On the Recently Prominent Tone of Sensitivity with Regard to Gaza
Suddenly, Palestine became fashionable, and empathy for it became part of the “polite society” package.
Paweł Mościcki is a professor at the Institute of Literary Research of the Polish Academy of Sciences, the author of numerous books and a blog: pawelmoscicki.net as well as substack pawelmoscicki.substack.com
Cross-posted from Pawel’s Substack
Picture: Copyright Pawel Moscicki with kind permission
Something has suddenly changed in the collective mood in the West. For several days now, everyone has been sympathizing with the Palestinians in Gaza, who are currently being subjected to a campaign of mass starvation by Israel. Intense acts of dissent are popping up on social media in series, and Palestinian flags have suddenly been struck by a miracle of de-tabooing. This awakening of conscience has even affected those who, during the twenty-two months of ongoing genocide, either showed no particular interest or even openly supported the perpetrators. We are not talking here about “ordinary people,” but about the intellectual, academic, and cultural circles. Suddenly, Palestine became fashionable, and empathy for it became part of the “polite society”package.
Much could be written about these dramatic changes in sensibility, about these sudden conversions that came later than late and were completely impossible just a moment ago. Perhaps it would even be worth delving deeper into these mysterious processes of regaining sight, the ability to understand, to recognize something that was denied just a moment ago with moralistic fervor.
However, let us not concern ourselves with individual psychology, motivations or calculations. It is more important to look at the ideological determinants of these gestures, because they indicate not only the source of the sudden change, but also its real dimension and likely consequences.
Let’s be honest: today, it is possible to feel sympathy for Gaza, because the signal to open hearts came from above.
The Democratic Party in the US is now using this issue in its war of attrition against Trump. It turns out that the president is hesitating to release Epstein’s client list, so his opponents, who had previously been threatened by its contents, have now gone on the counterattack. Trump is retaliating by revealing the scale of manipulation behind the launch of Russiagate and publishing materials exposing the involvement of intelligence agencies and top government officials in the conspiracy. In response, the Democrats have pulled out the Gaza card and are trying to blame the current administration for Israel’s policies.
Of course, everyone here is lying. First, Epstein had connections on both sides of the political divide (that was the whole point of his activities). Second, even if Russiagate is indeed a shameful case of political fabrication and manipulation of public opinion, Trump has long since learned the language of his persecutors and is now a full-fledged neocon in his policy toward Russia. Third, everyone is responsible for Gaza, because for two years of genocide, the entire Washington political elite danced to Netanyahu’s tune.
However, there are other sources signaling a change in thinking. Emmanuel Macron has announced that he will recognize the Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September. He was joined by Keir Starmer, who announced more or less the same thing. As if that were not enough, the presidents of Israeli universities sent a letter to their prime minister demanding an end to the humanitarian blockade of Gaza. This synchronization is puzzling, as it mirrors the previously equally well-orchestrated silence.
No wonder that the Polish elites have finally decided to reveal the depth of their moral shock as well. After all, it is no secret that they are incapable of any self-reflection or independent thinking, only occasionally covering up their indolence by virtue signaling when it does not cost them too much. Their moral compass and reflections on the world are perfectly attuned to the current needs of the most important centers of power. Even when – and perhaps especially when – they strike a tone of moral outrage.
Damage control
If we abstract for a moment from individual motivations and look at the broader ideological context of these sudden surges of ethical sensitivity, we see that this is not about opposition to Israeli policy. Quite the contrary, it is about its veiled defense.
Take Radek Sikorski, the Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs, as he is an excellent gauge of the servility of Western politicians towards Israel in particular and American imperialism in general. In a recent statement, he acknowledged that Israel, although “provoked,” had “used excessive force” and that in Gaza “the number of victims is simply too high.” What is more, Israel “even if acting in self-defense, is not exempt from respecting international law”.
This is an example of a statement whose content is in stark contrast to its actual impact. On the surface, one could argue that the Polish minister is criticizing Israel by speaking out on behalf of the starving and dying civilians in Gaza. But what does “the number of victims is too high” mean? Is there a number of victims that would be acceptable to Sikorski? Since he is only speaking out now, it seems that this number is somewhere between tens and hundreds of thousands, as estimates of the number of victims suggest. Until it is exceeded, it cannot be said that Israel has “used excessive force.” After all, it was provoked. This means that until it crosses a certain line, the state is essentially exercising its right to self-defense.
This statement thus casually normalizes the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestine and the policy of colonization and apartheid that dates back well before October 7, 2023. Under the guise of criticism, Sikorski reinforces the rhetoric used by Netanyahu’s genocidal government. What is more, he completely fails to mention that this attitude towards the Palestinians is a logical consequence of Zionist ideology. The liquidation of the Warsaw ghetto by the Nazis was not an exaggeration, but a consequence of its construction. And this was a direct result of Nazi ideology. The same is true of Gaza, where, as Francesca Albanese recently showed, the economy of occupation has smoothly transitioned into an economy of genocide. As can be seen, there has been no real political opposition from the Western establishment.
So, this whole theater of atonement is not about opposition to genocide, but about sanctioning the continued silence—yes, silence!—about its most important causes. And it is not just about the “historical context” needed for academic debates. This is what is really happening in Palestine.
Reputation laundering and regaining control
On a social level, the current festival of moral rebirth among the elites is having similar effects. The point is that those who have remained silent until now should not only regain their tarnished honor unnoticed, but also retain their position of authority. So that they can once again decide what, when, and how things can be called. This is a struggle to reproduce a disrupted hierarchy, not some kind of ethical metamorphosis. This is particularly evident in the fact that the first thing the elites do after regaining consciousness is, of course, to sideline the radicals who “support Hamas.”
Once again, the elites “criticize Israel” while using key figures of Israeli propaganda to do so. This is perfectly controlled opposition, which in its deepest essence does not undermine the legitimacy of the oppressors. In the Appeal to the Polish authorities to impose sanctions on Israel, signed by many people from the academic and artistic community [including myself, due to the validity of the demands], there is even a statement that the genocide was “provoked by a terrible terrorist attack carried out by Hamas militants,” although “the Israeli authorities are primarily responsible for its further course and horrific consequences.” It is interesting that the Israeli authorities do not seem to be responsible for the earlier course of events, before they were “provoked” into the Gaza massacre.
Incidentally, it is worth considering why, even while condemning the planned starvation of nearly two million people in Gaza, it is still necessary to stick to the Israeli version of events. Why does even this mass extermination of Gazans in no way violate the fundamental elements of this worldview?
Here we return to the rituals of “condemning Hamas” practiced by the corporate media—which is also taking advantage of the opportunity to whitewash its own well-deserved dismal reputation—as if Hamas were responsible for years of apartheid, occupation, violence, and exploitation, and not Israel. The essence of this ritual was recently aptly described by Tarik Cyril Amar. “The reality is that this is an ideological test of submission, a sort of loyalty oath. We are supposed to take it, again and again and again, to prove that we are in compliance with the double standards of a West that proactively helps Israel commit genocide. The demand is, put differently, perfectly morally perverse. Masquerading as a test of moderation or good sense (the opposite of ‘crazy’), it is really a test of corruption: Prove to us that you are, at least, corrupt enough to pay obeisance to the lie that ‘we’ are good and ‘they’ are bad, even while we are committing and abetting the crime of crimes against them”.
Tarik Cyril Amar’s Substack and Podcast – The Ninth Wave
On Condemnation, Complicity, and Genocide
This moment in world history is defined by Israel’s campaign of genocidal atrocities against the Palestinians. This is how our descendants will remember it. For this is a global crime, carried out in full view of the entire world. A settler-colonial apartheid regime, driven by a supremacist ideology of fascistic ethno-nationalism (which is what remains …
Read more
The paradox is that even while demanding sanctions against Israel for genocide, we still recognize—as the petition states—that “the civilized world can no longer tolerate this situation.” So it is still us [and our political leaders] who represent civilization, we are the measure of morality in international politics, we are the watchdogs of standards. This is much crazier than any of the voices of “radicals.”
Unfortunately, if Gaza has proven anything, it is the complete moral disgrace of such thinking. Because it is the “civilized world” that not only tolerates but actively supports the massacre in Gaza that has been going on for two years.
The political co-opting of Palestine
Let us return for a moment to the declarations of Macron and Starmer, because in concrete terms they reveal a completely different face than the one that can be hastily taken as proof of a “breakthrough.” The French president, announcing the recognition of the Palestinian state, also states: “We must also ensure the demilitarization of Hamas, secure and rebuild Gaza. And finally, we must build the State of Palestine, guarantee its viability, and ensure that by accepting its demilitarization and fully recognizing Israel, it contributes to the security of all in the region”.
He is echoed by the British Prime Minister, who, in addition to announcing decisive action (after two years), stipulates that he will recognize Palestinian statehood “unless the Israeli government takes substantive steps to end the appalling situation in Gaza, agree to a ceasefire and commit to a long-term, sustainable peace, reviving the prospect of a Two State Solution”. So if Israel meets these – admittedly not very demanding – conditions, the British government will not recognize Palestine? However, the rest of the statement is more important: „Meanwhile, our message to the terrorists of Hamas is unchanged and unequivocal. They must immediately release all the hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, disarm and accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza”.
The essence of both these declarations is extremely symptomatic. Under the guise of opposition to Israel’s policy, a project of political pacification of Palestine is developing. Why should Hamas lay down its arms and renounce its share of power, while Israel merely stops mass murdering Palestinians? Why should European leaders, who are complicit in genocide, decide who will rule today’s victims in the future? Why should the policy of a genocidal regime result in the full recognition of Israeli statehood by the victims? How can a two-state solution with guaranteed “demilitarization of Gaza” be considered a lasting peace? Why is there no demand for the demilitarization of Israel, Netanyahu’s departure from politics, or anything else that would create at least the appearance of symmetrical responsibility on both sides?
It seems that the resuscitation of the “peace talks” fiction and a “two-state solution” is primarily intended to put Hamas under public pressure. Now that European countries have come to their senses and joined the axis of good, only Hamas seems to be sticking to its radical and incomprehensible demands. All that is needed is to defeat the terrorists and everything will return to normal. Read: we will control all of Palestine while maintaining the appearance of humanitarian peacemakers, even though we have been supporting the genocide of Gazans in every way possible—militarily, economically, diplomatically, and informationally. This is the normality that is now being fought for on the European stage.
Similar tones are heard in the New York Declaration, signed by representatives of the European Union, the United Kingdom, Italy, and several other countries outside Europe. Although this is a much more serious document and contains a more detailed vision of a two-state solution, it also includes a demand that “Hamas must end its rule in Gaza and hand over its weapons to the Palestinian Authority”. Given that Macron’s declaration came as part of correspondence with President Mahmoud Abbas, it can be assumed that this is his offensive aimed at normalizing the situation through international pressure. The only problem is that the credibility of the Authority – which, for example, pacifies protests in the West Bank on behalf of the occupying authorities – is not looking good, and the proposal itself is simply a blatant attempt by Western countries to take full political control of Palestine. This would be done without taking into account the will of the inhabitants of Gaza and without imposing any sanctions on Israel other than the necessity to cease the current extermination campaign. To call this hypocrisy would be an understatement.
The triumph of humanitarian kitsch
The reborn moral consciousness of Western public opinion, once again reconciled with its high opinion of itself, will certainly be fertile ground for such a political offensive. Thanks to the collective reanimation of consciences, it may be possible to reconstruct a sense of unity based on humanitarian compassion, a common moral ground for agreement. All that is needed is to purge it of any politics, historical awareness, and real moral responsibility, and “Gaza” will once again become one of many “tragic events” that emotional Europeans watch with perfectly crafted indignation, oblivious to their own complicity. Without any connection to other processes, without a vision of real political interests, without an ideological framework, genocide will vanish from the collective consciousness faster than the current phase of compassion has taken hold. The more the public is satisfied with a return to the abstract realm of morality, the easier it will be for the ruling oligarchy to continue its work of destruction.
You will see, one day we will all stand together, holding hands, and cheer the construction of a “humanitarian city” in Gaza.