The Sick Logic of Gideon Levy: Hamas Are Victims, Israel Is Evil

Gideon Levy’s piece in Haaretz today (May 11, 2025) titled “The Annihilation of Hamas Is a Criminal Goal,” is a masterclass in moral obfuscation, rhetorical sleight-of-hand, and the deliberate conflation of distinct concepts to paint Israel’s military objectives as genocidal.

While Levy’s prose drips with humanitarian concern, (alebit to the Gazans, never to Jews or Israelis) his argument is fundamentally flawed, built on false equivalencies, historical distortions, and a refusal to engage with the reality of Hamas as a terrorist organization. Let’s dismantle this dangerous narrative.

1. The False Equivalence: Destroying Hamas Equals Genocide

Levy’s central claim, that annihilating Hamas equates to annihilating “a people” or “all the men in Gaza”, is a grotesque distortion. Hamas is not a race, ethnicity, or demographic group; it is a terrorist organization, designated as such by the United States, the European Union, and others.

It has a clear political and military structure, with documented leadership, fighters, and operatives. Targeting Hamas as an entity does not mean targeting every man, woman, or child in Gaza, as Levy alleges. This is a deliberate conflation meant to smear Israel with the charge of genocide, a term that requires intent to destroy an entire group based on its identity, not a military campaign against a terrorist group.

Levy writes, “You cannot destroy Hamas without destroying virtually every man and teenage boy in Gaza.” This is demonstrably false. Israel has conducted targeted operations against Hamas leaders and fighters for years, using intelligence to strike specific targets like weapons caches, tunnel networks, and command centers.

For example, in May 2021, Israel killed Hamas commander Hussam Abu Harbid without leveling entire neighborhoods. While civilian casualties are tragic and must be minimized, they are not evidence of a genocidal intent to “destroy all men in Gaza.” Levy’s claim ignores the distinction between combatants and civilians, a distinction Israel, like any military, is legally obligated to uphold under international law, even if Hamas exploits civilians as human shields, a well-documented tactic.

2. The Reality of Hamas’s Grip on Gaza

Levy argues that because Hamas has ruled Gaza for 19 years, “anyone breathing in Gaza today, especially anyone still earning a living, is in some way linked to Hamas.” He lists hospital orderlies, accountants, bus drivers, and even kindergarteners as being “tied to the system,” implying that Israel’s campaign against Hamas justifies killing them all. This is a cynical misrepresentation of both Hamas’s control and Israel’s actions.

Hamas’s authoritarian rule does create a complex environment where civilians may be coerced into supporting its activities, whether through taxation, employment, or social pressure.

But Levy’s assertion that this makes every Gazan a legitimate target in Israel’s eyes is baseless. Israel does not target civilians for their tangential ties to Hamas; it targets active combatants and infrastructure used for terrorism. For instance, when Israel strikes a Hamas weapons depot hidden in a school, the goal is to neutralize the threat, not to kill the school’s staff or students. Hamas’s deliberate embedding of military assets in civilian areas, a war crime, shifts the moral burden onto the terrorist group, not Israel.

Moreover, Levy’s logic absolves Hamas of responsibility for its actions. If every Gazan is “linked to Hamas,” then Hamas’s strategy of militarizing civilian life is the root issue, not Israel’s response. By framing all Gazans as inevitable targets, Levy inadvertently whitewashes Hamas’s exploitation of its own people.

3. The “Mowing the Lawn” Myth and the Occupation Narrative

Levy invokes the phrase “mowing the lawn,” a term used by some to describe Israel’s periodic military operations in Gaza, to suggest a sadistic, unending cycle of violence driven by Israel’s occupation. He claims that as long as the occupation persists, resistance will continue, and Israel will keep killing to suppress it. This narrative is a half-truth that distorts the conflict’s dynamics.

First, the “occupation” of Gaza is a misnomer. Israel fully withdrew from Gaza in 2005, dismantling all settlements and removing its military presence. Hamas seized control in 2007, and since then, Gaza has been used as a launching pad for attacks on Israel, over 20,000 rockets and mortars have been fired at Israeli civilians, according to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The blockade, which Levy likely refers to as part of the “occupation,” was imposed by Israel and Egypt to prevent weapons smuggling after Hamas’s takeover. It is a security measure, not an occupation, and even then, Israel allows humanitarian aid into Gaza, over 1 million tons annually, per UN data.

Second, Levy’s claim that new waves of resistance will rise as long as the occupation continues ignores Hamas’s agency. Hamas’s charter explicitly calls for Israel’s destruction, not just the end of the occupation. Its leaders, like Yahya Sinwar, have repeatedly rejected peace offers, including those that would lift the blockade in exchange for demilitarization. The cycle of violence Levy decries is fueled by Hamas’s refusal to disarm and its commitment to terrorism, not solely by Israel’s policies.

4. The Moral Inversion: Men as Legitimate Targets

Levy argues that the focus on women and children as victims “legitimizes the killing of men” because they are not presumed innocent. This is a strawman. Israel does not operate on the assumption that all men in Gaza are combatants. International humanitarian law requires militaries to distinguish between civilians and combatants, and Israel’s operations, while imperfect, are guided by this principle. For example, the IDF often uses “roof-knocking” tactics, warning shots to alert civilians to evacuate before strikes on military targets.

Levy’s claim that “the distinction between civilians and combatants has all but disappeared” is true, but not because of Israel. Hamas fighters often operate in civilian clothing, use civilian infrastructure for military purposes, and actively encourage civilian casualties to garner international sympathy. The IDF estimates that in the current conflict, as of early 2025, roughly 40% of those killed in Gaza were Hamas operatives, a significant number, but far from Levy’s insinuation that “virtually every man and teenage boy” is targeted.

5. The Revenge Cycle Fallacy

Levy warns that “hundreds of thousands of war orphans, the disabled, the displaced, the starving and the sick” will grow up seeking revenge, perpetuating the conflict. While the trauma of war undoubtedly fuels resentment, this argument removes all agency from Gazans and paints them as inevitable terrorists.

It also ignores efforts to break the cycle. Israel has supported initiatives like the proposed food distribution centers in Rafah (mentioned in prior reports), which aim to alleviate suffering and stabilize the region. Hamas, however, often sabotages such efforts, diverting aid to its fighters or rejecting cooperation, as seen in its opposition to the Rafah plan.

Levy’s prediction of endless revenge also dismisses the possibility of deradicalization. Post-World War II, Germany and Japan were rebuilt through concerted international efforts to dismantle the ideologies that fueled their aggression. A similar approach in Gaza, dismantling Hamas’s control, investing in education, and fostering economic opportunity, could redirect the region’s trajectory. But Levy’s fatalism denies this potential, condemning Gazans to perpetual victimhood and violence.

6. The Broader Context Levy Ignores

Levy’s piece omits critical context that undercuts his narrative. Hamas initiated the current conflict with its October 7, 2023, attack, killing over 1,200 Israelis and taking 250 hostages, per Israeli government figures. This was not a spontaneous act of “resistance” but a calculated massacre involving rape, torture, and the murder of civilians. Hamas’s stated goal is not merely to end the occupation but to eradicate Israel, a genocidal intent Levy conveniently ignores.

Israel’s campaign against Hamas is not about “annihilating a people” but about neutralizing a threat to its citizens. No nation would tolerate a neighboring entity that launches rockets, builds terror tunnels, and vows its destruction. Levy’s failure to acknowledge this context reveals his bias: he holds Israel to an impossible standard while giving Hamas a free pass.

Levy’s Narrative Is the True Evil

Gideon Levy’s article is not a defense of human rights but a vicious distortion that shields a terrorist organization while demonizing a nation defending itself. By equating the targeted destruction of Hamas with genocide, Levy cheapens the term and undermines genuine cases of mass atrocities. His refusal to hold Hamas accountable for its actions, its attacks on Israel, its exploitation of Gazans, and its rejection of peace, reveals the hollowness of his moral posturing.

We are used to Levy's drivel by now, but that doesn't mean it's not poisonous and dangerous. He's happy to power anti-Israel sentiment while offering no solutions, no hope, and no accountability for the true perpetrators of Gaza’s suffering. If there is “pure evil filth” here, it is in Levy’s willingness to twist facts and morality to vilify a democracy while absolving a terrorist regime.

For someone so "academic" and "intelligent" it's a wonder he still doesn't get it: if Hamas had the chance, they would riddle him with bullets and toast his death.