It’s hard to find words that still have relevance and meaning, but silence is not an option. 

Grotesque, immoral, utterly inhumane, and ultimately vomit-inducing. With a straight face, while expressing ‘concern’ for those affected, while urging greater ‘care’ in protecting civilians, the United States government has again authorised the transfer of billions of dollars worth of bombs and fighter jets to support the current military agenda of Israel in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon and possibly beyond.

While (over)arming Israel (one of the most powerful militaries worldwide) to maintain its ‘qualitative military edge’ in the region (the words are those of Israeli ‘defence’ minister Yoav Gallant), the Biden administration continues to sanctimoniously refer to the ‘pain’ generated by the use and impact of those very same armaments.

That ‘pain’ is, as ever, being endured by others, elsewhere.

While finally ending its veto on calls for a ceasefire at the UN Security Council, the US administration insists it is working tirelessly to end the war, and its devastating threats and consequences and to promote the possibility of a peaceful resolution. 

Except by doing that one thing that would have an immediate material impact on those stated objectives – reducing or ending arms transfers if even only on a temporary basis to allow other strategies to come into play. 

While continuing to send military ‘aid’ (what a thoroughly sick euphemism), the US administration provides Netanyahu and his cabinet with effective impunity. Netanyahu and his colleagues know that while the weapons flow, they can ignore Biden without consequence. 

Allowing militarist strategies and strategists to determine policy will be disastrous for everyone in Palestine, Israel, the region and beyond.

Refusing to even acknowledge let alone ‘explain’ this obscenity, Biden and his administration are wilfully undermining the practice as well as the spirit of international law, to say little about common humanity.  This plays directly into the hands and agendas of those who actively oppose human rights, democracy, and international accountability.

In such circumstances, it is incumbent on each of us, especially those in leadership roles in our many public and private institutions to publicly challenge the glaring and deadly hypocrisy of the US and others, especially when this is difficult and uncomfortable. 

‘Diplomacy’ must not be cited as the excuse to avoid doing so.  Failing to speak out clearly and without equivocation adds fuel and energy to the agendas of those who strategise to defeat democracy – including it must be said, Hamas and its fellow travellers.

Expressing our abhorrence of what is being done to Gazans (and barbarously to their entirely innocent children) and calling for immediate and effective humanitarian aid rings deeply hollow without calling out the policies of the US administration and its allies, especially Germany and the UK who have continued to supply arms over the past five months (and before).

Crudely stated, we have little if any credibility in condemning the killing agenda of Putin and his fellow travellers if we do not similarly condemn Netanyahu and his. 

Justice demands we condemn the hideous, immoral, and rights denying ideologies, policies, and agendas of Hamas – this is fundamental to asserting our own humanity. This must be done without equivocation. Those Israelis who have been attacked and murdered, injured, and abused deserve and demand our equal concern and solidarity, even as we call out Israel’s response.

But Hamas attacks on Israelis can in no way be invoked to justify the scale and depth of the war on Gazans and Palestinians more broadly. Citing one agenda of brutality to justify another similar agenda is simply sick. 

At last, we are now beginning to witness the emergence of an increasingly vocal and influential group of EU member states including Belgium, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Slovakia, and Spain, who seek to promote a different emphasis and strategy. They represent an important counterweight to the dominant, US led strategy and offer an alternate EU message internationally. 

Meanwhile, there continue to be many interests and agendas – military, political, cultural, ideological and even personal – supportive of war and militarism as ‘our’ response in the region.  Alternate perspectives, voices and strategies simply must be heard and promoted.

But much more is urgently needed, if an even greater disaster is to be prevented in Rafah and subsequently more broadly.  The current ‘status quo’ is lethal, for all of us.