Understanding the Strong Pro-Israel Sentiment
Many well-intentioned people in the West hold a strong pro-Israel stance, often shaped by historical trauma, identity, and media narratives. Historical memory and identity play a major role. The Holocaust and centuries of antisemitic persecution created deep sympathy for the Jewish people’s quest for a secure homeland. For some, especially evangelical Christians, there is a religious conviction that the land of Israel is divinely promised – leading to unquestioning support based on faith. Meanwhile, Jewish communities worldwide often feel an existential attachment to Israel’s survival, viewing criticism as a potential threat. These emotional and identity-based factors can make people reflexively defensive of Israel. It’s important to acknowledge these feelings: supporting Israeli security is not wrong, but it need not come at the expense of another people’s rights.
Another key factor is media framing and narrative bias. For decades, mainstream Western media has tended to present the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through an Israeli lens. Major American news outlets prioritize Israeli lives over Palestinian ones in coverage, often adopting official Israeli terminology and perspectives. Studies have found that U.S. networks overwhelmingly describe Israeli military actions as “retaliation” and use terms like “slaughter” or “massacre” only for Israeli victims – while Palestinian deaths are reported with far more muted language. For example, during a recent Gaza war, The New York Times, Washington Post, and L.A. Times mentioned “Israel” far more often than “Palestinians” in headlines, even as Palestinian casualties vastly exceeded Israeli casualties. Words like “horrific” and “massacre” appeared almost exclusively for Israelis killed, whereas in over 1,100 news articles, Palestinian children’s deaths were mentioned in only 2 headlines. This imbalance creates a subconscious impression that Israeli suffering is more important or more real. As two scholars observed, “the American media’s coverage of Israel tends to be strongly biased in Israel’s favor”, often marginalizing critical perspectives. When people are exposed primarily to one side’s narrative, their compassion and outrage become one-sided as well.
Psychology also helps explain why some find it so hard to change their views on this issue. We all employ cognitive biases and defense mechanisms to protect our worldview. For someone who has long believed Israel represents the “good guys” under siege, confronting evidence of Israeli abuses can cause intense cognitive dissonance – a mental discomfort that people resolve by denial or rationalization. For instance, a person might see images of destroyed neighborhoods in Gaza and tell themselves, “This isn’t genocide, it’s only self-defense”, using denial to avoid moral discomfort. Others engage in “whataboutism” or blaming the victim, e.g. insisting that any Palestinian suffering is Hamas’s fault or that Palestinians teach their children to hate, thus justifying harsh measures. These are forms of self-deception that allow otherwise empathetic people to remain unmoved by Palestinian pain. In-group bias is at play as well: many in the West naturally identify with Israel – a country often portrayed as a liberal democracy with values similar to their own – and see Palestinians as the “other.” This tribal instinct can skew one’s sense of justice, excusing inhumane policies when “our side” does it. Moreover, there is a real fear of social repercussions for criticizing Israel. Within some communities, any critique of Israeli policy is quickly equated with antisemitism. A former official of a major Jewish organization noted that even many rabbis “tiptoe” around the subject, “fear[ful] that speaking forthrightly will make their community life and careers insecure.” The result is a chilling effect – people stay silent or repeat familiar pro-Israel talking points to avoid ostracism or moral guilt. Understanding these psychological barriers is crucial. It shows that those who reflexively defend every Israeli action are not monsters – they are human beings grappling with identity, fear, and one-sided information. Our goal, then, is to gently pierce through the defensive wall with empathy and facts, not to attack or demean their loyalty.
The Humanitarian Reality: Palestinian Plight in Facts and Figures
The realities on the ground in the occupied Palestinian territories are stark and heart-wrenching, and they demand that we look past narratives and consider the facts. Gaza, in particular, illustrates the severity of the situation. This small coastal strip is home to about 2.3 million Palestinians – most of them children and refugees – living under a 16-year blockade that restricts food, medicine, fuel, and basic supplies. Repeated wars have pummeled its infrastructure. According to the United Nations, Gaza is one of the most densely populated places on earth; yet its people have been sealed off by an Israeli-imposed closure (with Egypt’s cooperation) that has been likened to “an open-air prison.”
The humanitarian indicators are shocking. Even before the latest war, Gaza’s economy was in ruins and its population heavily aid-dependent. In 2023–2024, the situation reached a breaking point. Food has become a weapon of war. International human rights organizations report that the Israeli government has explicitly used starvation of civilians as a method of warfare, by blocking food and water to Gaza – a war crime under international law. Human Rights Watch documented in early 2024 that children in Gaza were dying from starvation and dehydration after Israel cut off supplies, with doctors describing infants too weak to cry. A U.N.-backed food security group warned in March 2024 that “all evidence points towards a major acceleration of death and malnutrition” and that famine could occur imminently, as 70% of Gaza’s population in the north was facing “catastrophic” hunger. By April 2024, Gaza’s Health Ministry had recorded at least 32 deaths (28 of them children) from malnutrition and dehydration in just the northern region. Save the Children confirmed dozens of infants and kids had literally starved to death amid the siege. The World Health Organization officials on the ground spoke of finding “children dying of starvation” in hospitals. These are scenes we associate with the worst wars or famines in history – yet they are happening in real time, largely to one group of people.
Such starvation is not an accident or “fog of war” mishap; it stems from policy decisions. Israeli leaders have long calculated and controlled the calories allowed into Gaza. In fact, Israeli documents show that years ago officials determined a minimum “diet” for Gaza’s population – infamously described by one advisor as “putting the Palestinians on a diet, but not making them die of hunger.” This chilling quote from 2006, by a senior aide to then Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, revealed the mindset behind the blockade. Israel’s military body (COGAT) actually computed the minimum calories (2,279 kcal per person) and food tonnage needed to keep the population alive – and then often kept deliveries below even that minimum. During the 2023–2024 siege, humanitarian agencies requested an emergency ration of 1kg of food per person per day for Gaza. Yet between March and June 2025, Israeli authorities allowed in only 56,000 tonnes of food, less than one-quarter of the minimum needed. The Israeli government at times flatly denied that mass starvation was happening, or tried to blame Hamas for stealing aid. But Israel’s own data exposes that it was deliberately starving the civilian population by throttling food and aid. For the innocent families in Gaza – half of whom are children – the result of these choices is misery: parents skipping meals so their children can eat, children with distended bellies and listless eyes from acute malnutrition, and a generation stunted both physically and mentally by chronic hunger and trauma. No government should ever wield hunger as a bargaining chip; to do so is a gross affront to our common humanity.
Alongside starvation, there have been mass killings of civilians that simply cannot be justified as “security measures.” In May 2021, a brief war saw over 260 Palestinians in Gaza killed (including dozens of children) in Israeli airstrikes, while 13 people in Israel (mostly from Hamas rocket fire) were killed. In a far deadlier escalation starting October 7, 2023, Hamas’s brutal attack on Israeli communities (which killed around 1,130 Israeli men, women, and children and must be unequivocally condemned) triggered an Israeli military response of unprecedented scale. Over the next months, the Israeli bombardment and ground offensive in Gaza killed an astonishing 60,000+ Palestinians. By February 2025, according to Gaza health officials (figures later cited by the U.N.), at least 61,709 Palestinians had been killed in Gaza, including 17,492 children. To put that in perspective, that is equivalent to wiping out an entire town of children. In the occupied West Bank, another 900+ Palestinians (including 180 children) were killed in the same period, amid a spike of military raids and settler attacks. These numbers dwarf the Israeli losses, tragic as they are. By early 2025, the death toll ratio stood around 55 Palestinians (mostly civilians) killed for every 1 Israeli. Each one of those deaths is a human life snuffed out – a baby, a schoolchild, a mother, a grandfather.
It is not only the deaths, but also the widespread destruction and suffering of the living that reveal a humanitarian catastrophe. A U.N. damage assessment in January 2025 found that almost every home in Gaza was damaged or destroyed, along with 80% of all commercial buildings, 88% of schools, and around half of all hospitals. Over 2 million Gazans – roughly 80% of the population – were displaced from their homes, ordered to evacuate under Israeli military directives. Families huddled in overflowing shelters, with little water or electricity. By March 2024, UNICEF reported that more than 13,000 children in Gaza had been killed in the bombings and that surviving children were showing signs of severe trauma and malnutrition – many so weak they “do not even have the energy to cry”. Doctors on the ground described babies in incubators starving after power cuts, and surgery being done without anesthesia due to medical supply shortages. The trauma is multi-generational: parents are watching their children die, and children are growing up orphaned, homeless, and deeply traumatized. These are not propaganda claims or one-sided accusations; they are verified by sources like the United Nations, the World Health Organization, UNICEF, and even Israeli and international journalists who have witnessed the devastation. The sheer scale of civilian harm documented raises a profound moral question: can any security rationale justify what increasingly looks like the collective punishment of an entire population?
Criticizing Policies vs. Attacking Identities: It’s About Right and Wrong
Faced with this overwhelming evidence of human suffering, the knee-jerk defense from some is that criticizing Israel (even for these actions) is “biased” or even antisemitic. It is absolutely vital to clarify the distinction here: condemning the Israeli government’s policies is NOT an attack on Jewish people or on Israel’s right to exist. In fact, holding any government accountable for human rights violations is a form of respect for universal values, and it aligns with what we expect of any democracy. Israel is a state – like any state, it can act rightly or wrongly. Confronting state injustices is not an act of hatred; it is an act of hope that Israel can live up to the ideals it professes (indeed, Israel’s own Declaration of Independence promises equality for all inhabitants regardless of religion or ethnicity). Around the world, we routinely criticize our allies and even our own governments when they violate human rights – whether it’s the U.S. in Abu Ghraib, or European countries mistreating migrants, or Saudi Arabia’s abuses. Israel should not be an exception. As former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo – hardly a hostile or “biased” figure – said recently, “There is an apartheid state here… Two people are judged under two different legal systems, that is an apartheid state.” Pardo was referring to the dual legal regime in the occupied West Bank (Israeli settlers live under civil law, Palestinians under military law), explicitly using the term apartheid to describe it. His sober assessment carries weight precisely because of who he is; when even the ex-head of Israel’s intelligence feels compelled to use that word, it can no longer be dismissed as a slur or bias. Likewise, Israel’s own prominent figures – from former Attorneys General to decorated generals – have warned for years that Israel’s rule over the Palestinians is morally untenable and resembles apartheid if not changed.
Indeed, the criticism of Israeli policies often comes from those who care deeply about Israel and its future. Thousands of Jewish Americans and Israelis (including scholars and Holocaust survivors) have spoken out, not to “destroy” Israel, but to save its soul. For example, in 2023 over 2,000 Israeli and American public figures signed a statement declaring that “Palestinians live under a regime of apartheid” and urging Jewish communities to confront this reality as part of opposing injustice. Internationally respected human rights leaders like Ban Ki-moon (former UN Secretary-General) and Mary Robinson (former President of Ireland), after visiting the occupied territories, stated there is “ever-growing evidence” that the situation meets the legal definition of apartheid, pointing out policies aimed at permanent domination and even “ethnic cleansing” of Palestinians. These are not voices of hate – these are voices of conscience. They are essentially saying: a true friend tells you when you are wrong. Just as one can fervently support the safety of the Israeli people while opposing their government’s abuses, one can champion Palestinian human rights without supporting Hamas or denying Israel’s existence. Criticizing the Occupation (the military rule over Palestinian territories) and the systemic discrimination is a moral stance, not a partisan one.
It is worth noting that many Israelis themselves protest and agonize over their government’s actions. Brave human rights groups within Israel – such as B’Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights Israel – have issued detailed reports on the Gaza conflict, concluding that Israeli forces are committing grave atrocities. In mid-2025, these two organizations took the remarkable step of stating, based on meticulous documentation, that Israel is committing “genocide” against Palestinians in Gaza. Think about that: Israeli Jewish researchers and doctors, after months of field-work and witness testimonies, felt the evidence was so overwhelming that they invoked the Genocide Convention. They cited not only the mass killings, but also the deliberate policies “inflicting conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction” of the population – a direct reference to the legal definition of genocide. This conclusion was echoed by Amnesty International’s Secretary General, who praised their courage and urged the world to heed these findings and act to “stop Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in Gaza”. Now, genocide is a powerfully charged word – no one uses it lightly. These experts did not come to that conclusion to be provocative; they did so because the pattern of actions (tens of thousands killed, entire neighborhoods razed, starvation used as a tactic, dehumanizing rhetoric by some leaders) matches the grim pattern of genocide in international law. Even the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has taken notice: it is currently probing whether Israel’s actions in Gaza constitute genocide. The Israeli government of course denies genocidal intent, insisting it is fighting terrorism – but intent can also be inferred from outcomes and policies. As outside observers, we don’t even need to win a semantic debate over “genocide” to recognize that something gravely immoral is happening that far exceeds legitimate self-defense. We must not be afraid to call out crimes against humanity – be it apartheid, persecution, or ethnic cleansing – just because the perpetrator is a state we’ve viewed as an ally. Human rights have to mean something, or they mean nothing at all.
Moral Clarity Beyond Religious and Political Narratives
Some steadfast supporters of Israel cite religious justifications or identity-based arguments to excuse what we’ve described. We must address these with both respect and clarity. Religion is a deeply personal matter, and we acknowledge the profound significance of the Holy Land to Jews, Christians, and Muslims alike. However, no religious belief can exempt a state from respecting basic human rights. In a world of many faiths (and many interpretations even within each faith), we cannot allow ancient promises or theological claims to trump the flesh-and-blood reality of injustice today. Even within Judaism and Christianity, core ethical teachings emphasize justice, compassion, and the sanctity of life. There is a rich tradition of Jewish thought – from prophets like Isaiah to contemporary rabbis – that demands care for the stranger and the oppressed. Nowhere do those teachings condone starving children or demolishing homes. As one Jewish American rabbi recently put it, “Our covenant is about life and dignity, not land at any cost.” One can believe fervently that the Jewish people have a historic connection and right to live in Israel and simultaneously believe that Palestinians too have a God-given right to live in freedom and dignity on that same land. These positions are not contradictory. Indeed, numerous interfaith leaders around the world have spoken out, saying that true peace in the Holy Land must be built on shared humanity rather than exclusive claims.
Furthermore, consider that not all Israelis and Jews agree on religious nationalism. A significant segment of Israeli society itself – including many young people and secular Jews – are uncomfortable with hardline religious justifications for territorial expansion or permanent subjugation of Palestinians. There are Israeli human rights activists, and even combat veterans, who oppose the occupation precisely because of their Jewish values or love for Israel, believing that ruling over another people betrays Judaism’s highest principles and endangers Israel’s soul. In short, religious identity can be a source of compassion and self-critique just as much as a source of extremism. We urge pro-Israel readers to draw on the best of their moral and religious values – the parts that speak to loving one’s neighbor, to “not oppressing the stranger” (a biblical injunction repeated 36 times in the Torah), and to seeking peace. Those values align naturally with supporting Palestinian rights. After all, Palestinian children bleed the same red blood; their mothers grieve with the same tears. No theology worth its name would say their lives are worth less.
It is also crucial to dispel certain misconceptions that fuel anti-Palestinian sentiment. One common claim is that “Palestinians always choose violence” or “they have rejected peace every time.” This narrative omits that Palestinians have lived for 56 years under military occupation without basic rights, and for over 75 years as refugees dispersed by war and expulsions. They have, in fact, pursued diplomacy (for example, the PLO recognized Israel and agreed to a two-state solution in the 1990s), and many Palestinian civil society movements embrace nonviolence. But peaceful efforts have often been met with expanding settlements on their land and continued displacement. Desperation and anger in some quarters did lead to militancy – but to paint all Palestinians as terrorists is as unfair as blaming all Israelis for far-right settler violence. Another myth is that “Israel withdrew from Gaza completely, and in return got rockets”. In reality, when Israel pulled its settlers out of Gaza in 2005, it then imposed a blockade rather than granting freedom – effectively turning Gaza into a besieged enclave with no control over its borders, sea, or air. Gazans often liken it to living in a cage. This context is rarely explained in soundbites, leaving many to wrongly believe Gaza is free and solely governed by Hamas’s whims. Similarly, in the West Bank, the oft-heard phrase “disputed territories” obscures the fact that international law considers it occupied territory, and nearly every nation on earth (including the U.S. until recently) recognizes that Israel must withdraw or negotiate its status. Misconceptions like these persist in part because, as noted, media coverage rarely explains the Palestinian perspective – for instance, one study found only 4% of U.S. news reports on Gaza/West Bank even mentioned that those areas are occupied. Breaking through these misconceptions requires patience and a willingness to seek out information that may not be on the nightly news.
Ultimately, we must ground ourselves in universal moral principles. Regardless of one’s politics or religion, deliberately starving civilians is wrong. Killing thousands of children is wrong. Systematically denying millions of people their freedom and expecting them to simply accept it forever is wrong. We would hold any other country to this standard; it is not “anti-Israel” to hold Israel to the same standard, it is pro-justice. Human rights are not a zero-sum between Israelis and Palestinians – in fact, history shows that violating one group’s rights will eventually erode the security of the other.
A Path Forward: Embracing Justice and Empathy for Lasting Peace
As this report has illustrated, supporting Palestinian human rights is not about rejecting Israel; it is about rejecting inhumanity. The harrowing facts – of mass displacement, child starvation, indiscriminate bombardment, and decades of suffocating occupation – are impossible to reconcile with the values we claim to uphold in the free world. To our friends who have stood ardently with Israel, we say: You do not have to abandon Israel to recognize the profound injustice being done to Palestinians. In fact, helping to end that injustice is arguably the best way to secure Israel’s long-term future as a society that is both safe and morally sound. An Israel that perpetually rules over millions of disenfranchised Palestinians, with no end in sight, will neither be truly secure nor truly democratic. As former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak warned, if Israel keeps controlling all Palestinian territories without granting rights, it will face a choice between being Jewish or democratic – implying it would become an apartheid-like state if it denies political rights to Arabs indefinitely. Many Israeli leaders have echoed this: the status quo is untenable. The only sustainable path is one where Palestinians attain freedom and dignity – whether through an independent state of their own, or equal rights in a binational state. That is a complex political discussion, but what’s clear is that continuing on the present course is a disaster for all sides. It breeds radicalization, international isolation, and moral corrosion.
For ordinary people, advocating Palestinian human rights is actually a way of expressing care for Israelis too. It means we believe Israelis deserve peace – and peace cannot be achieved by walls, sniper towers, and airstrikes, but by justice. The Palestinian cry for liberty is not a threat to Israeli Jews; it is an invitation to finally end the cycle of hatred and violence in a just manner. Imagine an Israel that lives next to a sovereign Palestine, or with Palestinians as equal citizens – where neither side’s children have to hide in bunkers or huddle hungry in ruins. That future will remain elusive so long as we rationalize or ignore the suffering of one side. But if enough people, including former supporters of Israeli policies, raise their voices to say “No, this is not acceptable”, change becomes possible. International pressure matters. In the 1980s, many Western conservatives initially defended apartheid South Africa or were in denial about it – but over time, facts and moral arguments shifted the consensus. We saw churches, universities, and governments take a stand, and ultimately, even those who had been South Africa’s friends had to admit that apartheid was wrong and had to end. A similar shift is needed now. It won’t be easy – powerful interests and ingrained biases will resist it. Yet, as Americans or Europeans (or wherever we are), we have a responsibility because our governments fund and diplomatically shield Israeli actions in many cases. Our tax dollars, our weapons, our U.N. vetoes have helped enable the very policies we now see resulting in humanitarian horror. With responsibility comes the obligation to speak up and demand better.
In practical terms, advocating for Palestinian rights means supporting measures that uphold human dignity: an end to the blockade of Gaza so that food, water and medicine flow freely; a halt to settlement expansion and land theft in the West Bank; holding those who commit violence against civilians accountable (whether they are Israeli soldiers, Palestinian militants, or anyone); and ultimately, a political solution that guarantees both peoples security and self-determination. It also means challenging hateful language on all sides. Condemning Israeli government excesses goes hand in hand with condemning antisemitism – indeed, real antisemitism is antithetical to the fight for human rights. We can protect Jewish people from bigotry while also insisting the Palestinian people be protected from state violence. These are complementary, not contradictory, goals.
Let us be clear: supporting Palestinian human rights is a matter of basic decency. When presented with “overwhelming evidence of mass starvation, mass killings” and even credible accusations of genocide, how can any person of conscience turn away? The facts we’ve cited are not inventions of propaganda; they are documented by the United Nations, respected NGOs, journalists, and even by courageous Israelis who refuse to let injustice be done in their name. If after absorbing all this, one still finds excuses to look the other way – perhaps out of loyalty or fear or disbelief – one must ask: what would it take? How many children need to die, how many homes reduced to rubble, for us to say enough is enough? We believe that deep down, your values already tell you that an innocent child’s life is of equal worth, whether that child is Israeli or Palestinian. To be pro-Palestinian rights is not to be anti-Israeli; it is to be pro-humanity. It is to hold Israel (and indeed the Palestinians’ own leaders) to the universal standard of not abusing human rights. It is to insist that peace cannot be built on oppression.
In conclusion, we urge you to open your heart and your mind. It’s okay to question the narratives you’ve been taught – doing so does not betray your friends or your people. As the evidence shows, one can love Israel and still vehemently oppose the destructive path of its current policies – in fact, many Israelis themselves are pleading for the world to help save them from their government’s mistakes. And one can sympathize with the genuine fear Israelis feel about security, while realizing that millions of Palestinians living under constant fear and hardship is not a price that can be morally justified or indefinitely sustained. The Palestinians are a people with aspirations and dignity, not just a political issue or a security problem. Recognizing their full humanity is the first step to a just resolution.
Empathy and truth are powerful tools. When faced with the truth of human suffering, our moral compass points us toward compassion and action. We hope this comprehensive account has shed light on that truth. It is time to move beyond propaganda and tribal loyalties, and to stand up for what is right. That means saying clearly: I support Palestinian human rights and freedom, just as I support peace and safety for Israelis. These goals are one and the same. By advocating for the oppressed today, we help create a future where both Palestinians and Israelis can live with security, freedom, and hope – a future where criticizing a government’s mistakes is seen not as disloyalty, but as a commitment to justice that ultimately benefits all. It’s not only okay to criticize Israel’s policies – it is necessary if we want to remain true to the ideals of human rights and if we ever wish to see an end to this painful conflict. Let us choose courage over complacency, and empathy over bias. The children of Gaza, the families in the West Bank, and indeed the next generation of Israelis deserve nothing less than our clear-eyed advocacy for their shared humanity.
References
Human Rights Watch. (2024, April 9). Gaza: Israel’s imposed starvation deadly for children. Human Rights Watch.
Al Jazeera. (2024, March 17). Over 13,000 children killed in Gaza, others severely malnourished: UNICEF. Al Jazeera.
The Guardian. (2025, July 31). The mathematics of starvation: How Israel caused a famine in Gaza. The Guardian.
Al Jazeera (AJLabs). (2025, April 17). Israel-Gaza war in maps and charts: Live tracker. Al Jazeera.
Youmans, W. (2024, March 20). Biases in U.S. media coverage of Gaza. DAWN.
The Guardian. (2023, September 6). Israel imposing apartheid on Palestinians, says former Mossad chief. The Guardian.
Amnesty International. (2025, July 28). Israeli organizations conclude Israel committing genocide in Gaza. Amnesty International.
ABC Religion & Ethics. (2023, October 31). The darker side of complex trauma: How psychology can help us understand the conflict surrounding Israel and Palestine. ABC.
Al Jazeera / United Nations OCHA & UNICEF. (2024–2025). Israel-Palestine conflict: Humanitarian data and reports. Al Jazeera.
B’Tselem & Physicians for Human Rights Israel. (2025, July 28). Israeli organizations conclude Israel committing genocide in Gaza. B’Tselem / Physicians for Human Rights Israel.
