The events of October 7, 2023, marked a dark day in Israel’s history. In a coordinated assault, Hamas terrorists breached Israeli borders, murdering over 1,200 people, injuring thousands, and taking 251 hostages. These atrocities included indiscriminate violence against women, children, and the elderly, leaving the nation – and the world – devastated.
Israel’s military response, though heavily criticized, is a lawful and necessary act of self-defense. Scrutiny over proportionality, inflated casualty figures, and civilian deaths largely obscure the core issue: the need to neutralize a terrorist organization that threatens Israeli sovereignty and regional stability.
Proportionality, often misunderstood, does not mean equal retaliation or an equivalent number of casualties. Under international law, proportionality requires that a military action’s anticipated harm to civilians not be excessive compared to its projected military advantage. When faced with threats from groups like Hamas, this principle becomes incredibly complex.
Israel’s military operations focus on dismantling Hamas’s infrastructure, command centers, and weapons stockpiles – objectives crucial to safeguarding its citizens. Civilian casualties, while tragic, are an inevitable consequence of urban warfare, especially against an adversary that embeds its weapons within civilian towns and cities.
The principle of proportionality also requires examining the intent behind military actions. Israel’s strikes are not punitive but defensive, aimed at safeguarding its citizens and restoring peace. In contrast, Hamas’s attacks, without a doubt, deliberately target civilians, a clear violation of international law. Equating the two ignores the fundamental differences in their objectives and tactics.
Hamas’s reliance on human shields is well-documented. The group stores weapons in schools, hospitals, and mosques, creating deliberate casualties in Israeli military operations. A 2021 UN report confirmed Hamas’s use of civilian sites for military purposes, a tactic that violates international humanitarian law. The group’s actions ensure that any response risks civilian harm, enabling Hamas to manipulate global public opinion.
Israel, aware of these challenges, takes extraordinary measures to minimize civilian casualties. The IDF warns civilians of planned strikes using leaflets, phone calls, and text messages – efforts that go far beyond what most militaries undertake in similar conflicts. No military has ever warned its adversary of a planned attack other than Israel, yet it still faces the most criticism.
CONDEMNATION of Israel often fixates on casualty figures reported by the Hamas-run authorities in Gaza. These numbers, however, are unreliable. Analyses by independent organizations and investigative journalists reveal that Hamas inflates civilian death tolls, counting combatants among civilian casualties and even including deaths unrelated to the conflict.
Attempts to defame Israel
This propaganda serves to defame Israel while masking the extent of Hamas’s militarization of civilian areas. By accepting Hamas’s death toll figures without question, the public risks promoting a narrative designed to delegitimize a sovereign nation’s self-defense.
A newly released report by the Henry Jackson Society exposed the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry for employing flawed and biased tactics to inflate civilian casualty numbers. The study uncovered adults aged 22-31 registered as children in the casualty count.
Natural deaths, such as those from cancer or other illnesses, and fatalities caused by misfired Hamas rockets are included in the official civilian casualty figures as well.
Civilian casualties in war are not unique to Israel’s response in Gaza. Historical comparisons reveal significantly higher civilian-to-combatant death ratios in other conflicts.
During the NATO intervention in Kosovo in 1999, civilian casualties accounted for about 66% of deaths despite the use of precision strikes. In the fight against ISIS, US-led airstrikes in Syria and Iraq caused hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths, as documented by groups like Airwars. Israel’s casualty ratios are consistent with the challenges of urban warfare, where combatants deliberately exploit civilian environments for tactical gain.
Israel’s civilian-to-combatant death ratio, approximately 1:1, is lower than that of any significant modern conflict. The Jewish state’s exceptional proportionality highlights its efforts to target combatants precisely, even amid the complexities of urban warfare and Hamas’s deliberate use of civilian shields.
The disproportionate focus on Israel’s actions often ignores the broader context of the conflict.
Hamas’s charter explicitly calls for the destruction of Israel and its people, framing its operations as part of a larger ideological war. By targeting Israel’s civilian population on October 7, Hamas aimed not only to inflict terror but also to provoke a military response that would draw international condemnation.
Hamas relies on the predictable cycle of violence and blame, using civilian suffering to destroy Israel’s legitimacy on the world stage.
The Iraq War saw 200,000 civilian casualties; Afghanistan, 50,000; Syria’s civil war, 310,000; and Yemen’s, 150,000. Yet outrage over these tragedies pales in comparison to the uproar over Israel’s conflict with Gaza, where even Hamas’s inflated numbers claim fewer than 20,000.
COLLEGE CAMPUSES didn’t erupt over Afghanistan’s toll, nor did influencers acknowledge the staggering losses in these other wars. If the world feels compelled to advocate for innocent lives, let it start with the 1,200 taken in Hamas’s horrific attack – a tragedy to Israel like 9/11 to the United States.
Many critical of Israel’s response in Gaza frequently demand a ceasefire, arguing that continued military operations only cause civilian harm. A premature truce, however, risks leaving Hamas intact – therefore allowing for future violence.
History has proven that half-measures against terrorist organizations often lead to prolonged conflicts and tremendous suffering. For Israel, the goal is not only to neutralize immediate threats but also to degrade Hamas’s long-term capabilities, ensuring a safer future for both Israelis and Palestinians.
In September 2024, Mossad executed a highly sophisticated operation targeting Hezbollah operatives in Lebanon by remotely detonating rigged pagers and walkie-talkies. This unprecedented attack resulted in at least 37 deaths and over 3,000 injuries, predominantly affecting Hezbollah members.
Israel’s attack on Hezbollah may go down in the history books as one of the most advanced precision attacks ever carried out. The attack harmed a minimal number of civilians, yet some accuse Israel of having committed a war crime. It is evident by the facts, however, that the only war crime committed was Hamas’s initial terrorist attack on October 7.
The responsibility for all tragedy in Gaza and Israel lies with Hamas, whose tactics endanger civilians to further its goals. Israel’s actions, while imperfect, represent a measured effort to balance the demands of self-defense with the principles of proportionality and humanitarian concern.
In the complex reality of urban warfare, no response is without moral and practical challenges. Yet, Israel’s number one commitment will always remain to its citizens’ safety and regional stability.
The writer is a high school student from Great Neck, New York, passionate about advocacy and supporting Israel. Through his writing and activism, he focuses on engaging others in meaningful conversations about Israel’s importance, both as the homeland of the Jewish people and a key ally of the United States.