Category: Uncategorized

THE CRADLE

A $30-million plan aims to bring 6,000 Indian Jews by 2030, to expand illegal settlements, and replace the Palestinian workforce

Approximately 240 members of India’s Bnei Menashe Jewish community arrived in Israel on 24 April, marking the first phase of “Operation Wings of Dawn,” a government-supported initiative to expand Jewish settlements in occupied Palestine.

The arrivals mark the opening stage of a 90-million shekel (around $30 million) plan to import 1,200 Indian nationals annually, targeting a total of 6,000 by 2030, effectively replacing the Palestinian workforce that was cut off after October 2023.

Those brought in, who claim descent from a so-called “lost tribe,” are being funneled through mandatory Orthodox conversions to qualify under the “Law of Return,” a system that grants citizenship on religious grounds while denying displaced Palestinians the right to return to their land.

Officials said the initial group landed “this week,” with further flights already scheduled. Around 600 additional immigrants are expected in three waves over the coming weeks, continuing a process that is set to expand steadily.

VIDEO | In a move to bolster Jewish settlement, Israel brought approximately 240 members of the Bnei Menashe community from India on Thursday. This arrival marks the first stage of a 90-million-shekel state-funded plan to import 1,200 Indian nationals annually, aiming for 6,000… pic.twitter.com/34vs9EsTYn— The Cradle (@TheCradleMedia) April 24, 2026

Many of those arriving are expected to be placed in absorption centers in Nof HaGalil, where some will join relatives who had already moved to Israel in previous years, as part of efforts to plug the labor gap left by Israel’s genocide in Gaza and the subsequent cutoff of Palestinian workers.

The rollout reflects a structured state-led effort to import new labor and population groups while Palestinian workers remain excluded following Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

Israel had blocked Palestinian labor at scale after October 2023, cutting off over 100,000 workers who had previously entered from the occupied West Bank and depended on jobs inside Israel for their livelihood. 

Prior to the genocide, Palestinians made up a significant share of the workforce, accounting for nearly 30 percent of the construction sector, with tens of thousands also employed in settlements and industrial zones.

Israel moved quickly to replace that labor pool, bringing in more than 20,000 Indian workers by mid-2025, including large numbers in construction roles, with the purpose of replacing Palestinian labor during the Israel’s genocide of Palestinians in Gaza.

A February 2026 agreement between India and Israel expanded that effort further, with plans to bring in up to 50,000 additional Indian laborers over the next five years.

The Cradle for more

by JOSHUA COHEN

Amid declining test scores, the country has pivoted away from screens and invested in back-to-basics school materials.

In 2023, the Swedish government announced that the country’s schools would be going back to basics, emphasizing skills such as reading and writing, particularly in early grades. After mostly being sidelined, physical books are now being reintroduced into classrooms, and students are learning to write the old-fashioned way: by hand, with a pencil or pen, on sheets of paper. The Swedish government also plans to make schools cellphone-free throughout the country.

Educational authorities have been investing heavily. Last year alone, the education ministry allocated $83 million to purchase textbooks and teachers’ guides. In a country with about 11 million people, the aim is for every student to have a physical textbook for each subject. The government also put $54 million towards the purchase of fiction and non-fiction books for students.

These moves represent a dramatic pivot from previous decades, during which Sweden — and many other nations — moving away from physical books in favor of tablets and digital resources in an effort to prepare students for life in an online world. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the Nordic country’s efforts have sparked a debate on the role of digital technology in education, one that extends well beyond the country’s borders. U.S. parents in districts that have adopted digital technology to a great extent may be wondering if educators will reverse course, too.

So why did Sweden pivot? In an email to Undark, Linda Fälth, a researcher in teacher education at Linnaeus University, wrote that the “decision to reinvest in physical textbooks and reduce the emphasis on digital devices” was prompted by several factors, including questions around whether the digitalization of classrooms had been evidence-based. “There was also a broader cultural reassessment,” Fälth wrote. “Sweden had positioned itself as a frontrunner in digital education, but over time concerns emerged about screen time, distraction, reduced deep reading, and the erosion of foundational skills such as sustained attention and handwriting.”

Fälth noted that proponents of reform believe that “basic skills — especially reading, writing, and numeracy — must be firmly established first, and that physical textbooks are often better suited for that purpose.”

In a country with about 11 million people, the aim is for every student to have a physical textbook for each subject.

Between 2000 and 2012, Swedish students’ scores on standardized tests steadily declined in reading, math, and science. Though they recovered ground between 2012 and 2018, those scores had dropped again by 2022.

Undark for more

by NORBERT SUCHANEK

In 2017, Odesson Alves Ferreira, a survivor of the 1987 Goiânia nuclear disaster in central Brazil, received the Lifetime Achievement Award of the International Uranium Film Festival. Odesson himself was severely contaminated by the highly radioactive cesium-137 and lives with the consequences.

For over 30 years, he has campaigned for the recognition and fair compensation of the hundreds of cesium victims and for ensuring that this radioactive disaster in Goiânia is never forgotten and never repeated. Now he is strongly criticizing the new Netflix miniseries “Radioactive Emergency”.

Netflix series “Radioactive Emergency” distorts facts

In September 1987, the worst nuclear disaster in Latin American history occurred in the central Brazilian city of Goiânia. A scrap metal dealer unknowingly released highly radioactive cesium-137 from an abandoned cancer treatment device, contaminating parts of the city and hundreds of people.

Now, in March Netflix has released the miniseries “Radioactive Emergency,” based on this nuclear disaster and claiming to be inspired by true events. However, cesium-137-survivors dispute this. They argue that the Netflix series distorts the facts and ignores the victims.

“The distortion of historical facts is not only a narrative error, but in my view, also a profound disrespect to the memory of the victims and to us survivors,” criticizes Odesson Alves Ferreira, brother of scrap metal dealer Devair Alves Ferreira, who in 1987 bought the lead-encased radioactive head from two young waste pickers without even suspecting that it contained radioactive material.

In his statement to the Brazilian news portal Metrópoles regarding “Radioactive Emergency,” Odesson says: “By distorting the tragic historical facts for the sake of expediency, to make the plot more scientific and commercial, Netflix committed a crime against the truth. The true story we experienced doesn’t need sensational embellishments; it was tragic enough in itself.”

According to the 71-year-old, the streaming service “turns the victims of an irresponsible system into perpetrators and trivializes the tragedy. The memory of Brazil’s worst radioactive tragedy must be protected. We will not simply accept history being rewritten for convenience, because those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat its mistakes.”

The former president of the Association of Cesium Victims (AVCésio) also criticizes that the Netflix film crew did not consult those actually affected beforehand.

According to the association, which represents more than 1,000 victims of the Goiânia radioactive disaster, its members were neither consulted on the script nor asked to share their experiences.

“We were not consulted during the production of the series based on our story. Filming didn’t even take place in Goiânia, but in São Paulo. How can you make a series about this story and not let those who experienced it firsthand have their say?” Metropóles quotes the association’s current president, Marcelo Santos Neves.

He says, the film crew only contacted the former president, Suely Lina Moraes Silva, once. She reports that she accompanied a small group from the production team on a visit to the contaminated areas in Goiânia. After that, however, there were no further discussions with the team.

Brazzil for more

Humans far behind as robot breaks record at Beijing half marathon

A humanoid robot competing against flesh-and-blood runners broke the world record at a Beijing half marathon on Sunday, showcasing the rapid technological advancement achieved by Chinese makers. Humanoid robots have become a common sight in China in recent years, in the media as well as in public spaces.

Youtube for more

Humanoid robot breaks human half-marathon record; Drastic improvement reflects systemic advances in China’s robot technologies: expert

by TAO MINGYANG, CHEN QINGRUI, & NIU YINGBO

Just a year ago, humanoid robots stumbled awkwardly across the pavement, tripping mid-stride as human handlers rushed in to steady them. But on Sunday at the second Humanoid Robot Half Marathon in Beijing, robots didn’t just keep their balance – they rewrote expectations. The winning robot outpaced the human half marathon world record, while the top three finishers completed the course entirely autonomously, signaling a stunning leap in capability.

Charging through the 21-kilometer route in southern Beijing’s E-Town, the Robotics D1 humanoid robot – developed by Chinese smartphone maker HONOR and nicknamed “Lightning” – crossed the finish line in 48 minutes and 19 seconds in the remote-control category.

However, under the competition rules, the time posted by remote control robots is multiplied by 1.2, so the ultimate winner was another robot of the same type in the autonomous navigation group, which posted a winning time of 50 minutes 26 seconds, an enormous improvement from last year’s winning time of 2 hours and 40 minutes. It also outpaced the man’s half marathon world record of 57 minutes 20 seconds recorded by Ugandan runner Jacob Kiplimo in 2026 at the Lisbon Half Marathon. 

Participation in the event expanded nearly fivefold, with 102 robot teams, including five international teams, taking part in the second edition. A total of 26 brands and more than 300 humanoid robots competed, according to official data. Of these, 47 teams completed the race – 18 via autonomous navigation and 29 via remote control—resulting in an overall completion rate of over 45 percent.

The marked improvement in the finishing time highlights systemic breakthroughs in China’s humanoid robot technologies, including power systems, control, perception and decision-making, Wang Peng, an associate research fellow at the Beijing Academy of Social Sciences who focuses on the tech sector, told the Global Times on Sunday. “The technology has moved beyond barely functional to rapidly approaching practical usability,” he said. 

Faster and smarter

Global Times reporters watching along the route saw that when the robots set off alongside human runners, spectators burst into cheers, many recording the moment on their phones. 

Compared with the inaugural event in 2025, the speed and the running postures of the robots have seen significant improvement. While many robots last year struggled to maintain balance at the starting point, nearly all entrants this year launched steadily and were able to adjust their speed smoothly on the bends, the Global Times noted. 

The top three teams all deployed HONOR’s “Lightning” model, featuring autonomous perception and navigation as well as high-speed locomotion. Its speed and explosive power proved decisive, according to the company. 

Du Xiaodi, a test and development engineer from the championship team “Qitian Dasheng,” told the Global Times on site that the robot’s design drew on elite human athletes, with leg length approaching one meter.

In addition, the robot’s joints are equipped with a liquid-cooling system adapted from consumer electronics such as smartphones. “The system can provide continuous cooling for the entire race,” Du said.

Global Times for more

by JENNA NOROSKY

Aided by the Trump administration, debate over gender identity has gone from being a touchstone of domestic culture wars to infiltrating the work of international groups – including those designed to protect vulnerable communities.

In March 2026, at the 70th session of the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women, a U.S. delegate submitted a draft resolution to define gender in alignment with what the representative described as “its ordinary, generally accepted usage, as referring to men and women.”

While this may seem like a relatively benign or procedural intervention, the proposed resolution invited significant blowback from other delegates. Sweden’s representative framed it as an attempt “to turn back the clock 30 to 40 years.” The resolution ultimately failed after being blocked from going to a vote by Belgium, on behalf of the EU.

As an expert on gender, sexuality and conflict, I see the latest dispute over terminology at a key U.N. conference as reflecting a wider fight among the international community that has rumbled on for months. I believe that contest, moreover, threatens to undermine critical work to serve survivors of violence across the world.

Shifting approaches to gender

In recent years, some international organizations, nongovernmental organizations and countries have moved to understand gender beyond equating it with biological sex.

This had included expanding its meaning within the peace and security sector.

The U.N. Refugee Agency, for example, now follows an “age, gender and diversity” policy that defines gender as “socially constructed roles for women and men, which are often central to the way people define themselves and are defined by others.” In other words, trans women are women, and trans men are men.

The International Criminal Court takes a similar stance in its approach to gender-based crimes.

Both bodies contend that this gender lens is important for understanding the full scope of experiences and vulnerabilities not just of women and girls, but also LGBTQ+ individuals and men and boys during conflict.

While heavily contested by some nations, this approach departs from a previous implicit assumption that only women are targeted for sexual violence in conflict – and that these women are all cisgender.

Gender identity and violence

Despite the normalization of more inclusive approaches to gender, the pushback has recently gained a lot of traction, aided in part by the reversal of the U.S. from its previous stance under the Biden administration.

Only two months into the Trump administration, the U.S. pulled out of a working group of nations on LGBTQ+ concerns. Then, in January 2026, it withdrew from a slew of international bodies it claimed were “often dominated by progressive ideology and detached from national interests,” including U.N. Women. Most recently, the administration has called on FIFA, soccer’s international governing body, to change its policy on trans athletes.

It isn’t just the U.S. contesting inclusive language, however. In June 2025, the U.N. special rapporteur on violence against women and girls, Reem Alsalem, published a report suggesting that gender-neutral language and the recognition of gender identity in policy erases the category of what it refers to as “sex-based discrimination” against women and girls.

The Conversation for more

by BELEN FERNANDEZ

Not one to abide by ceasefires, Israel is carpet bombing Lebanese civilians, as its quest for devastation continues with no end in sight

On 8 April, Israel‘s military launched the psychopathically titled Operation Eternal Darkness against Lebanon, with predictably macabre results. In the span of a mere 10 minutes, Israel struck more than 100 sites across the country, killing more than 300 people and wounding at least 1,150.

The killing spree took place amid the regional ceasefire that had ostensibly taken hold after five weeks of cataclysmic war unleashed on Iran by the US and Israel.

Of course, Israel is not much one for ceasefires – and especially not when it comes to Lebanon. In just seven months following the so-called ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon in November 2024, Israel not only continued to occupy territory in southern Lebanon but also kept up regular air strikes on the country, killing no fewer than 250 people. And things only went downhill from there.

Since yet another Israeli-Lebanese ceasefire was declared on 16 April, this time for 10 days, the Israelis – true to form – wasted no time in violating it by shelling various Lebanese villages in the south.

In its diabolical display last week, Israel switched up its usual modus operandi by carpet bombing Lebanon rather than semi-restricting its destruction to specific sectarian geographies – namely Shia-majority areas dehumanised as “Hezbollah strongholds” in the reductionist US-Israeli lexicon.

Consider the case of a Lebanese-Palestinian friend of mine who resides in an apartment building not far from the American University of Beirut. In times of normal Israeli savagery, the demographic makeup of his neighbourhood would have essentially rendered it off-limits to attack.

On “Black Wednesday“, however, the building became a target of “Eternal Darkness”, reportedly killing one child and five women, among them a Sri Lankan housekeeper.

Since yet another Israeli-Lebanese ceasefire was declared on 16 April, this time for 10 days, the Israelis – true to form – wasted no time in violating it by shelling various Lebanese villages in the south

According to my friend, the victims had moved into the building after fleeing their home in south Lebanon on account of the Israeli assault in 2024.

Israel has made no secret of its goal of fomenting sectarian strife in Lebanon and terrorising Lebanese communities into expelling Shia refugees of Israeli terror – and the attack on my friend’s building would seem to align pretty solidly with that strategy.

MEE for more

by ROY DAZA & MARIA SIKORSKI

Latin America is a flashpoint for the major conflicts of the twenty-first century: the clash between Great Powers, the struggle over energy resources, the resurgence of reactionary nationalism and the popular resistance to it. The region has also become a testing ground for new forms of imperial intervention, as the Trump administration has radicalized its approach to the so-called western hemisphere, escalating its attacks on both Cuba and Venezuela. Yet Washington’s most dramatic act of aggression, kidnapping President Nicolás Maduro and rendering him to New York, has not led to regime change in Caracas. Three months later the country’s state apparatus remains in place, and one of its foremost cadres, former Vice President Delcy Rodríguez, has now taken the reins — negotiating sanctions relief and new commercial ties with the US from a highly asymmetrical position.

For an analysis of the Bolivarian revolution’s onward trajectory — the economic, financial, and military pressures to which the country has been subjected, and how domestic policymaking has tried to cope with them — Phenomenal World spoke to Roy Daza, a deputy for the ruling PSUV in Venezuela’s National Assembly. Daza is vice-chair of the National Assembly’s Foreign Policy Committee and chair of the Parliamentary Friendship Group with Brazil. He is also a member of the newly established Special Committee for Monitoring the Amnesty Law for Democratic Coexistence — a reform which pardons those accused of political violence as a means of restoring social peace.

While there is much to criticize in Maduro’s record, and while the nature of the historical relationship between Chavismo and Madurismo remains fiercely contested, most international media coverage of the Venezuelan crisis has impeded our understanding of such issues by systematically excluding Bolivarians like Daza who are aligned with the current administration. Whether or not one agrees with their perspective, one cannot map the prospects for this besieged nation without giving it careful consideration.

Let’s begin by discussing the diplomatic strategy adopted following the capture of Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores. What are the main pillars of Venezuela’s foreign policy today? What objectives is it pursuing with allied countries and multilateral organizations?

Over two hundred years of republican history, Venezuela had never before been bombed, nor has it ever waged war against another country. Even its most serious conflicts have always been resolved by political means. Peace is a fundamental pillar of the humanist thought of Commander Hugo Chávez and President Nicolás Maduro. The implementation of what Acting President Delcy Rodríguez calls Bolivarian Peace Diplomacy is in this sense the expression of a much longer historical legacy. This policy, as outlined in Rodríguez’s address to the National Assembly on January 15, is based on the recognition of the fundamental clash between the Monroe Doctrine and the doctrine of Simón Bolívar. It defines three major objectives for the Republic at this stage: to demand the immediate release of Nicolás Maduro and Cilia Flores, to maintain peace and stability within the nation, and to continue the development of the government program known as the Plan of the Seven Transformations.

The Bolivarian government is using all its diplomatic capacity to get the truth out, despite the intensity and persistence of the media campaign that has been waged against Venezuela for years. There needs to be coordinated action by international institutions to put an end to the blockade; we Bolivarians want to see them comply with the principles of the United Nations Charter and the Vienna Conventions. We also maintain that the majority of the world’s nations agree with us in condemning the armed assault and kidnapping of President Maduro. That said, we also know that the Venezuelan people must ultimately rely on their own strength. Hence the relevance of Maduro’s teaching: “In the face of adversity — calm and composure, nerves of steel, and intense popular mobilization.”

The background to the abominable events of January 3 — the kidnapping of the President and First Lady, the deaths of 106 heroes, and the wounding of more than 200, amid the bombing of the city of Caracas and the states of Miranda and La Guaira — is important here. Barack Obama’s decision in 2015 to declare Venezuela an “unusual and extraordinary threat” to the security of the United States served as the basis for adopting unilateral coercive measures whose express purpose, as made clear by US government spokespeople, was to suffocate the Venezuelan economy. This resulted in international financial transactions being blocked, which caused a dramatic drop in imports and affected the domestic market, the investment landscape, and the replenishment of capital for private and state-owned companies. In short, it led to a situation of profound economic paralysis, which was exacerbated by a sharp drop in oil prices.

Links for more

by KIRAN KUMBHAR

Just as one can’t write a meaningful academic analysis of the metrics and economics of Europe’s Industrial Revolution by skipping foundational concepts and terms like “efficiency” and “productivity”, one also can’t write meaningfully about inequalities during colonialism by invisibilising the phenomena of “exploitation” and “plunder”.

One of the most important skills that historians and other scholars are expected to ace is the careful reading and evaluation of other scholars’ writings, also termed as a “critique”. Ideally, critiques provide much-needed feedback to scholars and help improve their thinking and writing. When disseminated in public forums (as against in academic journals), such critiques additionally introduce the general public to important contributions and limitations of scholars and their writing. Of course, a critique is never the last word and is only one among many perspectives, so it must always be taken with a pinch of salt.

What follows now is a critique of an excellent study titled “Unequal Exchange and North-South Relations: Evidence from Global Trade Flows and the World Balance of Payments 1800-2025”, published last year. When the Europe-based economist and co-author Thomas Piketty announced the release of this paper, he wrote that “colonial extraction and unequal exchange have shaped two centuries of North-South inequality”. On social media, some people were quick to point out that this was already a well-known historical reality. In the paper, Piketty and lead author Gastón Nievas acknowledge that “while some of these facts are relatively well-known at a general level, the main novelty is that we are able to offer a systematic quantitative study”.

The Wire for more

THE CRADLE

Lehi, also known as the Stern Gang, wanted to partner with Nazi Germany to expel Britain from Mandatory Palestine and establish a Jewish State

Newly declassified Israeli files reveal pre-state Zionist militias contacted Nazi Germany officials for help in establishing a Jewish state in Palestine as World War II raged.

The newly released files are from the Israeli army’s archive, and were declassified at the request of Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

One file from May 1941 includes statements from Eliyahu Golomb, founder and de facto commander of the Haganah, a pre-state Zionist militia in Mandatory Palestine, which was under British control.

Golomb indicates that a rival Zionist militia was seeking to establish contacts with officials in Nazi Germany for help in expelling the British.

“I have information … about suspicion regarding a group of Jews who have connections with the enemy,” Golomb said, referring to the Germans.

“According to the information, there is a man who contacted the Germans. This man is known; his name is S,” he added.

“S” was Avraham “Yair” Stern, leader of Lehi, the pre-state underground Zionist militia also known as the Stern Gang.

Golomb’s remarks were recorded in real time in a Haganah intelligence document filed under “Contacts with the Axis.”

The declassified file includes material collected by the Haganah, and later by the Shin Bet (Israel’s internal security service) and the Israeli army, regarding the Stern Gang’s attempts to establish ties with the Axis powers, Italy and Germany.

Stern wanted help from Nazi Germany to expel the British and capture Palestine from its indigenous Muslim and Christian Palestinian inhabitants for the Jews.

His position differed from that of most of the Jewish community in Palestine, which had suspended its struggle against Britain to fight Germany in the broader European war.

“With the outbreak of World War II … there is no better time for a war of independence than during wartime. Britain’s forces are tied down … and it would be possible to overcome them,” Stern argued.

“The Jews are a party in the war and therefore cannot be neutral. Britain betrayed the Jewish people and will never allow the establishment of a Jewish state. On the other hand, Germany has no special interest in Palestine, and since the Nazis want to cleanse Europe of Jews, nothing is simpler than transferring them to their own state,” he added.

The document further states that Stern believed “it is possible to reach a practical agreement with the Germans … negotiations should be opened, and Jews of Europe should be recruited into a special army that would fight its way to Palestine and conquer it from the British. The Germans, he argued, would agree because it would rid them of the Jews while also removing the British from the Near East.”

According to Stern, some German officials supported strengthening Jewish settlement in Palestine by bringing Jews from Europe, believing they would be grateful and would later assist Germany.

The Cradle for more

by RAMZY BAROUD

Even those who oppose war often do so within a framework shaped by the very systems of power they claim to challenge.

A respected human rights activist has spoken repeatedly against the US-Israeli aggression on Iran. She recognizes the illegality of the war and does not shy away from condemning it in clear terms. Yet, almost invariably, she feels compelled to qualify her position, reminding her audience that Iran has killed “tens of thousands of protesters” during recent anti-government demonstrations.

The number itself is highly questionable. Even widely cited figures from international reporting—such as Reuters coverage in January 2026—place the death toll of the protests in the thousands, not tens of thousands. But the issue here is not the exact number, nor even the complex context of those protests, which began as genuine expressions of discontent but were later exploited by various external and internal actors seeking to destabilize the country.

The issue is the qualification itself.

Many who consider themselves progressive, anti-war, liberal, or even leftist seem unable to take a clear moral position on US and Israeli actions in the Global South without inserting these qualifications. The habit may appear harmless, even responsible, but in reality, it is deeply damaging. It is not a sign of nuance—it is a symptom of a deeper moral hesitation.

By qualifying their condemnation, these voices neutralize their own position. They suggest, whether intentionally or not, a form of moral equivalence: the US-Israeli war on Iran is wrong, but Iran is also guilty; the genocide in Gaza is horrific, but Palestinians are also to blame. The result is not balance—it is paralysis.

Compare this to the moral clarity of those who support war. Their position is never qualified. It is assertive, absolute, and often built on exaggeration or outright falsehoods, yet it carries conviction because it does not undermine itself.

This pattern is not new. It is deeply rooted in the history of Western political discourse. From the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, which was justified as a necessary act to save lives, to the Cold War military interventions in places like Guatemala in 1954, where regime change was framed as a defense against communism, the language of morality has consistently been used to legitimize violence.

The invasion of Iraq in 2003 offers one of the clearest examples. Saddam Hussein was presented as the ultimate embodiment of evil—the “new Hitler”—while the United States and its allies were cast as liberators.

Indeed, American officials spoke openly of being “greeted as liberators,” even as the country was plunged into chaos and extreme violence. A few years later, then-US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice described the devastation created by the Israeli war on Lebanon in 2006 as “the birth pangs of a new Middle East,” reducing immense human suffering to a necessary step in a grand geopolitical transformation.

This tradition extends even further back, to the era of colonialism, when European powers justified conquest through supposedly humanitarian missions. The abolition of slavery, for example, was frequently invoked as a moral justification for colonial expansion in Africa, recasting domination as benevolence and violence as a civilizing duty. Killing, in this paradigm, happens in the name of saving; destruction is presented as progress.

Israel has long operated within this same framework. Its wars have consistently been presented as existential and necessary for the survival of democracy and civilization itself.

Long before the emergence of Hamas, Palestinian resistance was framed through shifting labels that served the same purpose. During the 1936–39 revolt, Palestinian fighters were described in British and Zionist discourse as “terrorists,” “brigands,” and “gangs.” In later decades, the label shifted—from nationalist fighters to communists to Islamists—but the underlying logic remained unchanged: the enemy is always illegitimate, and therefore any violence against them is justified.

Many of us recognize this pattern, yet instead of exposing its fallacies, some continue to operate within it, searching for a “balanced” position while still presenting themselves as anti-war or even pro-Palestinian. They acknowledge Israeli crimes but feel compelled to condemn Palestinian “terrorism.” They oppose Israeli policies yet insist on distancing themselves from Hamas and the others, as if Palestinian resistance exists outside the historical and political reality that produced it. They speak of “extremists on both sides,” as though figures like Itamar Ben-Gvir and a Palestinian fighter in Gaza can be meaningfully compared.

Such positions may seem defensible in isolation, but they become far less convincing when viewed in other contexts. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States demanded—and received—unconditional solidarity. The same was true after the July 7, 2005, bombings in London and the January 7, 2015, attack on Charlie Hebdo in Paris. In those moments, there was no expectation that victims first be contextualized or that solidarity be qualified. Millions expressed support without hesitation, without disclaimers, without the need to prove moral balance.

This standard does not apply to others. It does not apply to Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Venezuela, or certainly not to Gaza.

Palestine Chronicle for more