We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Flags from across the divide wave in the air over protests at Columbia University on Thursday, April 25, 2024.
Slogans of war
Where do we draw the line between free speech and a safe space? That’s the core question posed by the protests and the arrests raging on campuses right now over the Hamas-Israel war.
Of the many complex, painful issues contributing to the tension stemming from the Oct. 7 Hamas massacre and the ongoing Israeli attacks in Gaza, dividing groups into two basic camps, pro-Israel and pro-Palestine, is only making this worse. Call it a category problem.
What do these terms, pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian, even mean? Are they helpful, or is it time to stop using them altogether?
The fundamental flaw with these terms is that they conflate support for the existence of a country with support for the government or leaders in power. For example, does pro-Israel mean support for the existence of the state of Israel, or for the policies of the current government? They are wildly different things.
Before Oct. 7, there were already massive rallies against Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, and they have only grown louder. Are the people protesting him anti-Israel? Of course not. Patriotism and partisanship are not always the same thing. The same person who supports the right of Israel to exist – and may even fight for Israel against a group like Hamas – might just as well protest the Likud government, support a two-state solution, and want a cease-fire in Gaza. Read the popular Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz and see the diverse views and critical opinions on Israeli policy.
The same is true for the Palestinian cause. Supporting a viable, safe, prosperous Palestinian state is the normative position of most governments around the world, but that does not mean supporting the murderous agenda of Hamas, which is listed as a terrorist organization in Canada and the US. Palestinians and millions of others who are deeply furious at the Israeli actions in Gaza and Netanyahu’s policies should not necessarily be equated with supporting Hamas and their eliminationist goals. Are you anti-Palestinian if you do not support Hamas? Of course not.
The same is true anywhere. No one asks if you are, say, pro-France, pro-Italy, pro-Canada, or pro-America when they are debating a specific policy. Instead, they ask if you support a particular position or action of the government in power. Reducing this to a conflict about the right to exist as a country – for Israel or Palestine – is a road to endless war. Making this, as it ought to be, about a conflict of policy and leadership – however deadly it is right now – is the path toward resolution.
With the war in Gaza raging, it is understandable that people are being forced to take a side: Are you pro-Israel or pro-Palestinian? That gives the patina of a firm moral stance, but it plays into the hands of the most radical forces on both sides who strategically want to co-opt the reasonable middle ground for their own purposes.
Among the great propaganda victories of this war are the Hamasification of the Palestinian cause on one side and the Netanyahuization of the Israeli voices on the other (and no, this is not meant to make a false equivalence between the two, but simply to describe the political dynamics).
That’s why you see, say, signs supporting Hamas on campuses and chants that celebrate Oct. 7. That’s why there is a rise in antisemitism or, on the other side, a refusal in some places to acknowledge the deaths and suffering of the people of Gaza.
The category problem supports this dynamic and undermines the rational middle ground where, for generations, there has been a genuine if fruitless effort to find a peaceful two-state solution. It is now parodied as a sinkhole of mushy naivete, offensive bothsidesism, and false equivalencies, and protesters and their slogans shout it down. But it remains the only hope.
There isn’t a lot people can do in the face of such a long-standing bloody conflict – though joining protests is certainly one thing. But perhaps adhering to the middle ground and avoiding the broad categories that help radicals on each side is a small but effective action.
You might think that the one place you’d find this middle ground would be on university campuses, where details, nuance, and debate are supposed to thrive. That’s not happening. On many campuses today, it is now impossible to distinguish between free speech and safe space.
Who's winning the Israel-Palestine information war?
To fully grasp why the Gaza war remains so far from a peaceful resolution, you need to understand the codependency between Israel's Far Right and Hamas. So says Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman on "GZERO World."
Watch full episode here: How the Israel-Gaza war could end - if Netanyahu wants it to
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
What would an Israel-Palestine solution look like?
Imagine if it were possible. What would a post-war Palestinian resolution to the Gaza conflict actually look like? Pulitzer Prize-winning New York Times columnist Thomas L Friedman games that out for Ian Bremmer on GZERO World.
Friedman breaks it down. "Two stages. First stage is the UAE, Egypt and Jordan agree to send troops to Gaza to provide security in a transition after Israel would pull back with American logistical help." Friedman also lays out what the Palestinians themselves would have to do to ensure an enduring peace. "And the thing that the Palestinians would do is I believe reconvene the PLO, the umbrella, the sole legitimate organization, which means the umbrella organization to legitimate to nominate a Palestinian government of technocrats."Watch full episode here: How the Israel-Gaza war could end - if Netanyahu wants it to
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
The sun sets over Gaza, amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Islamist group Hamas, as seen from the border with Gaza in southern Israel April 7, 2024.
Six months of war, no sign of peace
Sunday marked six months of war between Israel and Hamas, and some observers fear the conflict has become intractable. Hamas is still believed to hold over 130 Israeli hostages from its Oct. 7 assault that killed 1,200, while Israel’s offensive in Gaza has killed over 33,000 Palestinians and injured 75,000. Nearly half of Gaza’s buildings have been destroyed, and 1.9 million of its residents have been displaced, leaving them at risk of disease and starvation. But is the war any closer to ending?
Internationally, Israel has become increasingly isolated, losing favor even with its staunchest ally, the United States. At home, political rival Benny Gantz has called for early elections, and tens of thousands of protesters turned out in Tel Aviv to demand the release of hostages this weekend. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government retains the support of far-right and religious parties, but a dispute with ultra-Orthodox parties over military conscription could crack Bibi’s coalition, as peace talks are set to restart in Cairo.
What happens now? Following last week’s drone killing of seven foreign aid workers by Israel and a dressing down by US President Joe Biden over his callous remarks about the incident, Netanyahu initiated a partial military withdrawal from southern Gaza this weekend. While an Israeli incursion into Rafah isn’t totally off the table, the move signals that Bibi is feeling the heat to find a path forward to a cease-fire.
How the Israel-Gaza war could end - if Netanyahu wants it to
How close is the Gaza war to ending? “Nowhere” says Pulitzer-prize winning author and New York Times columnist Thomas L. Friedman. In a wide-ranging interview with Ian Bremmer on GZERO World, Friedman games out a possible resolution to the war (as far-fetched as it may seem right now) and explains why both Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and Hamas are obstacles to peace. Key to understanding this, Friedman says, is grasping the “codependency” that Netanyahu and Hamas share.
"Netanyahu always understood that... having a strong Hamas in Gaza is the best way to ensure a weak Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.” And even if he wanted to find a peaceful resolution to the conflict, Friedman explains, Netanyahu is paralyzed to do so because of his own precarious political position. “He is hostage to a Far Right in his coalition that has told him... progress toward a unified Palestinian position is a no-go, we'll throw you out of power."
Friedman and Ian also talk about how the US-Israel relationship is as tense as it has ever been. As Ian explains early in the episode, “The Biden administration is losing patience with its closest ally in the Middle East." And yet, the flow of weaponry and money to Jerusalem from Washington remains unabated. It's clear that the path to peace remains elusive. The voices of moderation and diplomacy are more critical than ever, Friedman says. But in the meantime, all signs point to more bloodshed and a new generation of Israelis and Palestinians who will grow up hating each other.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
Ian Explains: Why Israel's Netanyahu continues to antagonize Biden on Gaza
What is Bibi thinking? Ian Bremmer explains on GZERO World.
As the Gaza war enters its seventh bloody month, leaders in Washington, Jerusalem, and Gaza are asking what is motivating Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu. And while we can't read his mind, we can follow what he's saying. "Our goal is to destroy the military and governing capabilities of Hamas in Gaza" Netanyahu recently said. "There is no substitute for victory."
Israel has launched over 30,000 airstrikes on Gaza since the war began on October 7, killing more than thirty thousand Palestinians, including 14,000 children. Meanwhile, over a hundred Israeli citizens remain Hamas hostages. And according to US intelligence, Israeli Defense Forces have only managed to destroy about 30% of Hamas leadership in those six months. Victory, in short, remains a long way off.
This leads back to the original question: What is Bibi thinking? Well, he's doing what he knows best: holding onto power. To remain prime minister, he must appease a governing coalition of hard-right religious nationalist parties that are resolutely opposed to a ceasefire, not to mention any long-term political settlement with the Palestinians. While the Gaza war is becoming increasingly unpopular internationally, within Israel, there remains a broad base of support for it. And finally, Netanyahu and Biden both know that regardless of internal frustrations, the US will continue to supply Israel with billions of dollars in military backing.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
- Netanyahu flirts with a lengthy stay in Gaza ›
- How Netanyahu used Hamas to avoid talks of a two-state solution ›
- Netanyahu’s failed Gaza strategy ›
- Friedman: Netanyahu is no longer at the wheel ›
- Yuval Noah Harari: Netanyahu's 'Deep State' fears enabled Oct 7 attack ›
- Israel-Hamas war: Netanyahu hostage to far-right coalition, says author Friedman - GZERO Media ›
- Author Thomas Friedman on how the Gaza war could end - GZERO Media ›
- Ukraine will define the future of NATO - GZERO Media ›
Friedman: Netanyahu is no longer at the wheel
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu has said that the only way the war in Gaza will end is with the complete destruction of Hamas, the pro-Palestinian terrorist group that controls Gaza and was behind the October 7 attack.
But Pulitzer prize-winning author and New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman argues that much of the horror that's played out in Gaza over the past six months goes back to a devil's bargain that Bibi has maintained with Hamas over the past fifteen years. "Netanyahu always understood that ... having a strong Hamas in Gaza is the best way to ensure a weak Palestinian Authority in the West Bank." In a wide-ranging interview for this week's episode of GZERO World, Ian Bremmer sits down with Friedman to try to chart out an imaginable (and palatable) ending to the Middle East's bloodiest war in years. "[Netanyahu] is now hostage to a far-right in his coalition that has told him that anything that smacks of a Palestinian state or even progress toward a Palestinian state...is a no-go. We'll throw you out of power.'"
So what can people do who consider themselves both pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian? "The most important thing you can do to be pro-Israeli, " Friedman tells Bremmer, "...is to be for the removal of Bibi Netanyahu by the Israeli people." And the most pro-Palestinian thing you can do? "Be against Hamas and for the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah....Because if that project succeeds or makes progress, many more things are possible in terms of what can happen between the Israelis and Palestinians."
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
- Netanyahu: “Now is the time for war” ›
- Netanyahu escalates feud with the White House ›
- Yuval Noah Harari: Netanyahu's 'Deep State' fears enabled Oct 7 attack ›
- Netanyahu and Hamas both won, Israelis and Palestinians lost ›
- Why Israel's Netanyahu continues to antagonize Biden on Gaza - GZERO Media ›
- Israel-Hamas war: Netanyahu hostage to far-right coalition, says author Friedman - GZERO Media ›
- Author Thomas Friedman on how the Gaza war could end - GZERO Media ›
Yuval Noah Harari on the perils of viewing Israel-Palestine through the 'victimhood' context
In a wide-ranging conversation with Ian Bremmer, filmed live at the historic 92nd Street Y in NYC, bestselling author Yuval Noah Harari discusses the profound role narratives play in conflict resolution and identity politics. It’s through this framing that Harari and Ian address the latest conflict between Israel and Gaza. Victimhood, Harari posits, often comes with an element of truth, but it carries the danger of absolving individuals or nations of responsibility. "If you think about yourself primarily as a victim, it relieves you of all responsibility," he explains.
Bremmer also presses Harari on the notion of narratives, and particularly, how to distinguish between patriotism and nationalism. Harari describes patriotism as the love for a unique group and a willingness to do more for them, akin to how we treat our families. Nationalism, however, turns perilous when it crosses into supremacism — when love for one's group becomes an excuse to despise and discriminate against others. Harari asserts, "It becomes dangerous when we start saying this group of people, they are not just unique. They are superior."
Harari defends the possibility of simultaneously supporting the rights and dignities of both Israelis and Palestinians. Holding dual narratives of both people's aspirations to live dignified lives in their homelands is not only possible but necessary, according to Harari. "Just because you are in favor of the rights of Palestinians doesn't mean you have to be also in favor of destroying Israel completely," he states.