An increasingly concerning trend I observe in the discourse amongst my peers is the number of voices that appear willing to overlook or excuse the actions of Hamas on October 7. That so many stand by the murderous actions of this group, calling it legitimate, has been hard to digest and even harder to refute. A large section of this crowd consumesinformation peddled in short reels driven by obscure algorithms. Some will ask for proof when told that Hamas has not held elections since it was voted into power last in 2006, effectively denying Gazans the ability to choose their leadership for nearly two decades. The group bears all the hallmarks of an authoritarian regime, propped up by religious supremacist zealots sitting in Iran, despite being Sunni itself. These are verifiable facts, and one would assume that those who stand by the group’s actions and consider it righteous would at least have a modicum of information about it..

Equally troubling is how often Hamas is framed as a symbol of “resistance” in the same circles; again, ignorant that the group couched itself in such labels to strategically legitimise its domestic and political actions rather than being seen for what it is: a theocratic militia. When Hamas emerged during the First Intifada in 1987, one of its earliest acts was chastising Palestinian women for not dressing modestly enough. In the name of “resistance”, they exercise social as well as religious control, punish dissenters and can be credibly linked to radicalising hundreds of young impressionable Palestinians who view their ideology as a legitimate path to emancipation from Israeli occupation.

While I have often argued that Gaza wasn’t all fun and games before October 7, it was still a functioning and stable society that Hamas jeopardised with Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. It is the usual clapback that no society can be functional as Gaza was under Israeli blockade. The factual truth is that it was indeed a functioning society albeit not a prosperous one. It had an informal economy, with foreign remittances as a part of it. It was supported by the European Union and the UN with infrastructure projects. It had water desalination plants and other essential services, which, while limited, still allowed for a degree of societal continuity.

Alas, October 7 changed all that. And while Israel is not spared the slightest rebuke, I cannot help but point out that the real culprits have not only been let off but even lauded because ‘Hamas is a resistance group’. Is it though? Let’s talk about Hamas’ strategic wins, if any. Hamas has not ended the occupation nor advanced Palestinian sovereignty. I would even be willing to acknowledge their empathy if they had sheltered a few small children in their tunnels during the Israeli bombing, but there is no such news. What Hamas has done is bring ruin to Gaza: millions dead, wounded, starved, or displaced. It carried out a barbaric operation that does not indicate any strategic aim and it did so unilaterally; without the knowledge or consent of Gazans. It has made Palestinian statehood more remote, not more likely. The two-state solution now looks like a train that bolted the station on October 7. Annexation of Gaza is no longer unthinkable.

Then there is the moral acrobatics used to justify the killing and kidnapping of civilians by Hamas as part of that “resistance.” This mindset that sees brutality against innocents as almost fair is considered revolutionary by some and, they justify it because of the occupation. One must wonder if it is this line of thinking at play that you find your car with slashed tires because, unbeknownst to you, you parked in their spot. Except scale that up to mass murder.

Gaza has not been under occupation since 2005, but under an Israeli blockade that controls what entered and exited Gaza. Not an ideal situation, but certainly a few shades better than the destruction is reckons with today.

If this is a model of resistance that’s worthy of adulation - a model that takes ten steps back only to strike one big blow - then surely Pakistan’s proxy groups that have killed hundreds in India under the banner of “resisting occupation” in Kashmir are worthy of the same respect?

If there is condemnation of the indiscriminate bombing of civilians in Gaza, and rightly so, then should there not be a reckoning with the killing of civilians in Israel and the hostages who are still languishing in captivity? And if we must invoke international law against Israel, it is important to recall that targeting civilians is a violation of every international law, regardless of who does it and regardless of occupation. While one is free to oppose the Jewish stateand call it illegitimate on the grounds of religious ethnicity, the same would also apply to Pakistan, which claimed safety and self-determination for Muslims and marred the shared history of Indo-Pak partition with displacement, violence and contested land.

It is hard to fathom the double standard that surrounds the pro-Palestine activism. And I feel compelled to wonder if this is the new phase that merely replaces islamophobia with antisemitism, where you downplay violence against Jews under the garb of anti-colonial resistance. Moral outrage should not be reserved or unleashed based on the scale of casualties.

Selective outrage directed only at Israel does not automatically mean allying with Gazans; for a growing number of them, weary from the war and tired from living under Hamas’ brutal force, have been risking their lives to protest against the group and to rid Gaza of the group’s ideology and its men. Surely, to support Gazans, which I understand is ultimately the sombre intention and goal, we must listen to what the Gazans want. Calling out Hamas to disarm and putting pressure on the group to be booted out is indeed one of them. Gazans have been asked to sacrifice their lives for a group and its ideology that has them gripped forcefully, their voices silenced. To call out Hamas vehemently is to be their voice