Political leaders and commentators often invoke the term “being on the right side of history” to convey a commitment to moral or ethical progress.
Former US president Bill Clinton often used the term, as did former US president Barack Obama, to frame their policies and decisions as morally correct ones that will ultimately be vindicated by future judgment.
This reflects a view that history inevitably moves toward improvement, or – as Dr. Martin Luther King famously said – “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”
While who, exactly, is on the right side of history can be considered a pretty subjective determination, one thing is certain: If your actions are praised by a terrorist organization dedicated to wiping out another country, and whose own actions – including a barbaric orgy of murder, rape, mutilation, and kidnapping – illustrate that it means what it says, then your actions are surely not on the right side of history but rather on its darker margins.
The leaders of France, Britain, and Canada – countries that pride themselves on being liberal, moral, and ethically driven states with humanistic values – would do well to reflect on the fact that Hamas showered them with praise for their recent condemnation of Israel and threats to sanction the Jewish state if it does not halt the Hamas-initiated war in Gaza and significantly expand humanitarian aid.
Britain already acted on the threat, announcing Tuesday that it is pausing negotiations over a new trade deal with Israel. In addition, France’s foreign minister floated the idea of suspending the EU’s Association Agreement with Israel – an agreement worth tens of billions of euros to Israel annually in trade, preferential tariff rates, and access to research funds.
Hamas thanks UK, France, Canada for 'principled stance'
“We welcome the statement issued by the leaders of Britain, France, and Canada, which expressed a principled stance rejecting the policy of blockade and starvation,” a Hamas statement read. “We call for this European position to be urgently translated into practical and effective steps that deter the occupation and put an end to the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza.”
In other words, Hamas thanked them for handing them a lifeline.
Why the appreciation? Because with its leadership decimated, fighters depleted, and morale waning, Hamas is clinging to hope – any hope – that international pressure will save it from total defeat. The message conveyed by the leaders of these Western democracies was that salvation might yet come.
That message is more than symbolic: it is oxygen. Hamas sees this statement, and these types of policies, and concludes that if it can hold out just a little longer, keep the hostages, and reject surrender, the world may intervene before Israel can finish the job.
It is no coincidence that the trilateral statement came out on the same day the Washington Post quoted an unnamed source saying, “Trump’s people are letting Israel know, ‘We will abandon you if you do not end this war.’”
Historically, European pressure on Israel increases when they see US pressure on Israel, or when they perceive a rift between the two countries. Their reasoning is relatively simple: “If the US can turn the screws – and the Americans are Israel’s greatest ally – then we can as well.”
Countries inclined to restrain themselves when it comes to condemning Israel, for fear of crossing the United States, move quickly in the other direction when they see a rift.
Israeli voices are joining the anti-Israel rhetoric
Adding fuel to the fire are some Israeli voices who seem oblivious or don’t care how their rhetoric will be seized upon abroad. Chief among them is Yair Golan, head of the Democrats Party – a merger between the far Left Meretz and the struggling Labor Party.
In his relentless pursuit to bring down the government, Golan – as his words suggest – is willing to go to any lengths, even if it means using language that he must be aware will be exploited to delegitimize and criminalize the nation he aspires to lead.
“A sane country does not wage war against civilians, does not kill babies for a hobby, and does not set goals involving the expulsion of populations,” he said.
In his effort to wound the government, Golan hurt the country.
According to last week’s Ma’ariv poll, Golan’s party would win 16 seats if elections were held today, placing it in a tie for third place with the National Unity Party, after the Likud and Avidgor Lieberman’s Yisrael Beitenu – a surprisingly strong showing considering that Meretz did not pass the electoral threshold in the last election and Labor only has four seats in the current Knesset.
In expectation of former prime minister Naftali Bennett running in the next elections, Golan drops to 11 seats in this poll but still remains tied for the third largest party, this time with Lieberman.
It will be intriguing to see how Golan’s incendiary comment affects his numbers in this week’s poll.
Comments such as these make him the Itamar Ben-Gvir of the Left – an ideologue so extreme that even the other opposition leaders, except the Arab parties, roundly condemned him.
For Yesh Atid head Yair Lapid, Golan’s comments were a political gift.
Lapid competes for the same anti-Netanyahu bloc of voters, but now gets to portray himself as a centrist and Golan as an unhinged extremist, far removed from Israeli mainstream sentiment.
Abroad, of course, Golan will be lionized in those circles in France, UK, and Canada seeking to sanction Israel. He will be paraded as the brave Israeli dissenter who dared speak the truth. He will be described, inevitably, as a man on “the right side of history.”
But for most Israelis – for mainstream Israelis – he will be viewed very differently: not as a truth-teller, but as a reckless politician who gave ammunition to Israel’s enemies and – even if unwittingly – reinforced Hamas’s narrative at a critical moment in the war.