The following Viewpoint has been submitted for the Topic above.
Unjustified
The following Arguments have been submitted for the Viewpoint above. For each argument, the top Counter is also listed if it has been challenged by any counters.

October 7 would have never happened if it weren't for the deeply oppressive policies undertaken by the Israeli government over the past decades. This includes the complete blockade of Gaza, the expansion of unlawful settlements in the West Bank despite U.S. objections, and regular provocations at Masjid Al-Aqsa—a site sacred to Muslims. These places are part of Palestine, and Gazans consider them their homeland, as reflected in the name of the operation, “Al-Aqsa Storm.” Therefore, one cannot claim that such violations are unrelated to the events of October 7.

Israelis often cite security concerns to justify their actions. However, seizing other people's land is blatantly illegal (also see this) and is not self-defense. It will make bad precedent if countries start to occupy other countries and start making settlements there in the name of self-defense.

The attack was carried out by residents of Gaza, while the settlements are located in the West Bank, a different geographical area. Relating these two events is misleading.

Israeli officials publicly cut off electricity and water supplies to Gaza soon after October 7th. Additionally, according to reputable international organizations, food supplies to Gaza have been significantly reduced, with aid groups citing difficulty coordinating with the Israeli military as the primary reason (see here for more evidence). Some Israeli citizens have also attempted to block aid trucks. These limited food supplies have led to the starvation and deaths of many innocent people, particularly vulnerable children. In effect, the IDF has used starvation as a weapon of war against Gazans.

These policies clearly constitute "collective punishment", which is strictly prohibited under international law. It is important to note that the popular Israeli argument of "collateral damage" does not even apply in this case.

Israeli officials have attempted to cast doubt on claims of a food shortage in Gaza. They cite certain "studies" and "images" showing overweight individuals. It's important to note that all such studies originate from Israeli sources, not independent ones. As for the images, they should be weighed against the many more photos emerging from Gaza that show visibly malnourished individuals. Ultimately, if the Israeli government is confident there is no food shortage, one must ask: why not allow international journalists in to see for themselves?

Source: Middle East Eye/AFP/Omar al-Qattaa

A new study reveals that Israel has permitted ample food supplies to enter Gaza. However, these supplies do not reach Gazan civilians in a timely manner due to the inefficiency of the U.N. and humanitarian organizations in processing and distributing the aid. Additionally, Hamas exacerbates the issue by frequently stealing and diverting aid meant for civilians.

There is ample evidence that Hamas has made attempts at peaceful coexistence with Israel in the past, but Israel rejected these efforts due to its overarching goal of preventing the establishment of a Palestinian state.

When Hamas came to power in 2006 after a fair election, as confirmed by the UN and US, they repeatedly sent peace feelers to the Israeli government. However, the Israeli government dismissed all these efforts. Although a ceasefire was later reached, it was soon broken unilaterally by Israel. While it's true that Hamas at the time of sending peace feelers asked for the right of return for all refugees expelled from their homes in 1948—a demand not favored by Israel—one should note that, first, international law does recognize the right of return for expelled people, and second, Hamas presented it as a topic of negotiation, which Israel refused to engage in.

Additionally, in an effort to heal divisions within the Palestinian movement, Hamas issued a new charter in 2017 that endorsed the idea of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders—a significant shift from its previous stance.

Israel dismissed every one of these efforts to prevent the creation of an independent Palestinian state.

Granting the right of return would have posed significant security concerns for Israeli citizens because it would have led to a mixed Palestinian/Jewish society. Palestinians harbor animosity toward Jews, which would have created constant distress for Israeli residents. Such practical considerations must be taken into account when evaluating Israel's policies.

{{comment_help_text}}
Placeholder image

{{r.body}}
{{r.time_ago}}

Overview