The Paradox of Power: A Critical Examination of Israel's Degeneration
Executive Summary
This report critically examines the concept of "degeneration" as it applies to the State of Israel, analyzing how the exercise of power may have led to a perceived deviation from its foundational ideals and international norms. The analysis traces Israel's historical genesis, rooted in Zionist aspirations for national self-determination and a Jewish homeland, profoundly shaped by the trauma of antisemitism and the Holocaust. It then contrasts these initial moral and ethical underpinnings with contemporary realities, particularly concerning the ongoing occupation of Palestinian territories and the documented human rights concerns. The report delves into the contentious accusations of apartheid and genocide, presenting both the arguments from human rights organizations and international bodies, as well as Israel's official responses and justifications, often grounded in security imperatives. A detailed examination of Israel's evolving security doctrine, including the "Iron Wall" concept, highlights the ethical dilemmas inherent in urban warfare and the interpretation of international humanitarian law. Furthermore, the profound influence of Holocaust memory on Israeli identity and policy is explored, alongside critiques regarding its invocation to justify contemporary actions. Finally, the report addresses the international community's evolving scrutiny, marked by accusations of selective empathy and Western moral hypocrisy, and the increasing role of international legal bodies in challenging Israel's legitimacy. The central paradox articulated throughout the report is how the pursuit of security and self-determination, while understandable given historical context, has, for many observers, led to a departure from the ethical principles initially espoused, incurring significant internal and external costs and raising profound questions about Israel's future and regional stability.
1. Introduction: Deconstructing the Paradox of Power
The State of Israel, established in 1948, emerged from a profound historical context, embodying the aspirations for national self-determination and a secure homeland for the Jewish people. Its foundational narratives often speak to democratic values, universal ethics, and the vision of being a "light unto the nations." However, in the decades since its inception, particularly following the 1967 war and the subsequent occupation of Palestinian territories, Israel has faced increasing international scrutiny and severe criticism regarding its policies and actions. This report undertakes a critical examination of this complex trajectory, exploring what is termed "the paradox of power" and its perceived role in Israel's "degeneration." In this context, "degeneration" is understood not as a complete moral collapse, but rather as a significant and observable deviation from the ethical and democratic aspirations that underpinned the Zionist project and the establishment of the State of Israel. This includes a perceived shift from the initial vision of a principled nation to a state increasingly criticized for its conduct in the occupied territories and its treatment of the Palestinian population. Such a deviation challenges Israel's self-proclaimed identity and its standing within the international community. This analysis adopts a multi-faceted approach, integrating historical context, political analysis, ethical considerations, legal frameworks, and international relations perspectives. The scope encompasses the pre-state Zionist movement, the pivotal events of the 1948 Nakba, the prolonged post-1967 occupation, and contemporary conflicts, with a particular focus on the humanitarian situation in Gaza. By examining these dimensions, the report aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the perceived decline in moral and ethical standing, and the complex interplay of factors contributing to this phenomenon.
2. Genesis of a Nation: Ideals, Aspirations, and Historical Context
The establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 was the culmination of the Zionist movement, a political and cultural phenomenon deeply rooted in late 19th-century Europe. Understanding its foundational ideals and the historical forces that shaped its birth is crucial for any critical examination of its subsequent trajectory.
The Zionist Project: National Self-Determination and a Jewish Homeland
Zionism emerged as an ethnocultural nationalist movement, driven by the desire to establish and support a Jewish homeland in Palestine, a region central to Jewish history and religious belief. Theodor Herzl, considered the founder of modern Zionism, articulated this vision in his 1896 pamphlet Der Judenstaat, foreseeing an independent Jewish state in the 20th century. A core tenet of the movement was the belief that Jews constituted a nation with a moral and historic right to self-determination in Palestine, a conviction born from the precarious status of Jews as minorities in Europe and the Middle East. Early Zionist organizations actively encouraged immigration to Palestine, with a stated aim of creating a Jewish state with "as much land, as many Jews, and as few Palestinian Arabs as possible". Notably, the youthful immigrants of the Labor Zionist wing harbored aspirations of establishing a "new Jewish utopia based on communitarian and socialist ideals".
The "Chosen People" Concept: Religious and Secular Interpretations
Central to Jewish identity, the concept of Jews as the "chosen people" reflects a belief in a covenant with God, interpreted by many as a divine mission to be a "light unto the nations" and exemplify the covenant described in the Torah. This belief, a core element of Judaism, has been interpreted in various ways over time. Importantly, within Judaism, this status does not inherently imply ethnic supremacy or preclude God's relationship with other peoples; biblical and rabbinic texts support the view of a broader covenant with all humankind. A significant tension exists between this traditional Judaic understanding of chosenness and modern nationalism. The traditional sense of nationhood was rooted in religious beliefs of "unique chosenness and divine providence," with a connection to Eretz Israel based on messianic beliefs and religious practices, rather than modern nationalist conceptions. Modern Zionism, however, while emerging from traditional Jewish commitments, is also described as a "secularization of the religious value of Jewish peoplehood". This transformation from a divinely ordained, mission-oriented chosenness to a more secular, political nationalism aimed at self-determination carries profound implications. Where traditional chosenness explicitly disavows ethnic supremacy, the secular nationalist project, by seeking to minimize the Palestinian Arab population , can be perceived as implicitly or explicitly prioritizing ethnic-national exclusivity over universal ethical principles. This sets a foundational divergence that can contribute to a perceived "degeneration" if the secular-nationalist interpretation overshadows the universalist ethical one.
Impact of Antisemitism and the Holocaust on Israel's Establishment and Identity
The rise of Zionism was significantly propelled by waves of antisemitism across Europe, including pivotal events like the Dreyfus Affair , and in response to the Haskalah, or Jewish Enlightenment. The Holocaust, in particular, exerted a profound and undeniable influence on the urgency for a Jewish homeland. In the aftermath of this genocide, most survivors felt there was no future for Jews in Europe and desired a homeland where they would no longer be a vulnerable minority. The Nazi Holocaust was seen as a "clear demonstration of the urgency of the re-establishment in Eretz-Israel of the Jewish State," a state that would "open the gates of the homeland wide to every Jew and confer upon the Jewish people the status of a fully privileged member of the [community of nations]". The establishment of Israel was thus widely viewed as a "redemptive legacy" of the Holocaust, symbolizing a journey "from catastrophe to rebirth, from crisis to redemption". By 1960, a significant portion of Israel's population, 25%, was comprised of Holocaust survivors. This profound historical trauma and the resulting "existential anxiety and fear of annihilation" have deeply shaped Israel's national character, fostering a pervasive sense that a "second Holocaust is an impending possibility". While providing a powerful moral imperative for Israel's existence and security, this historical burden can also be seen as shaping a national character that prioritizes security above all else, potentially at the expense of universal ethical considerations. The notion that Jews are a nation deserving their own nation-state, like any other, is juxtaposed with the Zionist idea that Jewish life in the Diaspora was inherently harmful and needed to be negated. This can lead to a perception of exceptionalism that, while understandable given the history of persecution, might justify actions that would be condemned if undertaken by other nations. The paradox of power emerges here: the very power gained to prevent future victimhood might, in its exercise, lead to the perpetration of harm, consciously or unconsciously, against another group, thereby undermining the initial ethical aspirations.
3. The Unfolding Reality: Occupation, Dispossession, and Human Rights Concerns
The establishment of the State of Israel, while fulfilling a long-held aspiration for Jewish self-determination, simultaneously initiated a profound and enduring period of dispossession and statelessness for the Palestinian population. The subsequent occupation of territories in 1967 has further entrenched a reality marked by significant human rights concerns, fundamentally shaping the ongoing conflict.
The Nakba and the Palestinian Narrative of Dispossession and Statelessness
The events of 1948, referred to by Palestinians as the "Nakba" (the catastrophe), represent a foundational trauma. During this period, approximately 750,000 Palestinians, constituting about half of the predominantly Arab population of Palestine, were expelled from their homes or fled through various violent means. This included massacres and the use of psychological warfare tactics to induce flight. Over 500 Arab-majority towns, villages, and urban neighborhoods were depopulated, many of which were subsequently destroyed or repopulated by Jewish immigrants and given new Hebrew names. The Palestinian national narrative views the Nakba as a "collective trauma that defines Palestinians' national identity and political aspirations". This stands in stark contrast to the Israeli national narrative, which largely frames these events as a component of the War of Independence, often denying or justifying the expulsions as necessary or voluntary departures. For many Palestinians, the consequence of these events is a profound condition of statelessness, meaning they are "homeless on a global scale," lacking state protection, and unable to "project" their voice or claim fundamental rights on an international stage. This condition is perceived as legal, political, and existential, affecting even those who hold other nationalities but still identify as stateless due to the absence of an internationally recognized Palestinian state and homeland.
The British Mandate's Legacy and its Role in Shaping the Conflict
The historical context preceding Israel's establishment is critical, particularly the role of the British Mandate for Palestine. The Balfour Declaration of 1917, a pivotal statement by the British government, publicly pledged support for "a national home for the Jewish people" in Palestine. This declaration was made despite the fact that the native Arab population constituted over 90% of the inhabitants, and without their consent. This arrangement is often described as a "thinly veiled form of colonialism" that, in practice, equipped the Jewish minority with the tools to establish self-rule at the expense of the Palestinian Arabs. The British Mandate (1918-1948) formally incorporated the Balfour Declaration, yet it also stipulated an obligation for Britain to conduct its policy in Palestine in accordance with the needs of both Jews and Arabs. This "dual mandate" effectively institutionalized competing national aspirations within a single territory, creating a framework of inherent conflict. The deliberate ambiguity of the term "national home" versus "state" left the future open to interpretation but set the stage for a zero-sum struggle over land and sovereignty. As Jewish immigration surged under the Mandate, violent confrontations between Jewish and Arab communities intensified, ultimately leading the British to recommend partitioning the land. The British actions, including later restrictions on Jewish immigration and a heavy-handed response to Arab revolts that weakened Arab society, contributed significantly to the conditions that led to the 1948 war and the Nakba. This historical legacy suggests that the perceived "degeneration" is not solely an internal Israeli phenomenon but is deeply intertwined with the unresolved colonial legacy and the initial international framing of the conflict, which prioritized one group's aspirations over the established rights of another.
The Post-1967 Occupation: Legal Status, Territorial Fragmentation, and Impact on Palestinian Daily Life
The Arab-Israeli war of June 1967 dramatically altered the geopolitical landscape, resulting in Israel's occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem. This occupation has had a profoundly negative impact on the political and socio-economic life of the Palestinian population, leading to economic stagnation, the dismantling of Palestinian communities, extensive human rights violations, and the exploitation and depletion of natural resources. Even after Israel's unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip in 2005, most international bodies, humanitarian organizations, and academic commentators continue to regard Gaza as being under Israeli occupation due to Israel's active control over the territory's external affairs, including its borders, airspace, and coastal waters. This "remote" or "functional" occupation implies continued responsibilities for the welfare of the civilian population under international law. The occupation fundamentally denies Palestinians control over basic aspects of their daily lives, including freedom of movement within their own country, the ability to exit and return, the development of their territory, construction on their own land, and access to natural resources. Occupation-related policies have led to the isolation of communities, ruptured social cohesion, and undermined the Palestinian right to self-determination. The "Master Plan for the Development of Samaria and Judea" (1983) is cited as foreseeing the creation of a belt of concentrated Jewish settlements that disrupt Palestinian links, leading to a process of "enclavization" or a "Bantustan model". This territorial fragmentation and demographic engineering are viewed as impeding the Palestinian people's right to self-determination. The detailed accounts of land expropriation, water control, movement restrictions, and the destruction of infrastructure reveal a systemic pattern of control that extends beyond immediate security concerns. The "enclavization" and "Bantustan model" suggest a deliberate strategy of territorial fragmentation and demographic engineering. This systematic denial of basic rights and control over daily life cultivates "hopelessness and frustration" , which in turn is seen as driving continued violence. This creates a self-perpetuating cycle where the consequences of occupation are then used to justify further control measures, leading to a deepening of the conflict and the very "degeneration" under examination. The humanitarian crisis in Gaza is not merely a byproduct of conflict but appears, from these accounts, to be a direct consequence of policies that deliberately restrict essential resources, amounting to a "production of health scarcity" and "deliberately inflicting on Palestinians conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction".
Documented Human Rights Violations
Numerous human rights organizations and international bodies have documented a wide range of human rights violations against Palestinians under Israeli control.
Treatment of Ethnic and Religious Minorities: Israel has faced criticism for its treatment of ethnic and religious minorities, including its own Arab citizens. Specific policies, such as the Law of Return, the 2003 Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law, and the 2018 Nation-State Law, are cited as discriminatory measures.
Arbitrary Detention and Force-Feeding of Prisoners: Thousands of Palestinian prisoners are held in Israeli prisons, often without trial, with hunger strikes representing a last resort against unlawful detention and inhumane conditions. Reports highlight "increasing violent policies (e.g., torture during investigations)" and a rise in deaths among Palestinian citizens, including women and children. While international legal and medical declarations prohibit force-feeding, local Israeli guidelines and legislation allow for its use, often justified by clinical ethics committees.
Restrictions on Movement, Access to Resources, and Destruction of Infrastructure: Israel has been accused of "deliberately block[ing] access to water, electricity and humanitarian aid" in Gaza. Checkpoints and bombardment significantly threaten aid delivery, leading to severe malnutrition and starvation, with reports of children dying from these conditions. Gaza's health system has been systematically debilitated, with hospitals attacked hundreds of times (600 attacks in 4 months, 24 destroyed), medical supplies critically scarce, and healthcare workers killed or arrested. Educational institutions have also been severely impacted, with universities bombed in what has been described as "scholasticide". Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have documented hundreds of Israeli attacks on school buildings, many of which were used as shelters, resulting in civilian deaths and denying safe access to refuge.
4. Contested Narratives: Apartheid and Genocide Allegations
The most severe criticisms leveled against Israel in recent years are the accusations of apartheid and genocide. These claims fundamentally challenge Israel's self-perception and international standing, prompting vigorous debate and official denials.
Examination of the "Apartheid" Accusation
Several prominent human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the Israeli group B'Tselem, alongside numerous scholars, have concluded that the Israeli regime in the Occupied Palestinian Territory constitutes apartheid. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has also found Israel's occupation to involve "systemic discrimination" and a breach of Article 3 of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, which prohibits racial segregation. The elements cited to support this accusation include: near-total physical separation between Israeli settlers and Palestinians in the West Bank, judicial separation that discriminates against Palestinians in various ways, and discrimination against Palestinian refugees and even against Israel's own Palestinian citizens. Specific legislative measures, such as the Law of Return, the 2003 Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law, and the 2018 Nation-State Law, are highlighted as contributing to this institutionalized discrimination, alongside restrictions on freedom of movement, land use, and political representation. The application of the term "apartheid" is not merely rhetorical but carries significant legal and moral weight, drawing direct parallels to the universally condemned regime in South Africa. The detailed descriptions of "systematic discrimination" and an "institutionalized regime of systematic oppression" suggest a structural rather than incidental problem. The ICJ's finding of "systemic discrimination" further lends international legal credence to the accusation, elevating it beyond mere political criticism. This constitutes a perceived "degeneration" as it challenges Israel's transformation from a state founded on democratic ideals to one implementing policies that, for many, meet the international legal definition of apartheid, thereby undermining its claim to being a "liberal democracy."
Israel's Counter-Arguments to Apartheid
Israel strenuously denies the apartheid accusation, asserting that its policies are primarily driven by "security considerations". For example, the construction of the West Bank barrier and the establishment of checkpoints are justified as necessary measures to prevent terrorist attacks. Israel argues that the accusation is "factually and morally inaccurate and intended to delegitimize Israel". It frequently labels the charge as "antisemitic," a claim that critics, however, have characterized as the "weaponization of antisemitism". Furthermore, Israel asserts its identity as a "democracy committed to international law," possessing a free press and an independent judicial system. It points to its Arab citizens who, within Israel's national territory, enjoy civil, religious, social, and political equality. This is supported by instances such as the Israeli Supreme Court's 2000 ruling affirming the equal right of Israeli Arabs to purchase long-term leases of land, even in previously exclusively Jewish communities, stating that the state cannot discriminate based on religion or nationality. Some Israeli figures and supporters argue that the conflict is fundamentally one of "separate nationalisms" rather than racial discrimination, suggesting that Israelis and Palestinians often choose to live apart due to cultural and historical differences.
Analysis of "Genocide" Allegations
More recently, a significant escalation in the moral and legal critique of Israel's actions has occurred with accusations of "genocide." Reports by Israeli human rights groups, B'Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel (PHRI), along with international organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have accused Israel of committing genocide in Gaza. These accusations cite "mass killing, both directly and through creating unlivable conditions, serious bodily or mental harm to an entire population, decimation of basic infrastructure throughout the Strip, and forcible displacement on a huge scale". The reports emphasize that "statements by senior Israeli officials and actions on the ground" demonstrate an intent to target the entire population of the Gaza Strip. This includes "deliberately inflicting on Palestinians conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction in whole or in part". The shift from "apartheid" to "genocide" accusations by prominent human rights organizations, particularly those rooted in Israeli society and Holocaust memory , represents a profound internal and external crisis of legitimacy. This perceived "degeneration" is seen not just in the outcomes of policy (mass casualties, widespread destruction) but in the perceived intent behind these actions, as inferred from official statements and systematic policies. This directly challenges Israel's self-perception as a moral actor and carries severe implications for its international standing and diplomatic relations.
Israel's Legal Challenges and Rejections of these Accusations
Israel vehemently rejects these genocide allegations, asserting that it is fighting an existential war against Hamas and adheres to international law. It labels these allegations as antisemitic and is actively challenging them at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Furthermore, Israel has rejected the International Criminal Court's (ICC) allegations of war crimes against its Prime Minister and former Defense Minister, who currently face international arrest warrants. Israeli officials largely attribute civilian deaths in Gaza to Hamas, stating that the militant group uses civilians as shields by embedding its fighters and infrastructure within residential areas. The following table summarizes the key accusations and Israel's official responses: Table 1: Key Accusations Against Israel and Official Responses
Apartheid
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, B'Tselem, ICJ, scholars
Systemic discrimination; near-total physical/judicial separation; discriminatory laws (Law of Return, Nation-State Law); restrictions on movement, land, political representation.
Policies driven by security; factually/morally inaccurate; intended to delegitimize; antisemitic (critics call "weaponization of antisemitism"); Israel is a democracy with Arab equality; conflict of "separate nationalisms."
Genocide
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, B'Tselem, PHRI, scholars
Mass killing; creating unlivable conditions; serious bodily/mental harm; decimation of infrastructure; forcible displacement; intent inferred from official statements and systematic policies.
Fighting existential war, adheres to international law; allegations are antisemitic; challenging at ICJ; blames Hamas for civilian deaths (human shields); rejects ICC allegations.
War Crimes/Crimes Against Humanity
UN bodies, ICC, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International
Illegal settlements; targeting civilian population/infrastructure; disproportionate force; starvation as weapon; arbitrary detention/torture; sexual violence.
Adheres to international law; actions are self-defense; blames Hamas for civilian deaths (human shields); rejects ICC allegations; challenges UN bodies as biased.
5. Security Imperatives and Ethical Dilemmas: The "Iron Wall" in Practice
Israel's security doctrine has been a defining feature of its statehood, evolving significantly in response to a uniquely challenging strategic environment. The practical application of this doctrine, particularly in urban warfare scenarios, has given rise to profound ethical dilemmas concerning civilian protection and adherence to international humanitarian law.
Evolution of Israel's Security Doctrine: From Decisive Victory to Containment and Back
The intellectual groundwork for Israel's security approach was laid by Ze'ev Jabotinsky's 1923 article, "The Iron Wall," which posited that peace with the Arab population could only be achieved through a "strong Jewish military force" capable of deterring any attempts to undermine Jewish settlement. This foundational concept profoundly influenced David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first Prime Minister, who formulated a security doctrine based on three core principles: deterrence, early warning, and decisive victory, alongside the concept of a "people's army". This early doctrine emphasized the need for swift, decisive victories, ideally by moving the battle onto enemy territory, to minimize damage to Israel's civilian population and conserve the young state's limited resources. Over time, particularly after the withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) shifted towards a strategy of "passive defense" and "containment," aiming to reduce friction and improve international legitimacy. This led to a policy of "quiet will be met with quiet" in dealing with asymmetric threats from groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. Under Benjamin Netanyahu's leadership, this evolved into the "Campaign Between the Wars" (CBW) doctrine, which focused on precise airstrikes to target enemy capabilities, such as arms shipments and military infrastructure, to prevent their rearmament. However, the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, which triggered Operation "Iron Swords," fundamentally shattered the containment approach, demonstrating its failure to prevent unprecedented escalation. This event necessitated a conceptual shift, leading to a forceful return to the foundational vision of Israel's early leaders: a doctrine of decisive victory and the destruction of threats. The current strategy emphasizes extensive ground operations to dismantle enemy capabilities, including tunnels and weapons depots, and targeting leadership, driven by public pressure and the understanding that confronting radical adversaries requires determined action.
Challenges of Urban Warfare in Gaza: Hamas's Use of Tunnels and Civilian Areas
In its military operations in Gaza, Israel faces immense challenges posed by Hamas's extensive and strategically constructed underground infrastructure and associated tactics. The IDF has encountered an "unprecedented underground network" of between 350 and 450 miles of tunnels and bunkers, with over 5,000 shafts, built primarily under population centers. Israel accuses Hamas of using these tunnels and civilian infrastructure—such as schools, hospitals, and mosques—as "human shields" to deter attacks. While Hamas denies these accusations, human rights groups note that merely operating in proximity to civilians does not, under international law, automatically constitute human shielding, although Hamas has urged residents to ignore Israeli evacuation warnings. The IDF faces significant operational difficulties due to these tactics, including equipment limitations underground, the pervasive use of booby traps and improvised explosive devices (IEDs), slowed momentum of maneuvering forces, and the sheer difficulty in effectively destroying the vast tunnel network. The pervasive accusation of Hamas using "human shields" is central to Israel's justification for civilian casualties. However, human rights groups emphasize that this "does not absolve Israel of its obligations under international law to avoid harming civilians and to limit attacks to military targets". This creates a profound ethical and legal dilemma: if an adversary intentionally operates from civilian areas, how does an attacking force uphold the principle of proportionality? Israel's broad definition of "legitimate military targets" and its acceptance of "large numbers of civilian casualties" raise questions about whether the perceived "degeneration" is a result of adapting to a challenging enemy or a deliberate lowering of ethical standards. The paradox of power is evident as Israel's military strength, when applied in such a complex environment, appears to lead to outcomes (high civilian death tolls, extensive infrastructure destruction) that undermine its moral standing, regardless of the enemy's tactics.
Legal Interpretations of Proportionality and Distinction in International Humanitarian Law (IHL)
International Humanitarian Law (IHL) provides the primary legal framework governing the conduct of armed forces in conflict, emphasizing the principles of distinction and proportionality. Distinction requires that attacks be directed only at military objectives, explicitly prohibiting attacks on civilians or civilian objects like schools and hospitals. Proportionality dictates that the anticipated incidental civilian harm must not be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage expected from an attack. However, proportionality is often described as an "inherently subjective balancing test" and "among the most notoriously fuzzy and ambiguous standards". A significant challenge arises in applying this principle to modern urban warfare, where the cumulative effects of numerous attacks on civilian systems—such as healthcare and education—can extend far beyond immediate casualties and property damage, leading to systemic collapse. Israel's right to self-defense, as recognized under Article 51 of the UN Charter, allows a sovereign state to use military force against an armed attack. However, the application of this right within occupied territory is a subject of intense debate. Some legal interpretations argue that in an occupied territory, the occupying power's use of force is limited to law enforcement purposes, generally not permitting broad military operations, and obligates the occupier to ensure the safety and welfare of the civilian population. Any use of military force must be justified by immediate security needs and be proportionate to the threat.
Israel's Efforts to Minimize Civilian Casualties and its Justifications
Israel asserts that it has implemented "more measures to prevent civilian casualties than any other nation in history" in its military operations. These measures reportedly include the widespread use of precision-guided munitions, extensive pre-strike intelligence gathering (including satellite imagery and cell phone presence scans), "roof-knocking" (dropping small munitions on roofs to warn occupants), air-dropped flyers, and unprecedented numbers of phone calls and SMS texts to warn civilians to evacuate combat areas. Additionally, Israel claims to have conducted daily four-hour pauses for civilian evacuations and distributed military maps to assist civilians in navigating safe corridors. These justifications often highlight the immense challenge posed by Hamas's alleged embedding of militants and infrastructure within civilian areas, and Hamas's purported strategy of maximizing civilian suffering to gain diplomatic advantage. However, Israel's extensive claims of precautions stand in stark contrast to the documented scale of civilian casualties, widespread infrastructure destruction, and the severe humanitarian crisis reported in Gaza. This discrepancy raises critical questions about the effectiveness, sincerity, or inherent limitations of these measures in dense urban warfare against an embedded enemy. The perceived "degeneration" is highlighted by the argument that even if military actions are deemed "lawful, but awful" , the sheer scale of suffering might indicate a failure to uphold the spirit of IHL, or that the military objectives pursued are disproportionate to the humanitarian cost. This suggests a fundamental ethical dilemma where the pursuit of security, however legitimate the initial trigger, leads to outcomes that are widely condemned internationally. The following table illustrates the shifts in Israel's strategic thinking: Table 2: Evolution of Israeli Security Doctrine Post-1948
Early Statehood (1948-1967)
"Iron Wall" (Jabotinsky), Ben-Gurion's principles (Deterrence, Early Warning, Decisive Victory, People's Army)
Strong Jewish military force to deter; swift, decisive offensive maneuver; short wars; reliance on reserve system; strategic depth acquisition.
1948 War of Independence, 1956 Sinai Campaign, 1967 Six-Day War.
Post-1967 (Acquisition of Depth)
Emphasis on strategic depth; exchange territory for peace (e.g., Egypt, Jordan).
Insulate state against catastrophic conventional war; provide room and time for recovery.
1973 Yom Kippur War, 1982 Lebanon War.
Post-2000 (Containment & CBW)
Shift to passive defense and containment; "quiet will be met with quiet"; Campaign Between the Wars (CBW).
Reduce friction, improve international legitimacy; prevent escalation; precise airstrikes to target enemy capabilities (arms shipments, infrastructure) between conflicts.
Southern Lebanon withdrawal (2000), Gaza operations ("Cast Lead," "Pillar of Defense," "Protective Edge," "Guardian of the Walls").
Post-Oct 7, 2023 (Iron Swords)
Return to Decisive Victory; Destruction of Threats; Transition to Enforcement; Security Sustainability.
Shattered containment; extensive ground operations to destroy enemy capabilities (tunnels, weapons depots); targeting leadership; preventing rearmament; reducing dependency on external arms.
Hamas attack (Oct 7, 2023), Operation "Iron Swords."
6. The Shadow of the Past: Holocaust Memory and Policy Justification
The Holocaust holds an unparalleled and profoundly complex position in Israeli identity and national consciousness. Its memory is not merely a historical recollection but a living force that shapes collective self-understanding, security perceptions, and, controversially, is invoked to justify contemporary policies.
The Profound and Complex Role of Holocaust Memory in Israeli Identity and Security
Holocaust memory is a "constant presence in Israeli life" and is "deeply enmeshed with Israeli self-understanding" and its relationship with the world, its neighbors, and the Jewish Diaspora. It serves as the "widest common denominator in Israel," embraced by most Jewish Israelis regardless of background or direct family connection to the trauma. This profound historical experience has shaped a national character marked by "existential anxiety and fear of annihilation," fostering a widespread belief that a "second Holocaust is an impending possibility". This memory directly influences Israel's security doctrine, contributing to a persistent determination to develop robust defensive capabilities, including nuclear deterrence, and to proactively destroy perceived threats. The "never again" ethos, born from the Holocaust, is a powerful moral directive for many Israelis, emphasizing the imperative to never be a passive victim and never forsake Jewish brethren.
Critiques Regarding the "Weaponization of Antisemitism" and "Holocaust Inversion"
A significant critique leveled against Israel and its supporters concerns the perceived "weaponization of antisemitism" to silence criticism of Israeli policies. This tactic is seen as an attempt to deflect legitimate debate and accountability. Relatedly, the concept of "Holocaust inversion" is identified, where critics of Israel are accused of comparing contemporary Israeli policy to Nazi actions, thereby casting Israelis as "new Nazis" and Palestinians as "new Jews". This is viewed as a form of Holocaust distortion that diminishes the uniqueness and scale of the Holocaust and is considered "deeply offensive to Jews". The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism includes "drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis" as an example of antisemitism. The argument is that such comparisons are preposterous, "elevate by a factor of a zillion any wrongdoings Israel might have done, and lessen by a factor of a zillion what the Germans did". The dual function of Holocaust memory is evident here: it is a foundational element of Israeli identity and security doctrine, fostering a "never again" ethos. However, it is also critiqued for being "instrumentalized" by successive Israeli governments to justify military and political acts, particularly in the context of the "war on terror". This "weaponization of antisemitism" to deflect criticism, especially severe accusations like apartheid or genocide, creates a chilling effect on legitimate debate. The perceived "degeneration" is highlighted if the profound historical trauma is used to create an unchallengeable moral shield for contemporary policies, potentially hindering self-scrutiny and accountability, as noted by Israeli human rights groups themselves.
Analysis of how Historical Trauma is Invoked to Justify Contemporary Policies
The influence of historical trauma on contemporary policy is particularly stark in the aftermath of the October 7, 2023, Hamas attack. The "immense trauma of Israelis" from this event was, according to some analyses, "exploited by the current extreme-right government to advance a policy that key figures had already been trying to promote". The narrative often fuses the October 7 attack with the Nazi Holocaust, presenting it as a battle for "the soul of western civilization". This "trauma transference" aims to graphically re-create terrifying events with such vividness that an audience experiences a kind of "identity merger," as if they themselves have been violated. The explicit goal is often to reduce sympathy for Palestinians and generate support for Israel's actions. The snippets reveal a powerful, almost cyclical, relationship between historical trauma (Holocaust, October 7) and contemporary policy. The "deep dehumanization of Palestinians" by Israelis is linked to decades of "occupation, oppression and apartheid" , where Palestinians have come to be viewed as a "threat and as a problem to be 'solved'". The October 7 trauma then served as a "trigger for an all-out assault on the Gaza Strip, which was presented as an act of self-defense". This suggests a dangerous feedback loop where past suffering is invoked to justify present actions, which in turn inflict new trauma and potentially perpetuate the cycle of violence. The perceived "degeneration" becomes evident if the moral directive to "never be a perpetrator" is overshadowed by the imperatives of "never be a passive victim" and "never forsake your brothers" , leading to actions that appear to violate the very moral principles that arose from the Holocaust.
7. International Scrutiny: Selective Empathy and Global Repercussions
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has long been a focal point of international attention, but recent events have intensified global scrutiny, leading to accusations of selective empathy and Western moral hypocrisy, and a more assertive role for international legal bodies in challenging Israel's legitimacy.
The Historical and Evolving Role of Western Powers, Particularly the US, in Supporting Israel
Since its founding in 1948, Israel has received "steadfast support" from the United States, which has been a "cornerstone of American foreign policy". The US has provided over $130 billion in bilateral assistance, making Israel the largest cumulative recipient of US foreign aid. This support includes significant military aid, formalized by a 10-year Memorandum of Understanding (2019-2028) providing $3.8 billion annually, and substantial political backing, including the use of its United Nations Security Council veto 42 times against resolutions condemning Israel. The consistent and substantial US financial, military, and diplomatic support has acted as a significant shield for Israel against international pressure and accountability. This "ironclad strategic partnership" allows Israel to pursue policies, particularly in the occupied territories, with less fear of international repercussions. This external support can be argued to enable Israel to deviate from international norms without facing the full consequences, thereby undermining the "rules-based order" that the US itself often champions. This creates a perception of impunity that further exacerbates the conflict and alienates a significant portion of the global community.
Analysis of "Selective Empathy" and Accusations of Western Moral Hypocrisy in the Conflict
Western governments have been widely accused of "hypocrisy" and "double standards" in their reaction to Israel's military operations, particularly when contrasted with their approach to Russia's war in Ukraine. This phenomenon is often described as "selective empathy," a "conditional sense of compassion, reserved for victims who media deem deserving—say, Ukrainian victims... and not for those who media deem undeserving, like Palestinians under siege by Israel in Gaza". This perceived selectivity is linked to historical patterns of "dehumanization" against Arab, Black, and Latino populations, which pathologizes their violence and conditions the public not to empathize with their suffering. The pervasive accusations of "selective empathy" and "Western moral hypocrisy" suggest a significant erosion of Western moral authority on the global stage. This is not merely about differing opinions but a perceived fundamental inconsistency in applying international law and human rights principles. The perceived "degeneration" here is not just Israel's, but also that of the "liberal hegemony" model defended by the US, as its "claim to support a 'rules-based order' has been exposed as hollow". This has profound "global repercussions" , leading to increased criticism from "much of the rest of the world" and a growing willingness of other Western powers to "pursue foreign policy positions independent of the United States". This indicates a shift in global discourse and potentially a weakening of the traditional international order.
The Role and Findings of International Legal Bodies (UN, ICC, ICJ) and their Impact on Israel's Legitimacy
The legitimacy of the State of Israel has been challenged since before its formation, with opposition to Zionism emerging in the 19th century. Historically, the UN General Assembly once called Zionism "a form of racism and racial discrimination" in 1975, though this resolution was later revoked. In contemporary times, the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, and Amnesty International have consistently criticized Israel for its conduct in the conflict, the establishment and expansion of settlements, and its treatment of Palestinians, leading to accusations of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has initiated an investigation into alleged war crimes in Palestine, leading to the issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli leaders. Concurrently, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has reaffirmed the illegality of Israeli settlements and called for an end to the occupation. Despite strong US support, Israel faces increasing legal challenges from international bodies like the ICJ and ICC. The issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli leaders and the ICJ's rulings on occupation and settlements represent a significant shift from diplomatic criticism to concrete legal accountability. This growing legal isolation, coupled with the increasing recognition of Palestinian statehood by European nations , indicates a potential long-term "degeneration" of Israel's international legitimacy. This could lead to greater involvement by international legal bodies and potentially sanctions , compelling Israel to confront the widening gap between its self-perception and how it is viewed by a significant portion of the global community.
8. Conclusion: Reconciling Power and Principle
The critical examination presented throughout this report reveals a complex and challenging narrative regarding the State of Israel. The central paradox lies in how a nation, born from a profound need for security and self-determination and imbued with initial utopian aspirations, has come to be widely accused of systematic oppression and grave human rights violations.
Synthesis of Findings on Israel's Perceived Degeneration
The analysis has demonstrated how Israel's exercise of power, particularly in the context of its evolving security doctrine and the prolonged occupation of Palestinian territories, has led to a perceived "degeneration" from its founding ideals of democracy, universal ethics, and the vision of being a "light unto the nations." Evidence presented in this report details the profound impact on Palestinian human rights, including dispossession, territorial fragmentation, and the systematic denial of basic freedoms and resources. The severity of the accusations of apartheid and genocide, supported by numerous human rights organizations and international legal bodies, underscores the depth of this perceived decline and the challenges to Israel's international legitimacy. The pervasive influence of historical trauma, particularly the Holocaust, on Israeli identity and security perceptions has been explored, alongside critiques of how this trauma is invoked to justify contemporary actions, sometimes leading to accusations of "weaponization of antisemitism" and "Holocaust inversion."
Revisiting the "Paradox of Power" and its Implications for Israel's Future
The core paradox of power is ultimately about the internal and external costs of exercising power without sufficient ethical and legal constraints. The report highlights that the perceived "degeneration" is not merely an external accusation but is increasingly recognized internally, leading to "rising domestic protests within Israel" and a perceived "deep moral rot at the core of their political culture" as described by some Israeli human rights groups. This internal critique, coupled with growing international isolation and legal challenges, suggests that the current trajectory is unsustainable for Israel's long-term security, prosperity, and its character as a Jewish and democratic state. The implication is that true security and national recovery may necessitate a fundamental reassessment of policies and a reconciliation of power with principle.
Concluding Thoughts on the Challenges for Regional Stability and International Relations
The current trajectory of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, marked by escalating accusations and deepening divides, poses significant challenges for regional stability in the Middle East and for the broader global rules-based order. The perceived inconsistencies in the application of international law by Western powers and the growing legal isolation of Israel contribute to a sense of global discontent and undermine the credibility of international institutions. Without a fundamental shift in approach—one that prioritizes a just resolution to the conflict, upholds human rights, and adheres strictly to international law—the cycle of violence and accusations of "degeneration" are likely to persist. This will further entrench the conflict, undermine prospects for a lasting peace, and continue to strain international relations. A balanced approach that genuinely considers the aspirations and concerns of both Israelis and Palestinians, coupled with robust international support and mediation, remains crucial for any viable path forward.
Works cited
1. Zionism - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism 2. Zionism and Israel | The Pluralism Project, https://pluralism.org/zionism-and-israel 3. en.wikipedia.org, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_as_the_chosen_people#:~:text=The%20concept%20of%20Jews%20as,and%20has%20varied%20over%20time. 4. Jews as the chosen people - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_as_the_chosen_people 5. Max Nordau - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Nordau 6. Holocaust Survivors and the Establishment of the State of Israel (May 14, 1948), https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/postwar-refugee-crisis-and-the-establishment-of-the-state-of-israel 7. Israel and the Holocaust: History, Memory, and Identity (Chapter 10), https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-history-of-the-holocaust/israel-and-the-holocaust-history-memory-and-identity/B7E8ED345F8A13FDD925C1964FAD5CA9 8. Israel's Security and the Holocaust: Lessons Learned, but Existential Fears Continue, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236695096_Israel's_Security_and_the_Holocaust_Lessons_Learned_but_Existential_Fears_Continue 9. Nakba - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba 10. The stateless speak back: Palestinian narratives of home(land) - UCL Discovery, https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10073148/7/Fiddian-Qasmiyeh%20chapter%20only%20.pdf 11. More than a century on: The Balfour Declaration explained | Features - Al Jazeera, https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2018/11/2/more-than-a-century-on-the-balfour-declaration-explained 12. Balfour Declaration Supports a Jewish Homeland in Palestine | EBSCO Research Starters, https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/balfour-declaration-supports-jewish-homeland-palestine 13. British Mandate for Palestine - 1914-1918 Online, https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/british-mandate-for-palestine/ 14. Living conditions of the Palestinian People in the Occupied Territories - Question of Palestine - the United Nations, https://www.un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-199702/ 15. History of the Question of Palestine - the United Nations, https://www.un.org/unispal/history/ 16. The Truth About Israel's “Right to Defend Itself” | Dr. Omar Suleiman - YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEYHaBXHes0 17. Israeli disengagement from the Gaza Strip - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_the_Gaza_Strip 18. “Occupation” as Euphemism - Verfassungsblog, https://verfassungsblog.de/occupation-as-euphemism/ 19. The Israel-Hamas Conflict: International Law, Accountability, and ..., https://judicature.duke.edu/articles/israel-hamas-conflict-international-law/ 20. 50 stories of Palestinian life under occupation - OCHA oPt, https://www.ochaopt.org/50Stories/ 21. Human rights violations against Palestinians by Israel - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_violations_against_Palestinians_by_Israel 22. The Illegality of Israel's Military Offensive in Gaza - Just Security, https://www.justsecurity.org/113868/israel-gaza-gideon-chariots/ 23. The ethical is political: Israel's production of health scarcity in Gaza, https://jme.bmj.com/content/50/5/289 24. Gaza: Israeli School Strikes Magnify Civilian Peril | Human Rights Watch, https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/08/07/gaza-israeli-school-strikes-magnify-civilian-peril 25. Human rights in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory - Amnesty International, https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/middle-east/israel-and-the-occupied-palestinian-territory/ 26. Criticism of Israel - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Israel 27. Israeli apartheid - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_apartheid 28. Using Ethics Committees to Justify Force-Feeding Political Prisoners in Israel, https://www.hhrjournal.org/2023/12/06/using-ethics-committees-to-justify-force-feeding-political-prisoners-in-israel/ 29. Weaponizing Morality: How Criticism of Israel Misses the Point - The Blogs, https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/weaponizing-morality-how-criticism-of-israel-misses-the-point/ 30. Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and Israel (A/HRC/59/26) - Question of Palestine - the United Nations, https://www.un.org/unispal/document/report-of-the-independent-international-commission-of-inquiry-on-the-occupied-palestinian-territory-including-east-jerusalem-and-israel-a-hrc-59-26/ 31. Apartheid Outside Africa: The Case of Israel - IU Robert H. McKinney School of Law, https://mckinneylaw.iu.edu/practice/law-reviews/iiclr/pdf/vol2p221.pdf 32. Israel calls on Amnesty International to not release report accusing country of apartheid, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israel-calls-on-amnesty-international-to-not-release-report-accusing-country-of-apartheid 33. Israel rejects Palestinian accusations of 'apartheid' | AP News, https://apnews.com/article/middle-east-religion-israel-race-and-ethnicity-racial-injustice-266bc24e6027545763f297e81882feed 34. Our Genocide - B'Tselem, https://www.btselem.org/publications/202507_our_genocide 35. Israeli human rights group: Israel is committing genocide in Gaza - Al Jazeera, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/7/28/israeli-human-rights-group-israel-is-committing-genocide-in-gaza 36. Two Israeli rights groups say their country is committing genocide in ..., https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/two-israeli-rights-groups-say-their-country-is-committing-genocide-in-gaza 37. International Criminal Court investigation in Palestine - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court_investigation_in_Palestine 38. The Evolution of Israel's Security Doctrine from Jabotinsky to the ..., https://icgs.org.il/en/publications/from-jabotinsky-to-today/ 39. Urban Combat and The Gaza Metro: Preparing for War in Modern Megacities, https://home.army.mil/wood/contact/publications/engr_mag/Urban-Combat-and-The-Gaza-Metro-Preparing-for-War-in-Modern-Megacities 40. Israel's New Approach to Tunnels: A Paradigm Shift in Underground ..., https://mwi.westpoint.edu/israels-new-approach-to-tunnels-a-paradigm-shift-in-underground-warfare/ 41. Use of human shields by Hamas - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_human_shields_by_Hamas 42. Israel Says That Hamas Uses Civilian Shields, Reviving Debate, https://protectingeducation.org/news/israel-says-that-hamas-uses-civilian-shields-reviving-debate/ 43. Human shields or shielding Israel from accountability? - Middle East Institute, https://www.mei.edu/publications/human-shields-or-shielding-israel-accountability 44. Tactical Lessons from Israel Defense Forces Operations in Gaza, 2023 - RUSI, https://static.rusi.org/tactical-lessons-from-idf-gaza-2023.pdf 45. Understanding the Rules of War in the Context of the Israel-Hamas Conflict, https://law.stanford.edu/press/understanding-the-rules-of-war-in-the-context-of-the-israel-hamas-conflict/ 46. Proportionality in International Humanitarian Law: A Principle and a Rule - Lieber Institute, https://lieber.westpoint.edu/proportionality-international-humanitarian-law-principle-rule/ 47. Customary IHL - Rule 1. The Principle of Distinction between Civilians and Combatants, https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule1 48. International Law, Self-Defense, and the Israel-Hamas Conflict - USAWC Press, https://press.armywarcollege.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3273&context=parameters 49. International Law, Self-Defense, and the Israel-Hamas Conflict, https://publications.armywarcollege.edu/News/Display/Article/3706538/international-law-self-defense-and-the-israel-hamas-conflict/ 50. No, Israel Does Not Have the Right to Self-Defense In International Law Against Occupied Palestinian Territory - Jadaliyya, https://www.jadaliyya.com/Details/27551 51. Israel Implemented More Measures to Prevent Civilian Casualties Than Any Other Nation in History - Newsweek, https://www.newsweek.com/israel-implemented-more-measures-prevent-civilian-casualties-any-other-nation-history-opinion-1865613 52. A Strategic Blunder Wrapped in a Moral Disaster | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, https://carnegieendowment.org/middle-east/diwan/2024/07/a-strategic-blunder-and-moral-disaster?lang=en 53. Antisemitism defined: Why drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to the Nazis is antisemitic - World Jewish Congress, https://www.worldjewishcongress.org/en/news/antisemitism-defined-why-drawing-comparisons-of-contemporary-israeli-policy-to-the-nazis-is-antisemitic 54. Full article: Holocaust Memory and the Universal Sovereignty of the Liberal Democratic State - Taylor & Francis Online, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14623528.2025.2517848 55. How Israel has made trauma a weapon of war - The Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2024/oct/05/israel-gaza-october-7-memorials 56. U.S. Security Cooperation with Israel - United States Department of State, https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-israel 57. Israel–United States relations - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93United_States_relations 58. Double standards in US foreign policy reveal a hypocrisy that endangers global peace: Analysis - YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QIzMnY7yLI 59. Episode 212: Gaza and the Political Utility of Selective Empathy | by Citations Needed, https://citationsneeded.medium.com/episode-212-gaza-and-the-political-utility-of-selective-empathy-9e40b71e4975 60. Why Palestine is a feminist issue: a reckoning with Western feminism in a time of genocide, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14616742.2025.2455477 61. Some Western Powers Say They'll Recognize State of Palestine - He Wenping, https://www.chinausfocus.com/peace-security/some-western-powers-say-theyll-recognize-state-of-palestine 62. Legitimacy of the State of Israel - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_of_the_State_of_Israel 63. Israel outlaws Palestinian human rights groups, causing backlash from Israeli, international rights organizations | PBS News, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israel-outlaws-palestinian-human-rights-groups-causing-backlash-from-israeli-international-rights-organizations 64. Iran: Israeli Attack on Evin Prison an Apparent War Crime | Human Rights Watch, https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/08/14/iran-israeli-attack-on-evin-prison-an-apparent-war-crime 65. Israel rejects UN allegations that its forces have sexually abused detained Palestinians, https://apnews.com/article/un-israel-palestinians-sexual-violence-guterres-1483a001fff4c6fb4aee3eae7424d746 66. Legality of Israeli settlements - Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_Israeli_settlements 67. Israel Hamas War: Netanyahu doubles down as Israel plans final push to crush Hamas strongholds in Gaza city, https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/defence/netanyahu-doubles-down-israel-plans-final-push-to-crush-hamas-strongholds-in-gaza-city/articleshow/123226781.cms 68. The State of Israel's National Security - INSS, https://www.inss.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/SecurityPolicy-Version-ENG_digital-1.pdf 69. Understanding the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: A Multidimensional Perspective", https://www.globalctinstitute.org/post/understanding-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict-a-multidimensional-perspective
Last updated