even the slightest bit difficult.
It is very simple. No loss of innocent life should ever be justifiable, whether this life belongs to an Israeli, Palestinian, Muslim or Jew. Self-defense is different from mass revenge. If my article were to have a goal, it would be to salute the civilians of Gaza, the dead and the barely living, and to salute the children of Gaza, who have hidden in their schools for shelter, but have not found true safety there. As disgraceful as this might sound, we still live in an age where it is permissible to dehumanize a group of people. The civilians of Gaza are not an acceptable collateral damage. No human is!
No comments yet.
Comment Guidelines
Please log in to post a comment