On June 8, the Israeli military conducted a military operation in the Nuseirat refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip, resulting in the deaths of at least 274 Palestinians and injuries to nearly 700 more. The international community has expressed its deep concern over the situation, with many calling for an immediate end to the violence.
The European Union’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, has condemned the attack, emphasizing that the bloodshed must stop immediately. The international community is urging for a peaceful resolution to the crisis and an end to the suffering of civilians.
Meanwhile, the rescue of four Israeli captives held by Hamas has been hailed as a major success, with many celebrating the reunion of the captives with their loved ones. However, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza remains a pressing concern, with many calling for an end to the violence and a focus on providing aid to those affected.
The Israeli military’s latest attack on Gaza, resulting in the deaths of over 200 Palestinians, is a stark reminder of the country’s long-standing disregard for human life. The numbers are staggering, with over 37,000 people killed in Gaza in just eight months, and countless more bodies remaining buried under rubble.
The Israeli narrative has consistently dehumanized Palestinians, portraying them as mere obstacles to be eliminated in the pursuit of “security”. The concept of “human shields” is often used to justify the targeting of hospitals and schools, as if Palestinians are mere pawns in a game of war.
The math is clear: Israel kills Palestinians at an astronomically higher rate than Palestinians kill Israelis. Yet, the international community continues to accept the Israeli narrative, where Israeli life is somehow deemed more valuable than Palestinian life. The disparity is stark: 1,400 Palestinians killed in Operation Cast Lead versus 10 Israeli soldiers and three civilians. Similarly, in Operation Protective Edge, 2,251 Palestinians lost their lives, compared to 67 Israeli soldiers and six civilians.
Even prisoner exchanges demonstrate the skewed value placed on Israeli life. In 2011, Gilad Shalit was released by Hamas in exchange for 1,027 Palestinian prisoners. This stark reality highlights the profound imbalance in human worth in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The Israeli military’s latest attack on Nuseirat refugee camp, resulting in the deaths of at least 274 Palestinians, is a stark reminder of the country’s relentless efforts to erase the Palestinian population both physically and figuratively. The aftermath of the attack has been marked by a campaign to downplay and dismiss Palestinian casualties, as if they never existed.
The Israeli military’s social media posts, for instance, failed to mention Palestinian casualties, instead focusing on the “heroic” rescue of four Israeli captives. Meanwhile, the Jerusalem Post lamented that some Arab social media users were attempting to “reduce the significance” of the operation by highlighting Israeli aggression.
The US President Joe Biden’s response to the incident was equally concerning. He praised the return of the four captives, stating that he would continue to work towards a ceasefire and the return of all hostages. This statement raises serious questions about how a ceasefire can be achieved when the US president is effectively condoning Israeli aggression.
Just one month ago, Biden warned that he would no longer supply offensive weapons to Israel if they were used in an all-out assault on Rafah in Gaza. However, it seems that this warning has been conveniently forgotten in the wake of the latest attack. The fact that civilians continue to be killed, including at least 40 Palestinians who were sheltering in a UN-run school in Nuseirat just three days ago, seems to be of little consequence.
The use of US-manufactured parts in the weapons used in the attack on the UN school highlights the ongoing complicity of the US in Israel’s actions. It appears that genocide has become normalized and that the lives of Palestinians are being erased from international discourse.