Ethical Minefield: The Semiotics of Diplomacy in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
Diplomatic language is an artform: an artform that appears to be on the decline at times. Let me qualify the previous statement. Some of the language that I have heard lately with regard to Hamas's attack on Israel and the Israeli response is akin to tossing a stick of dynamite in a henhouse. It is not a good example of diplomatic language because it shuts down dialogue and promotes polarisation, Tribalism and negative responses.
So, let's delve deep into the framework of diplomatic language:
Diplomatic language is cautious and often ambiguous, allowing for multiple interpretations to ensure manoeuvrability among parties.
It is formal, given its use in official discussions, and it avoids colloquial expressions and slang.
Regardless of the underlying conflict and personal biases or feelings, diplomatic language prioritises respectful and courteous language.
Diplomatic language must take into account cultural differences and diversity.
While ambiguous in some areas, diplomatic language is precise where needed, as in documents, treaties, or agreements where every word needs to be air-tight in clarity to ensure all parties understand their stated responsibilities.
The language must be void of emotions and personal biases; a neutral and objective tone should be used to avoid offending any involved party.
Diplomatic language is a purpose-driven endeavour to foster collaboration, understanding, and peace. It is not merely used to convey information; it is about facilitating positive outcomes in international relations.
So, let us look at a statement from António Guterres, secretary-general of the United Nations, stating that the attack did not happen in a vacuum: "The Palestinian people have been subjected to 56 years of suffocating occupation. They have seen their land steadily devoured by settlements and plagued by violence; their economy stifled, their people displaced, and their homes demolished. Their hopes for a political solution to their plight have been vanishing,"
Many people agree with his statement, but was it helpful in the diplomatic amelioration of the current crises? I do not think so because Palestinians face ongoing repercussions following António Guterres's strongly worded statement. Israel shut down the conversation and Banned UN officials from Israel. This problem complicates humanitarian aid entering Gaza, handled through the UN.
Israel's response to the terrorist attack is against international humanitarian law, according to the Fourth Geneva Convention (Convention IV 12 August 1949): their response includes actions that some consider war crimes (Israeli attacks wipe out entire families in Gaza, 2023). They have bombed civilian targets and ordered the Northern Half of the Gaza Strip to abandon their homes and move south. They have turned off the water and will not allow food or other resources into the area, except for a few aid trucks.
Now, to be fair to Israel, let us look at the motivation for such a strong response from Israel. During the Hamas attack, about 2200 rockets were fired into Israel, appearing, at times, to overwhelm Israel's Iron Dome Defense system (ABC News a,b, 2023). This fear of the Iron Dome being overwhelmed would be a strong motivation to hit back hard. Another issue is Hamas is rumoured to have placed its launchers in civilian buildings and areas (Times Now 2023) (Hendawi, H., & Federman, J. 2021).
This dilemma begs the moral and ethical question: how do you suggest Israel respond in the moment? What would you do to suppress the immediate threat? It is one thing to sit back in your comfy chair and pontificate – but – what if those missiles were coming down in your neighbourhood, on your house: would you want them suppressed regardless of where the launchers were? This situation is where we get into the ethical dilemma. It is also where we get into a legalistic quagmire: how far do you go in protecting your population given the above circumstances? Are your responses still considered war crimes?
Now, the Palestinians have existed in dire circumstances for many years. They live under occupation: they are denied basic rights, and their political leaders within the conclave, Hamas, are recognised as a terrorist group. What you may not realise is that Hamas terrorises Palestinians as well as Israelis. They are known for torturing and murdering their people for freedom of expression and other trivialities (Human rights in Palestine (State of). (2022). As a family person or innocent civilian, are you going to walk out and tell the Hamas soldier not to place that launcher beside the school and church? If you are truthful with yourself, the answer is not likely!
So, what is your answer? Which civilians get to live, and which ones do not: Palestinians or Israelis? On both sides of the conflict, civilians stand in the gap: fodder in a conflict that has existed since biblical times.
Solving the core issue is undeniably a herculean task, given the extremist positions held by certain factions. For instance, Hamas's charter historically called for the elimination of the state of Israel, and some far-right Zionist groups advocate for the entire historic land of Israel without compromise. These extremes make finding a middle ground exceptionally challenging.
Therefore, the art and ethics of diplomatic language must be practised with precision weaving among the intersection of a multitude of historical nuances if harm reduction is to be achieved and the current situation is calm enough for cooler heads to negotiate lasting solutions. António Guterres's statement fell short of the mark, opening the door for more harm rather than less. There but for the grace of God go I: it is easy to criticise; however, it is easy enough to make the same error. Let's watch our words and tone lest we create more damage, more polarisation, more Tribalism and more radicalisation to an already white-hot flashpoint.
If Hamas is indeed embedding weapons and militants among the civilian population, it is an act of tactical subterfuge and a weaponisation of moral complexity. Both sides must then dance in the complex landscape of etho-strategic dissonance. Do we or do we not respond? Inhuman tactics are baiting us to react to the horrors of civilian deaths by hitting more civilian targets. The truth is that Israelis and Palestinians are dying, and bad actors are controlling the narrative. If Hamas is embedding weapons among its people to accomplish an act of political Jujitsu, It is working!
Addendum
The Hamas Charter and The State of Israel: The original Hamas Charter of 1988 advocated the complete elimination of Israel. However, in 2017, Hamas revised the charter slightly, indicating a willingness to accept a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders. This being said, it did not recognise Israel's right to exist.
Political Jujitsu: This tactic is akin to the art of Jujitsu and uses the opponent's energy and response against them. So, in this case, if I embed weapons among civilians and fire enough rockets to overcome the defensive systems of my enemy, I can expect a reply of suppressing fire that has bad optics and can then use that to demonise the enemy for the overwhelming response against civilian targets.
References
Israeli attacks wipe out entire families in Gaza. (2023). Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/10/damning-evidence-of-war-crimes-as-israeli-attacks-wipe-out-entire-families-in-gaza/
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, (12 August 1949). Retrieved from https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949
ABC News. (2023, 8 October). Israel-Hamas conflict: Timeline and key developments. https://abcnews.go.com/International/timeline-surprise-rocket-attack-hamas-israel/story?id=103816006
ABC News. (2023, 11 October). What is Israel's Iron Dome air defence system -- and was it overwhelmed? https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/israels-iron-dome-air-defense-system-overwhelmed/story?id=103872036
Times Now. (2023, 23 October). Israel unrest: IDF releases aerial images of Hamas rocket launchers near Gaza civilian infrastructure. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/israel-unrest-idf-releases-aerial-images-of-hamas-rocket-launchers-near-gaza-civilian-infrastructure/videoshow/104637488.cms?from=mdr
Hendawi, H., & Federman, J. (2021). Evidence is growing that Hamas used residential areas. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/lifestyle-middle-east-hamas-152644963f4249a7a21154446649910a
Human rights in Palestine (State of). (2022). Retrieved from https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/palestine-state-of/report-palestine-state-of/#:~:text=They%20also%20held%20sco
Hamas Covenant 1988. (18 August 1988). Retrieved from https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/ham
Hamas in 2017: The document in full. (2 May 2017). Retrieved from https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/hamas-2017-document-full