Post

@dmarusic

@dmarusic

@dmarusic

@dmarusic

More from @shadihamid

Shadi Hamid

@shadihamid

Mar 18

I respect @petersavodnik too, and I think these are questions worth addressing. I will answer them in detail here.

1. Yes, Israel has a moral duty to ensure Hamas can never repeat Oct. 7 As I’ve said repeatedly, Israel has a right to defend itself. But even a war whose cause is just does not, and cannot, justify doing anything and everything in the name of that war, i.e. effectively destroying an entire territory, making it uninhabitable, and killing tens of thousands of civilians.

Basically, Hamas argues that everything that Israel did before 10/7 justifies 10/7. Israel then argues that because of what happened on 10/7, everything it does afterwards is justified. They’re not exactly the same, but they rely on a similar, maximalist logic—that the laws of war are suspended when you’re dealing with a uniquely barbaric enemy.

Boiled down to its essence, this is Hamas’ argument. Hamas’ leaders don’t actually rely on theological arguments or defer to the rules of combat in the Islamic just war tradition. They don't even pretend to care. Hamas uses an almost entirely secular, nationalistic logic, a version of 'desperate times call for desperate measures.'

It's odd and unsettling to me that the irony is lost on Israel's most vociferous defenders that they're mirroring Hamas' arguments. As various Israeli officials and ministers have themselves suggested and even at times explicitly state, all Palestinians are fair game now that Hamas has declared war. Which was Hamas' argument on 10/7: that all Israelis were fair game because Israel had declared war on the Palestinians.

2. What about the claim that if Hamas wanted to spare Gazans, it would release the hostages unconditionally and surrender? All of this could end tomorrow, the argument goes. In some ways, this is both the most sensible, straightforward argument and also, practically-speaking, a red herring.

We already know that Hamas is bad and doesn’t care about saving the lives of Gazans. It’s a terrorist organization, and terrorist organizations try to provoke the target country and population into a disproportionate response. We live in the world as it is. An organization that would commit the wanton atrocities of 10/7 isn’t all of a sudden going to become a different organization than the one it was the day before and release the hostages unconditionally.

So if this is not going to happen, then we have to look at more feasible alternatives that don't depend on the goodwill of a terrorist organization.

Read 11 tweets

Shadi Hamid

@shadihamid

Mar 2

It's an utter embarrassment that the US has to airdrop aid to Gaza because it refuses for reasons that have never actually been made clear to put actual pressure on Israel—a state that, itself, depends on US aid—to let aid in. Shameful and absurd.

The Biden administration's refusal to use our tremendous leverage with Israel to pressure it to treat Gazans like humans is one of the real policy puzzles of our time.

Whatever else you think about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, looking this impotent on the world state is probably not a good thing for America.

Read 7 tweets

Shadi Hamid

@shadihamid

Jan 27

8 years into the Trump era, there is still a widespread resistance to acknowledging that he might have appealing qualities. Which is odd. He *must* have some appealing qualities to have won 74 million votes. It's worth asking what they are and what they mean. 🧵

In my new @washingtonpost column, I try to make sense of the Trump paradox. He manages to be extreme without being dogmatic. His ideological nimbleness could even be mistaken for moderation—or, more precisely, "unhinged moderation."

wapo.st/3SxCnAh

In a presidential system, personality matters. The country’s past five presidents—Joe Biden, Trump, Barack Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton—could all claim some mix of charisma, charm and folksiness. They were candidates you could conceivably enjoy getting a beer with.

Read 11 tweets

Shadi Hamid

@shadihamid

Dec 26, 2023

https://twitter.com/Koefnielsen/status/1739589240155930895

Yes, I do think this is the intellectual undercurrent behind much of the aggressively pro-Israel sentiment I see. Palestinians (and Arabs) lost. They must accept defeat. The fact that they haven't is, for whatever reason, something that deeply offends.

https://twitter.com/Koefnielsen/status/1739589240155930895

This is where pro-Israel attitudes overlap with anti-wokeness. Anti-wokeness (if one isn't careful) can easily devolve into a disdain for the weak and marginalized—that if they are weak, then the fault in some sense is ultimately with them and not with those who oppress them.

And then this is where pro-Israel attitudes, anti-wokeness, and pro-Westernism overlap. The West won. The West is superior. Israel is emblematic of Western civilization—its liberalism, its military dominance, and its moral superiority. Those who oppose the West are defective.

Read 4 tweets

Shadi Hamid

@shadihamid

Dec 6, 2023

Harvard President Claudine Gay's response to Elise Stefanik was embarrassing but not for the reasons people claim. It was embarrassing because she accepted Stefanik's premise that saying "intifada" is equivalent to a call for genocide, which is ridiculous.

The problem with these college presidents is that they're spineless technocrats who don't have the courage of their convictions. GOP officials are popularizing the idea that pro-Palestine sentiment = pro-Hamas sentiment. This should be rejected out of hand.

As for @EliseStefanik, she doesn't speak Arabic and has not the slightest idea what intifada means, or that the first intifada (when the word became popularized) had nothing to do with calling for genocide and included large-scale civilian action, such as general strikes and economic boycotts. Are we really arguing that Palestinians don't even have the right to *nonviolent* resistance against occupation?

Read 8 tweets

Shadi Hamid

@shadihamid

Nov 15, 2023

I finally got to reading Ayaan Hirsi Ali's "Why I am now a Christian." Is it really possible to convert to Christianity and not mention Christ even once? Apparently it is. There's not the slightest sign of sincere belief. It's completely instrumental.

unherd.com/2023/11/why-i-…

As Ayaan herself explains it, her main reason for being Christian isn't belief in Christianity. It's because of what she thinks Christianity means politically. She believes Christianity is the best available tool against the unholy trinity of China, Islam, and wokeness.

In my piece for @TheFP earlier this year, I discussed the rise of the "political convert." Andrew Tate converted to Islam because he thought that Islam aligned with his politics. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is just the latest in a growing trend.

thefp.com/p/embracing-go…

Read 8 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Shadi Hamid

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @shadihamid

Shadi Hamid

Shadi Hamid

Shadi Hamid

Shadi Hamid

Shadi Hamid

Shadi Hamid

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!