Israeli Spokesmen

Really tricky territory, Gaza. Lots of different people ready to descend in fury on those who get things wrong, so God help the BBC if they don’t report every development with the proper caution and nuance. Or even if they do, much of the time.

Early on, Starmer and Sunak were competing to show who could be most in support of Israel. And even in those early stages, problems began to emerge. Deplore the Hamas attack, of course, but “want to see you win” ? What does a win look like, for the Israelis? The total demolition of Gaza?

Some of their spokesmen don’t help. Accusing the UN Secretary General of a “blood libel” and demanding his resignation isn’t a rational response to a speech which clearly condemned the Hamas attack. The bit they didn’t like was Guterres suggestion that this attack did not happen in a vacuum. But it’s true. Look at the casualty figures, Israeli and Palestinian, over the last decade, and you see why the Hamas attack might have happened.

In the same way, an Israeli spokesman on pm argued against a ceasefire, because that would suit Hamas. To him, it’s simply war between Hamas and Israel, and Hamas has to lose. There is no recognition of civilians in Gaza, helpless and unable to move, paying the price for Israeli rage. The only thing that counts is the Hamas attack, and making sure it can never happen again. It’s the politics of vengeance, as usual, and it isn’t the answer.