Most decent people can accept that the attack by Hamas across the border into Israel in October—whether 4, 40, 400 or 1400 people were either killed, raped or mutilated—was not justified. It is hard to grasp the mentality of those who were out on our streets celebrating it before Israel had retaliated and sharing footage from Hamas Go-Pro cameras.
In the same vein, only the naïve could expect that Israel would not retaliate, despite the respect that this would have gained them internationally. Peter Hitchens has been alone in recommending that restraint would have been their best tactic.
But since the invasion of Gaza in pursuit of Hamas, the mainstream media and some alternative outlets have been awash (Google it!) with explanations, based on the Thomistic theory of just war, why the current Israeli actions are justified. Various well-rehearsed arguments about repelling invasion and self-defence are rolled out along with proper authority, the aim of ultimate peace and, of course, proportionality.
It is hard to argue against the invasion and self-defence aspects of just war. Israel was, indeed, invaded (questions remain as to how it was possible) and they are defending themselves against a pretty dreadful bunch of fanatics. But they did help to put these fanatics in place themselves at a time when it was deemed expedient to do so.
On the question of obtaining and establishing peace, it is hard to see how pulverising communities in Gaza will ever lead to peaceful coexistence. For every Palestinian killed they have no way of knowing how many new enemies they have created. The only way they can be sure that no terrorists are left, and their future is secure is to keep on bombing and killing until not a single Palestinian is left in Gaza. From some of the footage and photographs available it looks like they are having a pretty good crack at that.
As asked recently by Theodore Dalrymple (the nom de plume of Dr Anthony Daniels): ‘What factor must Jewish deaths be multiplied by?’ which raised the thorny issue of proportionality. It is entertaining to witness the philosophical gyrations of those who consider the Israeli bombing of Gaza justified when it comes to proportionality. Let’s assume 1400 people were killed by Hamas. To date, according to NBC news 22,500 people have been killed in Gaza. So far, that is 16 dead Palestinians for every Israeli reported killed, yet Hamas aided by other forces in the region hostile to Israel continue their own offensive.
It is reckoned that, while Hamas and their allies bomb indiscriminately—and they most certainly do—that Israel is bombing strategically and making every effort to save civilian lives. That case rests on the above ratio of 16:1 and rising.
But amidst all the talk of Thomas Aquinas and just war theory it is worth asking if any war conducted in the manner being conducted in Gaza can be justified. Aquinas drew up his principles at a time when wars were fought by armies meeting honourably on the field of battle and going at it until the last man was standing or one side ran away. They fought with swords and spears and looked the enemy in the eye. It’s a far cry from the wholesale and indiscriminate destruction that is achieved by missiles packed with high explosives. Nobody I have read recently asks whether if Thomas Aquinas were alive today he could justify what is happening to the people of Gaza. My guess is he could not.
Roger Watson is a retired academic nurse who lives in the UK.
He is currently engaged in a range of professional consultancies in the UK, Europe and China. He writes regularly for several outlets including The Daily Sceptic, The European Conservative, Country Squire Magazine and The New Conservative.
