By IRWIN J. (YITZCHAK) MANSDORF . Full Article at https://tinyurl.com/5bzzxxme
One of the most basic insights in behavioral psychology is
that people are wired to respond to immediate rewards even if those carry
long-term consequences. Whether it’s eating another slice of cake, smoking a
harmful cigarette, or running a red light, we tend to act when the benefit is
now and the price is later. If the reward feels good enough and the threat
seems distant enough, we take the risk.
This is not just human nature. It’s a weapon; one that Hamas has used masterfully in
its psychological war against Israel and the West over the past 18 months.
With the help of Iranian and Qatari backers,
Hamas has turned hostage diplomacy into a psychological trap. The emotional
appeal of bringing hostages home – a deeply human desire – has become the bait.
The cost? A stronger, bolder, more dangerous Hamas, just as ideologically
committed to Israel’s destruction as ever.
And the trap is working.
Every potential deal with Hamas carries a price. And the
terror organization ensures that the price is steep. Within Israel, a moral
rift is deepening. For some, particularly hostage families, nothing matters
more than bringing loved ones home. For others, the memory of October 7 and the
desire to ensure it never happens again means defeating Hamas, even at terrible
cost.
This is the heart of our moral dilemma: Two values – both
legitimate – that feel increasingly irreconcilable.
Hamas is exploiting this divide with precision. One day, it
offers a temporary hudna (“ceasefire”). The next, it releases a hostage video.
All the while, it plays the victim: children under rubble, hospitals without
power, shelters destroyed. The images are tragic – but they also serve a
purpose. The responsibility, they suggest, lies not with Hamas, but with
Israel.
Incredibly, many Israelis, who despise Hamas and all it
stands for, fall into this psychological trap. Instead of demanding that Hamas release the
hostages unconditionally, as international law requires, public anger
often turns inward, toward the Israeli government. It is a striking success of
Hamas’s psychologically asymmetric strategy.
The same is true in the West. There, the dominant narrative
is one of Israeli
oppression and “genocide” in Gaza. This narrative is a result of years
of emotional manipulation and moral confusion.
Headlines show starving children and suffering patients,
rarely acknowledging Hamas’s role in initiating the conflict or continuing to
hold innocent Israelis captive. The moral burden shifts to Israel, while the
terrorists evade accountability.
What does this all mean? First, we must take a more sober
view of the reality we’re in. The moral imperative to rescue living hostages is
real – but so is the government’s duty to protect its citizens from future
atrocities.
These are not easy choices. But they are not mutually
exclusive either. We must stop demonizing decisions we disagree with and start
appreciating the weight of the dilemma.
Second, we must recognize that Hamas is watching us,
learning about us, and playing us.
Militarily, we may be stronger. But on the psychological
battlefield, Hamas currently holds the emotional upper hand. That’s how it
continues to manipulate public opinion, both in Israel and in the West.
No comments:
Post a Comment