In recent days, the world has once again revealed the double standard it applies to Israel — one that punishes Jewish self-defence more harshly than terrorism itself.
When terrorists slaughtered 26 people in a brutal attack in Kashmir, India responded with decisive measures: downgrading diplomatic relations with Pakistan, suspending key bilateral agreements, and closing its main border crossing. The international reaction was swift and supportive. The United States stood firmly with India. The United Kingdom and China expressed sympathy and solidarity. Even the United Nations, often critical of nationalist responses, urged restraint on both sides without condemning India’s actions.
There were no global protests. No calls to boycott Indian products. No international court filings. No UN commissions of inquiry.
Now compare that to Israel.
When Hamas once again launched a wave of attacks from Gaza — firing rockets indiscriminately at Israeli civilians, invading Israel to indiscriminately kill families in their homes and take hostages — Israel responded as any sovereign state must: by defending its people and dismantling the terrorist infrastructure responsible. And yet, instead of backing Israel’s right to self-defence, much of the world condemned it. Spain canceled a multimillion-euro arms deal. Bolivia severed diplomatic ties. South Africa recalled its ambassador. International headlines focused not on Hamas’s war crimes but on Israel’s airstrikes. Even when those strikes targeted militants hiding among civilians, the finger was pointed squarely at Jerusalem.
This is not simply a media failure. It is a moral one.
Every country has the right — and the duty — to defend its people. That is not controversial when it applies to India, or France, or the United States. But when Israel exercises the same right, the world demands a higher standard, a quieter response, a cleaner war against an enemy that hides behind its own civilians and celebrates death.
As a liberal democracy, Israel should be scrutinised like any other. Civilian deaths, however unintentional, are tragedies that warrant review and reflection. But scrutiny is not the same as scapegoating. The fact that Israel is held uniquely and disproportionately responsible for conflicts it does not start should trouble anyone who values fairness.
As Golda Meir once said: “If we have to have a choice between being dead and pitied, and being alive with a bad image, we’d rather be alive and have the bad image.”
That ethos still defines Israeli policy today. It is the natural posture of a small nation in a dangerous region — a country surrounded by adversaries, demonised on the global stage, and yet still committed to democratic values, the rule of law, and the sanctity of life.
New Zealanders, who pride ourselves on fairness, empathy, and a commitment to peace, must resist this double standard. We must affirm Israel’s right to defend its citizens with the same moral clarity we afford every other nation. To do otherwise is not just inconsistent — it’s unjust.
The real question is not why Israel defends itself. The real question is why it is the only country in the world condemned for doing so.
