Archives for category: International

In this post, historian Heather Cox Richardson writes about the Russian effort to buy the voices of rightwing “influencers,” as well as the right’s apologetics for Nazism.

She writes:

One of the things that came to light on Wednesday, in the paperwork the Justice Department unveiled to explain its seizure of 32 internet domains being used by Russian agents in foreign malign influence campaigns, was that the six right-wing U.S. influencers mentioned in the indictments of the Russian operatives are only the tip of the iceberg. 

Since at least 2022, three Russian companies working with the Kremlin have been trying to change foreign politics in a campaign they called “Doppelganger,” covertly spreading Russian government propaganda. “[F]irst and foremost,” notes from a meeting with Russian officials about targeting Germany read, “we need to discredit the USA, Great Britain, and NATO.” Through fake social media profiles, their operatives posed as Americans or other non-Russians, seeding public conversations with Russian propaganda.

In August 2023 they launched the “Good Old USA Project” to target swing-state residents, online gamers, American Jews, and “US citizens of Hispanic descent” to reelect Donald Trump. ​​”They are afraid of losing the American way of life and the ‘American dream,’” one of the propagandists wrote. “It is these sentiments that should be exploited in the course of an information campaign in/for the United States.” Using targeted ads on Facebook, they could see how their material was landing and use bots and trolls to push their narrative in comment sections. 

“In order for this work to be effective, you need to use a minimum of fake news and a maximum of realistic information,” the propagandists told their staff. “At the same time, you should continuously repeat that this is what is really happening, but the official media will never tell you about it or show it to you.”

According to the documents, one of the three companies, Social Design Agency (SDA), monitors and collects information about media organizations and social media influencers. It collected a list of 1,900 “anti-influencers,” whose accounts posted material SDA workers thought operated against Russian interests. About 26% of those accounts were based in the U.S. 

SDA also identified as pro-Russian influencers more than 2,800 people in 81 countries operating on various social media platforms like X, Facebook, and Telegram. Those influencers included “television and radio hosts, politicians, bloggers, journalists, businessmen, professors, think-tank analysts, veterans, professors, and comedians.” About 21% of those influencers were in the U.S. 

YouTube took down the Tenet Media Channels associated with the Justice Department’s indictments, and last night, Tenet Media abruptly shut down. In The Bulwark, Jonathan V. Last noted that the Tenet influencers maintain they were dupes, although they must have been aware that their paychecks were crazy high for the numbers of viewers they had. He asks if, knowing now that their gains are ill-gotten, they are going to give them to charity. 

Earlier this week, former Fox News Channel personality Tucker Carlson hosted Holocaust denier Darryl Cooper on his X show, where Cooper not only suggested that the death of more than six million Jews was an accidental result of poor planning, but also argued that British prime minister Winston Churchill, who stood firm against the expansion of fascist Germany in World War II, was the true villain of the war.

Cooper’s argument puts him squarely on the side of Russian president Vladimir Putin and Hungarian prime minister Viktor Orbán, who insist that democracy undermines society. During the recent summer Olympics, Cooper posted on social media an image of Hitler in Paris alongside another of drag queens representing Greek gods at the Olympic opening ceremonies, an image some on the right thought made fun of the Last Supper of Jesus and his disciples. “This may be putting it too crudely for some,” Cooper wrote, “but the picture [of Hitler in Paris] was infinitely preferable in virtually every way than the one on the right.” 

The idea that Churchill, not Hitler, is the villain of World War II means denying the fact of the Holocaust and defending the Nazis. It lands Carlson and Cooper in the same camp as those autocrats journalist Anne Applebaum notes are “making common cause with MAGA Republicans to discredit liberalism and freedom around the world.” Elon Musk promoted the interview, saying it was “very interesting,” and “worth watching,” before the backlash made him delete his post. The video has been viewed nearly 30 million times. 

Carlson told Lauren Irwin of The Hill that the Biden administration is made up of “warmonger freaks” who have “used the Churchill myth to bring our country closer to nuclear war than at any moment in history.” Carlson is on a 16-day speaking tour, on which he will interview Trump allies, including Republican vice presidential nominee J.D. Vance and Donald Trump Jr. 

Trump today continued his effort to undermine the democratic American legal system in a “news conference” of more than 45 minutes, in which he took no questions. Although Judge Juan Merchan, who oversaw the election interference case in which a jury found Trump guilty on 34 counts, decided today to delay sentencing until November 26 to avoid any appearance that the court was trying to affect the 2024 election, Trump nonetheless launched an attack on the U.S. legal system and suggested the lawsuits against him were election interference. 

He spoke after he and his legal team were in court today to try to overturn a jury’s conclusion that he had sexually assaulted writer E. Jean Carroll, a decision that brought his judgments in the two cases she brought to around $90 million. He began with an attack on what he said was a new “Russia, Russia, Russia” hoax, and promised he had not “spoken to anybody from Russia in years.”

Aaron Rupar of Public Notice recorded what amounted to close to an hour of attacks on the American Justice Department and the laws of the country, and also on American women (he not only attacked Carroll, he brought up others of the roughly two dozen women who have accused him of sexual assault). He attempted to retry the Carroll case in the media, refuting the evidence the jury considered and suggesting that the photo of him and Carroll together was generated by AI, although it was published in 2019.

Attacking women was an interesting decision in light of the fact that he will need the votes of suburban women if he is to make up the ground he has lost to Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris and vice presidential nominee Tim Walz.

For her part, former representative Liz Cheney (R-WY) appears to see this moment for what it is. Although a staunch Republican herself, she is urging conservative women to admit they’ve had enough. Referring to both Trump and Vance in a conversation sponsored by the Texas Tribune, she said: “This is my diplomatic way of saying it: They’re misogynistic pigs.” She assured listeners, quite accurately, that Trump “is not a conservative.” “Women around this country…we’ve had enough.” “These are not people that we can entrust with power again.” 

Her father, former vice president Dick Cheney, agreed that Trump “can never be trusted with power again” and announced today that he will be voting for Harris. “As citizens, we each have a duty to put country above partisanship to defend our Constitution. That is why I will be casting my vote for Vice President Kamala Harris,” he said. Eighty-eight business leaders also endorsed Harris today, including James Murdoch, an heir to the Murdoch family media empire. Citing Harris’s “policies that support the rule of law, stability, and a sound business environment,” they said in a public letter, “the best way to support the continued strength, security, and reliability of our democracy and economy” is by electing Harris president.​​

Meanwhile, at his event with Sean Hannity of the Fox News Channel yesterday, Trump embraced the key element of Project 2025 that calls for a dictatorial leader to take over the U.S. That document maintains that “personnel is policy” and that the way to achieve all that the Christian nationalists want is to fire the nonpartisan civil servants currently in place and put their own people into office. Trump has tried hard to distance himself from Project 2025, but last night he said the way to run the government is to “get the right people. You put the right person and the right group of people at the heads of these massive agencies, you’re going to have tremendous success, and I know now the people, and I know them better than anybody would know them.”       

One of those people appears to be X owner Elon Musk, whom Trump has promised to put at the head of an “efficiency” commission to audit the U.S. government. 

In 1858, Abraham Lincoln, then a candidate for the Senate, warned that the arguments against democracy and in favor of a few people dominating the rest were always the same. In his era, it was enslavers saying some people were better than others. But, he said, those were the same arguments “that kings have made for enslaving the people in all ages of the world…. Turn in whatever way you will—whether it come from the mouth of a King, an excuse for enslaving the people of his country, or from the mouth of men of one race as a reason for enslaving the men of another race, it is all the same old serpent.” 

In our era, Indiana Jones said it best in The Last Crusade: “Nazis. I hate these guys.” 

Soldiers of the Israeli Defense Force discovered the bodies of six young hostages while searching the vast tunnel infrastructure under Gaza. All six had been captured on October 7, 2023 They were young people, and each had been shot in the head within 24-48 hours of being found. This event provoked massive protests in Israel, with hundreds of thousands of people in the streets, demanding both a ceasefire and a release of all the hostages. The national labor federation called a general strike in support of these demands. Sadly, while the public wants an end to the war, the leaders on both sides do not.

The following article by Amir Tibon appeared yesterday in Ha’aretz, a liberal Israeli news site.

It seems like a lifetime ago, but just two weeks ago, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken was in Israel, and ended his visit to the country with a surprising statement. The Israeli government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, he said, had accepted the latest bridging proposal put forward by the United States and the other mediators in the talks for a hostage release and cease-fire deal.

Blinken’s intention was good: He wanted to increase the pressure on Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, who has been stalling and refusing to compromise for months now, sticking to maximalist positions and doing everything he can to avoid negotiating in good faith. Almost 11 months into the war that Sinwar initiated with the October 7 massacre, Gaza is in ruins, tens of thousands are dead, but the man who brought this calamity on his people is hiding in a tunnel and haggling for time.

The problem with Blinken’s statement is that on the other side of the negotiating table is a cynical and ruthless politician who feels even less urgency to reach a deal than Sinwar. Netanyahu pulled on Blinken the same trick he has been pulling on American diplomats for his entire career: Doublespeak. One message in English, the opposite in Hebrew.

And so, after a lengthy conversation in which Netanyahu promised the secretary that he will accept the bridging documentput forward by the mediators, Blinken gave his statement – and the Israeli prime minister, having “pocketed” the achievement, moved on to his next move.

In the two weeks that have passed since the visit, Netanyahu has done everything humanly possible to turn Blinken’s statement into a total joke. He imposed new conditions for any future agreement, stated that Israel will “never” evacuate its forces from the Philadelphi corridor along the Gaza-Egypt border, and pushed Israel’s security cabinet to pass a decision that prohibits any withdrawal from there. His own defense minister warned the cabinet members during a heated discussion on Friday morning that Netanyahu’s desired decision is a de facto death sentence for the dozens of living hostages still held in Gaza. Netanyahu ignored him.

It’s too late to save the six hostages who were murdered last week by Hamas, after surviving 11 months in the tunnels of Gaza. The time to save them was in June and July, when a deal was in hand, and Netanyahu again added new, last-minute obstacles.

At the end of the day, the Biden administration – which seems much more eager than the Israeli government and Hamas to reach a deal – is facing an impossible situation. Sinwar is an ultrareligious fanatic with a murderous zeal and a messianic world view. Netanyahu is an egotistic, selfish man who values the survival of his own coalition over the survival of the hostages. It’s not clear if the administration can truly get a deal under these circumstances. But if it can’t, it owes one thing to the families of the hostages, especially the American ones: to tell the truth, and stop allowing either side to use political tricks and manipulations.

The Mouse That Roared was a 1955 novel made into an uproarious comedy starring the great Peter Sellers in 1959. It is the story of a tiny pre-industrial nation—Grand Fenwick—whose economy has collapsed and whose leaders decide to invade the U.S. because the U.S. always rebuilds the economy of nations it defeats.

Grand Fenwick sends a fleet of 24 soldiers armed with longbows to New York City, and due to a series of miscommunications, accidentally conquers the U.S.

Something like that appears to be unfolding in the grinding war between Ukraine and Russia. After 30 months of absorbing withering attacks on its towns, cities, infrastructure, and people, Ukraine has invaded Russia.

Russia, of course, cries “unfair!” Only Russia can invade, not Ukraine. But invade they did, and the Ukrainians met little resistance.

Thinking like the writer of “The Mouse That Roared,” what if?

What if the Ukrainians pushed their way to Moscow (as the Wagner Group did last year)?

What if they took control of the Kremlin?

What if they captured Putin?

What if Zelensky became the president of Russia and launched a democratic revolution?

I know it’s fantastical, but what if?

Good news for the families of Americans wrongfully detained in Russia: their loved ones have been released in a multi-nation deal. The deal confirmed that the U.S. was trying to include Andrei Navalny in the swap but he was killed in a Russian prison camp before the deal could be finalized. Trump, as customary, claimed that he could have gotten the prisoners released in a day, undoubtedly by a phone call to his pal Putin. But Whelan’s family complained that Trump did nothing to get him out of Russian prisons.

MSNBC News reports:

Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich and Marine veteran Paul Whelan are among the Americans released on Thursday in a prisoner swap between the U.S., Russia and other countries.

Russian-American radio journalist Alsu Kurmashev, U.S. permanent resident Vladimir Kara-Murza and 12 German nationals held in Russia have also been released in exchange for eight Russian nationals who were being held in the U.S., Slovenia, Germany, Norway and Poland.

U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan called the swap, one of the largest since the Cold War, “historic.” 

“It’s the culmination of many rounds of complex, painstaking negotiations over many, many months,” Sullivan said on a call with reporters Thursday morning.

Gershkovich, 32, was detained in March 2023 while he was on assignment in Moscow. He was found guilty of espionage and sentenced to 16 years in a maximum security prison last month. Both the U.S. government and Gershkovich’s employer, The Wall Street Journal, called his trial a “sham.”

Whelan, 54, had been serving a 16-year sentence in a Russian penal colony after being convicted of espionage in 2020. He was arrested in December 2018 while in Russia for a friend’s wedding. 

Both men and the U.S. government have vehemently denied allegations of espionage.

Negotiations in prisoner swaps between the U.S. and Russia have often been colored by political tensions. Sources told NBC News earlier this year that a deal to release Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, as well as Whelan and Gershkovich, had been in the works before Navalny died in a penal colony in February. At the time, President Joe Biden blamed Russian President Vladimir Putin for Navalny’s death.

In 2022, while criticizing the release of WNBA star Brittney Griner in exchange for Russian arms dealer Viktor Bout, former President Donald Trump said he had turned down a deal to secure Whelan’s release in exchange for Bout. Whelan’s family has said that Trump did little to move negotiations forward when he was president. 

Trump has also repeatedly claimed that he would free Gershkovich from Russian detention if he wins the November election, boasting that Putin would “do that for me, but not for anyone else.” His remarks were widely criticized, including for potentially scuttling the possibility of Gershkovich’s release prior to the U.S. election.

Benjamin Netanyahu is a hero to the party of Trump but not to the moderate and liberal Israelis who want him to be ousted from office and prosecuted for his failures. The Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz published the following scathing analysis of his speech to the U.S. Congress. Liberal Israelis believe that Netanyahu is prolonging the war in hopes of Trump winning the election, because Trump will let him do what he wants without pressuring him to make peace. The families of the hostages are furious at Netanyahu. Many thinks he’s delaying the day when he will be held accountable for his financial crimes, for the massive security lapse on October 7, 2023, and for his refusal to end the war.

Anshel Pfeffer writes:

If Benzion Netanyahu had his way and, instead of being forced by his wife Cila to return to Jerusalem in late 1948, he had kept his family in New York, Benjamin Netanyahu would have been born there. Perhaps he would have gone into politics and become the first Jewish president of the United States. On Wednesday evening, we had a glimpse of that parallel universe.

Netanyahu’s address to the joint meeting of Congress was a studied imitation of a presidential State of the Union, complete with the recognition of distinguished guests in the gallery at the start and the “God bless the United States of America” at the end.

But Netanyahu was not born in the U.S. He is the prime minister of Israel, and nowhere in the 52 minutes of his record-breaking fourth address (yes, he made sure to mention right at the very beginning how many times he had been given this honor) was there any detail, not even the slightest hint, of how he plans to extricate Israel from the tragic impasse in which it’s trapped, and on his watch.

Netanyahu may have won 52 standing ovations from the rapturous, majority-Republican audience, but his rhetoric that so impressed the natives in Washington offered nothing for Israelis watching back at home.

The first half of his speech was devoted to stories of the heroism of Israeli soldiers on October 7, and graphic details of Hamas’ bestiality on that day. But there was so much missing from that account. Nothing about how the strategic concepts of a prime minister who had led his country for 15 years crumbled that day. Nothing about the failures that allowed Hamas to kill and kidnap hostages at will. Or about his refusal to form a commission of inquiry.

He lauded the IDF soldiers who fought on October 7 as “unbowed, undaunted, unafraid,” and of course the soldiers brought to represent the IDF were an Ethiopian-Israeli paratrooper and a Bedouin master-sergeant. They are indeed worthy of recognition, despite Netanyahu’s blatant tokenization. But he has yet to summon up the courage to meet with any of the kibbutz communities devastated on that day.

He spoke of the ordeal of former hostage Noa Argamani, who stood there uncomfortably in the audience as an excruciatingly exuberant Sara Netanyahu gripped her with one arm and petted her with the other. Two seats away stood the beaming wastrel son Yair, on a day-trip form his opulent, taxpayer-subsidized exile in Miami. A 33-year-old Israeli who has nothing in common with the brave soldiers brought to serve as window-dressing for his father’s speech.

It was a speech that had Netanyahu written all over it. All the old hasbara clichés he’s used so many times, the regulatory lame joke (a tip he once got from Larry King that he abides by) and the biblical verse in Hebrew. But it was a speech about a reality Netanyahu is extraordinarily detached from. He talked of Hamas saying “they will carry out October 7 again and again and again. I swear to you today I will never allow that to happen,” and every Israeli watching who is not a member of the shrinking Bibi-worshipping cult said to themselves at that moment, “but you already have!”

There were some disruptions and protesters in the gallery. Seven members of hostage families were forced to leave by the Capitol Police. That humiliation was only compounded by the fact that Netanyahu had nothing for them but an empty promise that “efforts are happening right now” to free their loved ones.

They’ve been hearing those promises for nearly 10 months and they know the truth. That Netanyahu opposed the first hostage release agreement back in November and it took all of President Joe Biden’s pressure to make it happen, and that he’s spent the last few months, under pressure from his far-right coalition partners, delaying and preventing another deal.

Before the speech his entourage briefed that he would present “a vision” for the future of Gaza and the region. In the end that vision consisted of “a demilitarized and deradicalized” Gaza. Just how Netanyahu, who can’t even get his ultra-Orthodox partners to teach their kids math, is planning to educate “a new generation which must be taught not to hate Jews” wasn’t quite clear, but he was already on to the next round of slogans about an “Abraham Alliance” between Israel and “moderate” Arab nations, but once again, forgot to mention his coalition, which won’t allow him to even breathe the words “two-state solution,” which are the first condition for this alliance.

For Netanyahu, it was a triumph. It was a day on which he got in everything that means anything to him. But Israelis got nothing.

Many questions have been raised about the $2 billion that the Saudis gave Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, to invest in profitable deals. Now we know about one of them, thanks to veteran journalist Michael Isikoff, writing at SpyTalk.

After weathering criticism over its reliance on a gusher of Saudi cash, Jared Kushner’s investment fund made its first big splash last month when it announced it had signed a $500 million deal with the Serbian government to develop a high end real estate project in downtown Belgrade on the site of a bombed down army building destroyed during the 1999 Kosovo war.

But the fine print of the deal includes a commitment that seems destined to stir up even more international controversy: a pledge by Kushner’s firm, Affinity Partners, to construct a “memorial dedicated to all the victims of NATO aggression”— an allusion to the U.S.-backed bombing campaign that brought the Serbian government of Slobodan Milosevic to its knees a quarter century ago in response to its relentless campaign of repression and savage massacres of ethnic Albanians in Kosovo. 

Among those exercised over the Kushner deal is retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who served as NATO Supreme Allied Commander during the war. 

While he has no objection to a U.S. firm investing in Serbia, the planned revisionist memorial—officially proclaiming America’s adversary in the war to have been a victim of  “aggression”— “is worse than a reversal” of U.S. policies in the region, said Clark in an interview with SpyTalk. “It’s a betrayal of the United States, its policies and the brave diplomats and airmen who did what they could to stop Serb ethnic cleansing.” 

Just as concerning as the whitewashing of Serbian war crimes, Clark said, is the just announced deal between Kushner’s firm and the Serbian government of Aleksander Vučić, a pro-Russian hardliner who once served as minister of information in Milosevic’s government. The memorial project needs to be viewed in a wider geopolitical context: It serves the Kremlin’s core interests in undermining NATO at a time the alliance is engaged in resisting Russian aggression in Ukraine.

“This is part of a broader Russian intelligence movement to split, discredit and weaken NATO,” Clark said. “It’s Russian imperial pushback…Should Kushner participate in this? Of course he should not.”

Neither Kushner nor representatives of his Miami-based firm responded to requests for comment. But the remarks by Clark are likely to draw further attention to a project that has generated strong  criticism from Serbian opposition leaders as well as questions about potential conflicts of interest if Kushner’s father in law, Donald Trump (for whom he is once again raising money) is elected president in November.

Kushner’s partner in the deal is Richard Grenell, who was Trump’s Ambassador to Germany and who hopes to become Trump’s Secretary of State in a new administration.

Will Saletan describes how the GOP is not only a Trump party but is now fully isolationist. Saletan writes for The Bulwark, which is a Never Trumper site with some of the best political writing on the web. Trump’s friendship with Putin must frighten our European allies. Trump’s return will destabilize Europe and leave our allies to Putin’s tender mercies.

He writes:

THE OPENING NIGHT OF THE 2024 Republican National Convention sent a clear signal: The balance of power within the GOP has shifted. This is now an isolationist party. And if Republicans win this year’s presidential election, the first victim of this retreat from the world will be Ukraine.

The party’s base was already moving in this direction. In recent polls, most Republicans—unlike most Democrats and independents—have consistently said that the United States is giving too much support to Ukraine. The gap between the parties is enormous, with Republicans about 40 points less supportive than Democrats.

A few hours before the primetime speeches began on Monday, Donald Trump announced his running mate: Senator J.D. Vance. Trump is already well known as a Putin sympathizer and opponent of aid to Ukraine; his selection of Vance reinforces that disposition. Vance was by far the most anti-Ukraine candidate on Trump’s vice-presidential short list. As a senator, he has fought against aid to Ukraine and has made clear that he isn’t particularly interested in defending Europe. Two years ago, shortly after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Vance shrugged, “I don’t really care what happens to Ukraine one way or the other.”

Get 30 day free trial

The convention’s organizers gave a coveted evening speaking slot to Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, Ukraine’s fiercest opponent in the House. Greene doesn’t just oppose aid to Ukraine; she also parrots Russian smears against its government. In her prepared remarks, Greene denounced “globalists” and protested that “the Democrats spent over $175 billion of your tax dollars to secure Ukraine’s borders.” The delegates—not waiting for her next line, about how the money wasn’t being spent on a wall to seal the Mexican border—immediately began to boo.

In his own primetime address, tech investor and CEO David Sacks went further. He blamed President Biden for Russia’s invasion.

He provoked—yes, provoked—the Russians to invade Ukraine with talk of NATO expansion. Afterward, he rejected every opportunity for peace in Ukraine, including a deal to end the war just two months after it broke out. . . .

Hundreds of billions of our taxpayer dollars have gone up in smoke. President Biden sold us this new forever war by promising it would weaken Russia and strengthen America. Well, how does that look today? Russia’s military is bigger than before, while our own stockpiles are dangerously depleted. Every day, there are new calls for escalation, and the world looks on in horror as Joe Biden’s demented policy takes us to the brink of World War III.

This speech—presumably cleared for delivery by the convention’s organizers—explicitly shifted blame from Putin to America. In effect, it excused Putin by faulting Biden for every stage of the crisis: for causing the invasion, for risking escalation, and for failing to agree to Putin’s conditions for ending the war. It’s particularly rich that Sacks said we should give up on Ukraine because our military stockpiles are depleted—after Trump, Vance, Greene, and other Republicans opposed Ukraine-aid legislation to replenish those stockpiles.

Sacks also boasted that Trump, unlike Biden, would be

a president who understands that you build the most powerful military in the world to keep America safe, not to play the world’s policeman; a president who is willing to talk to adversaries as well as friends, because that is the only way to make peace; a president who will stand up to the warmongers instead of empowering them.

“A president who is willing to talk to adversaries” was an obvious allusion to Putin. He’s the only U.S. adversary—particularly in a context where peace might have to be discussed—with whom Trump, unlike Biden, is known to be friendly.

Half an hour after that speech, Trump arrived at the convention. As the crowd cheered, he stood in a row of VIPs in front of his family. To Trump’s left stood Vance. To his right stood Rep. Byron Donalds, a consistent opponent of aid to Ukraine. And next to Donalds, basking in Trump’s glow and the delegates’ adoration, stood the most avidly pro-Putin, anti-Ukraine propagandist in right-wing media: Tucker Carlson.

This is the Republican party in 2024. Two years after Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, as Russia continues to kill civilians, seize land, and threaten Europe, the GOP has opened its convention with an emphatic message. To American isolationists—and to the Kremlin—the signal is: We are your party.

I have written it again and again: The war in Gaza is complicated. There is no simple “right side” and “wrong side.” The war should end as soon as possible. Both sides have committed terrible atrocities and crimes against humanity. The only way out is through negotiation. All the hostages must be returned, alive and dead. The end result must include plans for a Palestinian state.

Nicholas Kristof said it best in yesterday’s New York Times:

I’ve been on a book tour for the last few weeks, speaking around the country, and one of the questions I get asked most often isn’t about my book at all but along the lines of: What should I think of the war in Gaza?

The toxic public debate is dominated by people with passionate views on both sides, but most people I meet are torn and unsure how to process the tragedy that is unfolding. That makes sense to me given how exquisitely complex real-world ethics are, as much as we may yearn for black-and-white morality tales.

With that in mind, I’d like to offer this highly personal road map for thinking about the war. Here’s a set of morally complicated, sometimes contradictory principles for a nuanced approach to sort out the issues.

1. We think of moral issues as involving conflicts between right and wrong, but this is a collision of right versus right. Israelis have built a remarkable economy and society and should have the right to raise their children without fear of terror attacks, while Palestinians should enjoy the same freedoms and be able to raise their children safely in their own state.

2. All lives have equal value, and all children must be presumed innocent. So while there is no moral equivalence between Hamas and Israel, there is a moral equivalence between Israeli civilians and Palestinian civilians. If you champion the human rights of onlyIsraelis or only Palestinians, you don’t actually care about human rights.

3. Good for President Biden for pushing a proposal on Friday for a temporary cease-fire that could lead to a permanent end to the war and a release of hostages; as he said, “It’s time for this war to end.” Let’s hope he uses his leverage to achieve that end. It’s also true that Biden’s failure to apply enough leverage over the last seven months has made the United States complicit in human rights abuses in Gaza, because it has provided weapons used in the mass killing of civilians, and because it has gone too far in protecting Israel at the United Nations.

4. We can identify as pro-Israeli or pro-Palestinian, but priority should go to being anti-massacre, anti-starvation and anti-rape.

5. Hamas is an oppressive, misogynistic and homophobic organization whose misrule has hurt Palestinians and Israelis alike. But not all Palestinians are members of Hamas, and civilians should not be subject to collective punishment. In the words of a 16-year-old Gaza girl: “It’s like we are overpaying the price for a sin we didn’t commit.”

6. There was no excuse for Hamas attacking Israel on Oct. 7 and murdering, torturing and raping Israeli civilians. And there is no excuse for Israel’s reckless use of 2,000-pound bombs and other munitions that have destroyed entire city blocks and killed vast numbers of innocent people, including more than 200 aid workers.

7. When Israel began military operations after Oct. 7, it was a just war.

8. What starts as a just war can be waged unjustly.

9. Israel was entitled to strike Gaza after the Oct. 7 attack, but not to do whatever it wanted. In particular, there should be no argument about Israel’s practice of throttling food aid. Using starvation as a weapon of waragainst civilians, as the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court alleges Israel has done, is a violation of the laws of war.

10. Each side justifies its own brutality by pointing to earlier cruelty by the other side. Israelis see Oct. 7. Palestinians see the “open-air prison” imposed on Gaza before that. This goes all the way back to the displacement of Palestinians at Israel’s founding in 1948, the 1929 massacre of Jews at Hebron, and so on. Enough obsession with the past! Let’s focus instead on saving lives in the coming months and years.

11. Hamas’s brutality toward Israeli hostages, such as credible reports of sexual assault and starvation, is unconscionable. So is Israeli brutality toward Palestinian prisoners, such as CNN accounts that some Palestinians have had limbs amputated because of constant handcuffing.

12. War nurtures dehumanization that produces more war. I’ve heard too many Palestinians dehumanize Jews and too many Jews dehumanize Palestinians. When we dehumanize others, we lose our own humanity.

13. Zionism is not a form of racism. And criticism of Israel is not antisemitism. Both sides are too quick to fire such epithets.

14. Each side sees itself as a victim, which is true — but each side is also a perpetrator.

15. “Apartheid” isn’t the right word for Israel today, where Palestinians are treated like second-class citizens but can still vote, serve in the Knesset and enjoy more political freedoms than in most of the Arab world. But “apartheid” is a rough approximation of Israeli rule in the West Bank, where Arabs have long been oppressed under a system that is separate and unequal.

16. “From the river to the sea” refers to the dream of a single state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, encompassing what is now Israel and the Palestinian territories. The slogan as used by protesters can mean many different things, some peaceful and some the militaristic vision of the Hamas charter, while a parallel vision is in the original platform of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party. Hamas imagines a Palestinian state with no room for Israel, and Netanyahu wants perpetual Israeli sovereignty from the river to the sea to deny a place for a Palestinian state. I think that instead of either version of a one-state solution, a two-state solution is infinitely preferable.

17. Pro-Palestinian demonstrations have too often tolerated strains of antisemitism, which in recent months has shown itself to be stronger than many imagined. How can a movement that claims the moral high ground make excuses for any kind of bigotry?

18. Campus protesters would do more good raising money for suffering Gazans rather than using it to buy tents for themselves.

19. We probably know what an eventual Israeli-Palestinian peace deal would look like. The plan was outlined in the Clinton parameters of 2000 and in the Geneva Accord of 2003. The only question is how many innocent people on both sides will die before we get there.

20. To establish peace, both Israel and the Palestinian Authority will need new leaders with vision and courage. This won’t be achieved tomorrow. But there are peacemakers on each side. To understand how a path toward peace may emerge, consider the words of the Chinese writer Lu Xun more than a century ago: “Hope is like a path in the countryside. Originally, there is nothing — but as people walk this way again and again, a path appears.”

A wise Palestinian from Jenin, Mohamed Abu Jafar, whose 16-year-old brother had been shot dead by Israeli forces, told me last year: “They can’t kill us all, and we can’t kill them all.” That leaves, he said, one practical option for all of us: working for peace.

Let’s get to it.

Speaking at a private fundraising event, Donald Trump said that he would put a quick end to campus protests against Israel’s war in Gaza. When Trump was president, he moved the American Embassy to Jerusalem, which previous presidents refused to do and took other actions that endeared him to Prime Minister Netanyahu, like canceling the multinational Iran nuclear deal, which Israel opposed. Netanyahu called Trump “the best friend Israel has ever had in the White House.”

According to The Washington Post:

Former president Donald Trump promised to crush pro-Palestinian protests on college campuses, telling a roomful of donors — a group that he joked included “98 percent of my Jewish friends” — that he would expel student demonstrators from the United States, according to participants in the roundtable event with him in New York.


“One thing I do is, any student that protests, I throw them out of the country. You know, there are a lot of foreign students. As soon as they hear that, they’re going to behave,” Trump said on May 14, according to donors at the event.


When one of the donors complained that many of the students and professors protesting on campuses could one day hold positions of power in the United States, Trump called the demonstrators part of a “radical revolution” that he vowed to defeat. He praised the New York Police Department for clearing the campus at Columbia University and said other cities needed to follow suit, saying “it has to be stopped now.”

The International Criminal Court in The Hague issued an order calling for the arrest of leaders of both Hamas and Israel for crimes against humanity. The supporters of each side have called foul, but the ICC is absolutely right. There is no excuse or rationale for atrocities or killing of innocent civilians. Meanwhile, Rep. Elise Stefanik addressed the Israeli Parliament and urged Israelis to keep fighting Hamas until they had achieved “total victory.” She said “Total victory starts, but only starts, with wiping those responsible for October 7 off the face of the Earth,” a maximalist goal that rejects negotiations to end the war.

The Israeli publication Haaretz says that the ICC got it right:

Reading the statement by Karim Khan, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court in the Hague, calling to arrest top Hamas and Israeli leaders is physically dizzying. It is at once a terrible reliving of the cruel events of this war, and a forced confrontation with atrocities that “my” side (whichever you’re on) is committing. It is a soaring, noble effort to constrain them, but one that seems just as likely to fail.

If the court issues those warrants, three Hamas leaders, Yahya Sinwar, Muhammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, run the risk of being arrested in any of the 124 countries who are parties to the 1998 Rome Statute that established the ICC. Customary international law allows diplomatic immunity for top national leaders, but they shouldn’t count on it – there are legal precedents for the court overriding such immunity.

The ICC is one of the world’s most audacious experiments: Creating a universal standard of law to constrain the equally universal barbarism of war. The project has been dogged by accusations of the politicization of justice for years, and the court perennially struggles for legitimacy.

But calling to arrest both Hamas and Israeli leaders has tremendous significance for the parties involved – and possibly for the court’s own global standing.

That’s because Khan presents unrelenting allegations against both sides, not as artificial both-siderism, but out of commitment to the law. It is the first call to arrest leaders backed by major Western powers. And along the way, the text renders subtle judgment on some of the painful public debates on this issue.

For example, the statement, which starts with accusations against Hamas, cleanly dispenses with the bizarre public inquisition against the C-word. Hamas’ alleged war crimes “were committed in the context of an international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine, and a non-international armed conflict between Israel and Hamas.”

Issue closed: Of course there is a context, and it is no excuse for atrocities, full stop.

Specifying that there is an international armed conflict is also important. For the Court, Palestine is a state, recognized by the UN as a non-member observer state in 2012, which allowed Palestine to accede to the Rome Statute in 2015. It’s a good reminder that foreign involvement is not a violation of Israel’s sovereignty but a legitimate matter for the international community.

Denialists of sexual violence can crawl back into whatever dark moral void they came from. Like the exhaustive media, civil society, and UN investigations, Khan, too, found sufficient evidence to accuse Hamas of committing these crimes – which are probably ongoing against hostages.

The court called on Hamas to release the hostages immediately, as “a fundamental requirement of international humanitarian law.”

And the top charge among eight different accusations against Hamas was “extermination as a crime against humanity.” The whole list is a horrifying replay of October 7 itself: murder, hostage taking, rape and other forms of sexual violence, torture.

Starting with Hamas might have reflected merely the chronology of the current war. But it could inject “Team Israel” readers with a sense of vindication – perhaps the court hoped for inoculation – for the charges against Israel.

These charges are devastating: starvation as a method of war, a war crime. Israel is accused of intentionally attacking a civilian population. And fifth on the list: “extermination and/or murder…as a crime against humanity,” followed by two additional crimes against humanity.

The court also bluntly observed that “Famine is present in some areas of Gaza and is imminent in other areas.” This is a reminder that Israeli denialism must vanish forever.

The prosecutor also made the unforgiving distinction between self-defense, war and war crimes:

“Israel, like all States, has a right to… defend its population. That right, however, does not absolve Israel… of its obligation to comply with international humanitarian law… intentionally causing death, starvation, great suffering, and serious injury to body or health of the civilian population – [is] criminal.”

Beyond the content, Khan noted that his office “worked painstakingly to separate claims from facts and to soberly present conclusions,” and he leaned on a panel of international law luminaries. Among them is the nonagenarian jurist Theodor Meron – the Israeli (in addition to other nationalities) who first warned the Israeli government back in 1967 that civilian settlements in occupied territory would violate international law – when they were still just an idea.

The Prosecutor’s earnest efforts will never be enough. Everywhere international courts rule on such cases, the side on the dock feels persecuted, victims feel their perpetrators got off too lightly, and everyone blames the court. But in this case, no one even waited for verdicts.

A dozen GOP Senators already issued Tony Soprano-like threats to the court weeks ago:

“Target Israel and we will target you… we will move to end all American support for the ICC, sanction your employees…bar you and your families from the United States. You have been warned.”

Among apoplectic Israeli leaders, the Nazi-accusations runneth over, as do their attacks on international justice altogether, from Smotrich to the president, Isaac Herzog.

The ICC might have lost Israel forever. But the court seeks and pursues justice as the Bible commands. If this doesn’t destroy it, the court may win a second chance from the rest of the world.