1. Tal Shalev et al, “Israel Launches Diplomatic Attacks on Its Western Allies Ahead of Palestinian Statehood Recognition,” CNN.com, August 20, 2025.
Wednesday, August 20, 2025
On Presumptuous Pride: Netanyahu Castigates Europe
Tuesday, August 5, 2025
Maimonides on Netanyahu
On August 5, 2025, Israel’s
prime minister, Ben Netanyahu and his cabinet were considering conquering all
of Gaza as cease-fire talks came to naught. According to the Associated Press, he
“hinted at wider military action in devastated Gaza . . . even as former
Israeli army and intelligence chiefs called for an end of to the nearly
22-month war.”[1] Roughly
thirty years earlier, Netanyahu had admitted in an interview that Israel
destroys countries (or peoples) it doesn’t like very slowly. The slow process
of starvation amid Israeli troops and American mercenaries enjoying shooting
Gazans at designated food-distribution sites through at least the summer of
2025 instantiates Netanyahu’s perhaps careless admission of cruelty befitting a
man out for vengeance. Never mind the scriptural passage, Vengeance is mine,
sayeth the Lord; Netanyahu and his cabinet, and even the president of Israel
felt entitled to take that task upon themselves, such that even just death
would be too good for Palestinians, rather than having faith in their deity,
whose vengeance would presumably be narrowly and properly directed to the Hamas
attackers and kidnappers rather than to innocent people, including small children
who could not possibly be considered to have been culpable two months shy of two
years earlier in 2023. The religious depth of the betrayal of Yahweh by
Netanyahu and his cabinet can be gleamed by recalling passages from Maimonides.
The full essay is at "Maimonides on Netanyahu."
1. Julia Frankel and Wafaa Shurafa, “Netanyahu Hints at Expanded War in Gaza but Former Israeli Military and Spy Chiefs Object,” The Associated Press, August 5, 2025.
Sunday, July 20, 2025
Pope Leo on the Fallacy of Collective Justice: The Case of Israel in Gaza
One of the many pitfalls in
the doctrine of absolute sovereignty, whereby government officials acting as government
can literally get away with murder domestically given the lack of credible de
jure and de facto enforcement of international “law,” is the ability
to inflict collective punishment based on group-identity, including the ideologies
that hinge on identity politics. Going the actual culprits of a crime or even a
revolt, collective punishment inflicts harm and even mass murder on an entire
group, including individuals thereof who are not at all culpable. Unlike “collateral
damage,” the ideology of collective justice includes intentionally harming
such individuals. It is an ideology because it is based on beliefs about a
group rather than an ethic that would justify normatively the infliction of
pain and suffering on the innocent. Furthermore, collective justice is an
ideology because it includes the artificial elevation of a group (i.e., the
collective) over the individual even though members of a group are arguably
foremost individuals, who typically belong to more than one group or
organization. To put the collective abstraction first ontologically is thus tenuous
at best. A person may be a Texan, a Democrat, a Catholic, and a member of a
football team, for example, so the claim that that person is essentially
any one of these would be dogmatic in the sense of being arbitrary. In privileging a
part over a whole, thus being partisan, an ideology is in a sense arbitrary, even
in claiming that a state of affairs that is favored or desired is the
present state of affairs, as if the statement were a fact of reason rather than
a counter-factual statement.
It is one thing for
intellectuals to debate and discuss ontological and ethical matters, and quite
another when a leader on the world stage makes an explicit normative statement
condemning collective punishment. The reason why such a public pronouncement by
a person chosen to head a government or a global religious organization is
important is that the Israeli government quickly discovered in 2023 that having
its president state publicly that every resident of Gaza would be punished for
being culpable in an atrocity committed by criminals in October of that year in
Israel was not going over well in the media around the world. Because the
collective-justice motive was from then on—for at least 21 months (and
counting)—on stealth mode in the Israeli government even though the fingerprints
were obvious in Gaza, to have a leader recognized globally state publicly that collective
“justice” was being pursued by the Israeli government even though prohibited by
international law. For some reason, facts on the ground, even when obvious, are
not enough for human beings to think, Hmm, the Israelis really are pursuing
collective justice on their subjugated people within Israel’s borders. Even
with such a recognition and acknowledgement, the prerogative of absolute sovereignty
can go on, unimpeded internationally.
Nevertheless, it is significant that Pope Leo of the Roman Catholic Church, whose billion-plus membership spans the globe, “said at the end of his Sunday Angelus prayer” on July 20, 2025, “I once again call for an immediate end to the barbarity of this war and for a peaceful resolution of the conflict.”[1] Typically, leaders on the global stage are satisfied to leave it at that; they condemn this or that without stating what actions in particular, or what ideologies behind those actions, are being castigated. In addition to bringing up the Israeli attack on the only Catholic church in Gaza just days earlier, the pontiff said, “I appeal to the international community to observe humanitarian law and respect the obligation to protect civilians as well as the prohibition of collective punishment, the indiscriminate use of force, and the forced displacement of populations.”[2] Together with the barbarity of that war, the collective punishment, which presumes the validity of collective justice unless punishment is inflicted without cause, such as randomly, can be said to be extreme in its severity, and not just in its scale. If in fact the Vatican had turned a blind eye to the Nazi Holocaust, the Church was not making the same mistake on the Israeli Holocaust in Gaza. Pope Leo was essentially telling the Israeli government officials:
We know what you’re trying to do; you’re trying to extinguish the Palestinian people who now live in the uninhabitable area that you created so to decimate the Gazans, whom you view not only as culpable collectively, but also sub-human—as “animals,” as it were. This is not the first time in human history that a government has considered a people in its territory to be subhuman. It is ironic, is it not? The Torah makes clear that being Yahweh’s chosen people does not spare you from God’s wrath. You are not divine, so it is not your place to fete out collective justice that God can do by virtue of being omniscient as well as omnipotent.
Whereas the Pope would have to
acknowledge the validity of divine collective justice in the Old
Testament, Nietzsche argues that the conception of the deity wherein it is both
omnibenevolent and vengeful, for “Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord,” is
discredited by whomever added that line, knowing that God must be perfect
goodness. Perhaps collective justice is not vengeance, and a deity who knows
all would only inflict collective punishment in cases in which everyone is
in fact guilty of some injustice. Nietzsche was not an atheist; in fact, he may
have been criticizing a flawed concept so that a new, healthier concept could
be built. An atheist would likely go
further, arguing that collective justice is inherently unjust so positing it of
a deity is wrongheaded, and in fact could do additional damage as Israeli
officials could try to justify their heinous crimes against humanity by saying
that Yahweh engages in collective justice in punishing Israel, such as by keeping
the Hebrews in the wilderness for forty years and later by allowing them to be
conquered for violating the covenant. Trying to exterminate a people who
believe in the same deity—unlike the people in Jericho in the Bible story—is
arguably such a violation. It would be ironic were Yahweh to apply collective
justice on the Israelis by punishing Israel for having inflicted collective
punishment on the Gazans as if every resident in Gaza in October, 2023 were a
culprit. Whether collective justice rightfully applies to an omniscient deity or
contradicts the very notion of divinity, the assumption that we mere mortals enjoy
God’s prerogative is impious self-idolatry.
2. Ibid., italics added for emphasis.
Friday, March 14, 2025
The UN: Israel Guilty of Reproductive Genocide
On March 13, 2025, the
Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory released a report based
on evidence of incessant incidents and Israeli strategic bombings to the UN
Human Rights Council. “Israel has increasingly employed sexual, reproductive
and other forms of gender-based violence against Palestinians as part of a broader
effort to undermine their right to self-determination,” Chris Sidoti of the
Commission stated.[1]
This statement is oriented to particular incidents, albeit recurrent; the report
goes on to charge the Israeli government with genocidal methods targeting the
ability of the Palestinian population to sexually reproduce itself. Ironically,
such methods may bring to mind the methods used in Nazi Germany, including
those used by Josef Mengele, the “Angel of Death,” to wantonly kill and
strategically sterilize undesirables. It need not be a truism, however, that
the descendants of victims become victimizers, though I suspect that studies on
intergenerational psychology attest to the phenomenon. Also ironically,
culpability with an intergenerational cause is also a theme in the Hebrew
Bible. Thirdly, it is ironic too that Yahweh may have the last word on the
Israeli transgressions, as this too is a recurrent theme in the Hebrew Bible’s
faith-rendering of the history of Israel. It would be odd indeed were Yahweh behind
a sort of rendering of justice against the Nazis by having Israel inflict
severe pain on Palestinians in the occupied territories. Put another way, that justice
did not catch up to every Nazi aggressor does not mean that excessive, and thus
unjust, harming of innocents can complete the cycle of justice. In fact, both
the literal “overkill” by Israel and Russia’s war crimes in invading Ukraine—both
with impunity—raise the question of whether omnipotent Yahweh gives a damn, or
even whether it is actually sheer fiction.
In the Commission’s report released
to the UN on June 14, 2024, whose coverage includes the Hamas attack on October
7, 2023 and does not excuse Hamas for its atrocities against Israelis. Even so,
the Israeli government ignored the Commission’s requests for information even
on those crimes. That the UN had created the state of Israel must also be
considered in assessing the refusal. The report also states that the attack by
Hamas “and the subsequent Israeli military operation in Gaza must be seen in
context. Those events were preceded by decades of violence, unlawful occupation
and the denial by Israel of the right of Palestinians to self-determination”.[2]
The “unlawful occupation” is especially relevant, as it attests that the
political and military “playing field” was hardly level. The Israeli government
had taken advantage of this macro advantage for decades, and the Commission’s
report on the genocidal sexual and reproductive crimes against humanity
following October 7, 2023 should be put in this context. In other words, those
crimes were not part of an even “tit-for-tat” between two equal adversaries.
Moreover, 45,000 to 55,000 killed or starved for 1250 Israelis killed on October
7, 2023 is so extremely one-sided that the slant in the underlying
geo-political and military paradigm can be reckoned as being culpable, as well
as the party enforcing it.
Therefore, it is vital to go
beyond particular instances of the crimes. Even as the March, 2025 report
includes incidents, the macro-level of genocidal sexual tactics is not ignored.
Of the former, “two days of public hearings held in Geneva . . . featuring
victims and witnesses of sexual and reproductive violence and medical personnel
who assisted them, as well as civil society representatives, academics, lawyers
and medical experts” went into the report.[3]
The report asserts that “forced public stripping and nudity, sexual harassment
including threats of rape, as well as sexual assault” were “standard operating
procedure” of the Israeli Security Forces in Gaza.[4]
Furthermore, the report maintained that “forms of sexual and gender-based
violence, including rape and violence to the genitals, were committed either
under explicit orders or with implicit encouragement by Israel’s top civilian
and military leadership.”[5]
From a human standpoint, it is only natural that the anger of Gaza residents
towards Israelis and Israel going forward must be such that any proximity,
such as is an aspect of military occupation, is itself problematic and
essentially infeasible. That such anger can be expected to be intergenerational
also rendered continued occupation unfeasible. This is not to say that the
residents of Gaza should be moved; a coalition of the willing globally could
step in to see that no Israeli enters the territory, which, fortunately, shares
a border with Egypt.
The report on the sexual and
reproductive tactics also covers crimes against the Palestinian people in Gaza,
and this also renders continued occupation untenable. Specifically, the Commission
reported “that Israeli forces had systematically destroyed sexual and
reproductive healthcare facilities across Gaza, including Gaza’s largest
fertility clinic, Al Basma centre, in December 2023.”[6]
Additionally, it was no accident, according to the report, that “(t)ank
shelling destroyed about 4,000 embryos at the clinic that reportedly assisted 2,000-3,000
patients a month.”[7] According
to Sidoti, “certainly, their commanders knew and the commanders would have
known that there were tanks operating within that vicinity and firing on
buildings and fired on a healthcare facility that was clearly marked.”[8]
To be sure, it is possible that the Israeli government had intel that Hamas was
using the clinic as a shield. Even if this were so, the report includes other
instances of tactics of reducing the number of Palestinians in Gaza, such as
direct attacks on maternity wards, “combined with the use of starvation as a
method of war,” that have negatively “impacted all aspects of reproduction.”[9]
Imagine the reaction were such a design and intent applied by an occupying
power on Israel; it would not take long at all for the Israeli government to
charge such an occupier with committing Nazi atrocities on the Jews. The asymmetry
itself points back to the tilted playing field.
From its collection of
evidence, the Commission could detect a systemic pattern. The report “finds
that the destruction amounts ‘to two categories of genocidal acts in the Rome
Statute and the Genocide Convention, including deliberately inflicting
conditions of life calculated to bring about the physical destruction of Palestinians
and imposing measures intended to prevent births.”[10]
The very notion of collective justice (and injustice) is based on the fallacy that
there are no innocents in a population. Immediately after the Hamas attack, the
president of Israel commited this fallacy and connected it with his stated
determination that every resident in Gaza should suffer as a result of the
Hamas attack. The reaction of governments around the world was to step back and
let this fallacious reasoning be implemented on the ground in Gaza by
embittered Israeli leaders and soldiers. It is as in Hobbes’ Leviathan
in that a sovereign power can do whatever it wants. Yet even in Hobbes’ political
theory, even though a country’s sovereign power has the last word in
interpreting scripture, everyone is subject to God’s judgment.
The doctrine in Jonathan Edwards’ sermon, “Sinners in Zion,” is that the “time will come when fearfulness will surprise the sinners in Zion, because they will know that they are going to be cast into a devouring fire, which they must suffer forever ad ever, and which none can endure.” Edwards’ most famous (or infamous) sermon, “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” is based on Deut. 32:35: “Their foot shall slide in due time.” This can be said of the Israelis who are culpable in ordering or committing genocidal acts well in excess of reciprocal harm in an eye for an eye. The Palestinians are largely if not all Muslims, so it cannot be believed that Yahweh would be in favor of the killing, starvation (e.g., blocking humanitarian aid from entering Gaza in 2025), deprivation of utilities (e.g., cutting off electricity), and reproductive abuse. It is not as though the deity were saying to Israel’s prime minister Netanyahu, Go and rid the Land of Israel of those people who worship other gods, as is the biblical story of Yahweh directing the Hebrews to circle Jericho seven times and kill even the women and children who worship Baal because they do not worship Yahweh. Rather, it seems that Yahweh would eventually punish Israel (i.e., collective divine justice) for having violated the Commandment against killing, especially if the magnitude is well beyond tit-for-tat.
For a God-fearing Israeli, and the rest of us, Yahweh once again punishing Israel for its transgressions is not something that any person can or should take on as if delegated by that deity to enforce divine justice. Indeed, such a horrendous assumption renders theocracies dangerous. We are all, human, all too human, and thus we don’t have the omniscience to be God’s enforcers. This is not to say that governments cannot or should not act to enforce international law, especially given the impotence of the United Nations, but absent this, there is faith that Yahweh will have the last word in holding Israel accountable here rather than only in the hereafter. Instead of willful arrogance, humility, self-restraint, and contrition are the appropriate attitudes of people of faith who have so violated divine (and international) law. It can even be said that serving rather than attacking one’s enemies unlocks the door to the kingdom of God, but even this is subject to willful intransigence out of jealousy and spite.
2. “Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including
3. Rights Probe Alleges Sexual Violence Against Palestinians by Israeli Forces Used as ‘Method of War,” UN News, United Nations, March 13, 2025.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid.
10. Ibid.