If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were: any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee.
Meditation XVII, John Donne
The past twenty-one months of conflict in the Middle East have challenged concepts of morality and right on both the international stage and at the individual level. No-one can deny the attacks of 7 October, 2023 were horrific. Equally no-one can deny that the extraordinary retribution exercised by Israel on Gazans is proportional. Around 1,139 people were killed on that fateful day in 2023 when Hamas attacked Israelis at an open air concert, at a Kibbutz, in their homes. In contrast, over 59,000 Palestinians have been killed, the vast proportion non-combatants. Of the victims, 44% are children and another 22% are women, according to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights.
On social media, in broadsheets, tabloids and chat groups, it’s been impossible not to see reports of the conflict in Gaza. What’s been most disturbing has been the way in which governments and many individuals have declined to condemn the killing of children. Images of children walking within the flames of a bombed building, of lifeless legs pinned under collapsed concrete, of vacant faces missing a cranial vault. Not just 1,139, but thousands of children, uncountable images. And still governments have remained reticent to say or do anything to stop the massacre. It’s been up to individuals to speak out, the small group protests in capital cities or on university campuses across the world, and governments have tried to silence them.
Now, twenty-one months later, with the warnings of aid agencies months earlier ringing in their ears, governments see the final stages of a military incursion that extends to starvation. And again, it’s the children suffering the most. Whilst families send men to scramble for food at aid distribution centres, hoping not only that their loved one will procure food, but that they will not be killed by an Israeli sniper in the process, the Israeli owned and operated Global Health Fund fails in its self-determined role of the humanitarian aid to a population it’s government has actively sought to decimate.
The growing distaste for the famine amongst Gazans now explicitly demonstrated, if not actively stated, of emaciated children, has had television hosts in tears and prompted governments to make statements saying that the war must finally end. One must wonder what the difference is between the images of a body decimated by a missile versus a lack of food. Is starvation the universal moral barometer of taking retribution too far?
Concepts of morality
Opinions of right and wrong can vary depending on religious or cultural backgrounds. Some argue that there is a baseline which most people would accept as universal and these are largely encompassed under the banner of universal human rights. They are the freedoms and rights that many argue are inalienable, those enshrined in the thirty articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Yet, the articles are aspirational, arguably carrying no legal power unless incorporated into a nation’s own laws. Unless a nation has signed a corresponding treaty, there is no accountability under the United Nations.
One can reason that a situation is immoral, but acting accordingly does not necessarily follow. Emotions can skew decisions and results in actions that conflict with the moral reasons.
Kohlberg defined three levels of morality, two stages within each. Children up to around age nine, function within the first level, initially reacting out of obedience or in response to punishment, before developing a degree of understanding that individual opinions may differ and the and exchange may be possible depending on viewpoints.
The morality of adolescents and young adults at level 2 operates around social interactions where the approval of others and relationships directs actions. As independence and a broader view of the world develop, people come to understand the value of preserving social order through adherence to laws.
Stage 3 applies to mature adults, who initially develop social contracts and understand the importance of protecting individual rights. Those who adhere to a principle, sometimes at the expense of adherence to law or social contracts, may be considered idealists who place ethics above all else.
Israel is a signatory to the Convention for the Rights of the Child and yet, it’s pragmatism regarding child safety have clearly been supplanted by emotion in the current war. In setting the norms and social order for their country, they have failed to actively engage Palestinians in dialogue to address the differing values that ensure dignity and equality for people regardless of ethnicity or faith, a fundamental aspect of Kohlberg’s postconventional morality.
Morals are often absorbed subconsciously and may not necessarily be logical. Philippa Foot’s trolley problem experiment, later varied to the fat man problem in which you can save the lives of five people by pushing one fat person onto the tracks, often generates distaste among experiment participants. However, if the trolley could be diverted onto an alternative track with only one person at risk, people are more likely to sacrifice an individual to save five lives. The experiment highlights the agency of the self in making a difficult decision and our own proximity to the actions required when making a morally difficult decision.
Shame and accountability
Generally, when we fail to adhere to moral standards, we feel a degree of shame and possibly guilt. Shame causes social withdrawal, whilst guilt prompts an effort to make amends, but the moral precept to which shame is a response is culturally and possibly religiously bound. Many atheists and agnostics argue that morality does not rely upon religion. The many essentially good people of the world who do not believe in a god is strong evidence to their premise, which makes the actions of each of us entirely bound by individual thoughts, whether shaped by belief in a deity or not.
The atrocities in the Middle East have peaked empathy and driven a moral imperative among some to stop the wanton destruction of life, both at grassroots level protests and by the Government of South Africa. But the effect has been minimal, as no sense of shame has been exhibited by either Hamas for the actions of 7 October 2023 or by the Israeli Government since. Rather each has persisted exhorting its moral right to defend itself.
At some point, most people tuned out. There was no point in feeling shame ourselves, because we could not stop the attacks. And as we scrolled through the interminable images of destruction, we became inured to the gore and waste of life. But the change in images from mutilation to emaciation have once again peaked the empathy of individuals and governments. We are being forced to think again about what is happening. It’s like Ethiopia all over again, the optics are terrible and we think finally, this must stop. But will it?
Desensitisation
Frequent exposure to violence is well known to lead to desensitisation, dulling moral decision-making and impairing empathy. Compounding this empathy block, the inability of individuals to make a difference results in a learned helplessness. When people’s voices are ignored regardless of the letters written, protests attended, petitions signed, the number speaking out diminishes.
Did the world just get tired of hearing about the war in Gaza after months of carnage broadcast across all forms of media? The sameness of the reports month after month made reading more seem superfluous; nothing had changed, just more gross destruction and waste of lives. No more hostages released and no respite for their families who wait wondering if they are still alive.
The initial months of the war in Gaza brought seemingly unending images of suffering. Who can forget Khaled Nabhan grieving for the “soul of my soul”, his three-year old granddaughter, or the countless images of little corpses? Inured to the constant onslaught of maimed bodies, many no longer respond to such images. It has become almost normalised. Impotent in our rage and realising that our governments are not going to act, many tuned out.
Famine is a new hurdle in undermining moral attitudes. The ambiguity in responsibility for the war in Gaza – Hamas versus Israel – is gone. It was unclear until now who was responsible for the deaths in Gaza – did they bring it upon themselves, are Hamas shooting Gazans themselves then blaming it on the Israelis? Attacks on both sides made it easier to shrug our shoulders and say it’s too hard to know. Now, only one group is starving. The images of emaciation are coming from those within the Gaza strip, revitalising calls for a complete cessation of hostilities to allow aid through to the starving. The worrying thing is that it is unlikely to happen. As Caitlin Johnstone states, “Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself made it clear back in May that implementing Donald Trump’s plan for the ethnic cleansing of Gaza was a precondition to having peace in the enclave.”
Images of starving, emaciated people are likely to continue to haunt us in all forms of media. And as we did with the initial images of destruction, many are likely to be desensitised to the degradation of an entire populace, until we again look elsewhere and become absorbed with our usual conceits and daily irritations.
The precipice before the precedent
Sadly, the protective measure the international community had built over the past seventy years may have been for nought. The effectiveness of the declarations and treaties developed by the United Nations system has faltered, evidenced following actions brought by South Africa against Israel in the International Court of Justice commencing since late 2023 and still ongoing. The potential for famine was well recognised as early as March 2024, when the ICJ directed Israel to take measures to prevent starvation in Gaza in response to an urgent request made by South Africa. Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International have each stated in early 2024 that Israel has failed to comply with the ICJ directions, whilst the UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food described preventing access to humanitarian aid as an act of deliberate starvation.
We read of civilians being killed by snipers as they scramble for food at aid stations, Israeli soldiers admitting to following orders when there was no threat. The centres are open for only one hour per day and at one, named Operation Salted Fish, 550 desperate starving people were killed and 4,000 more wounded. Desperate people drawn to food, so that they can be killed. Those that are too scared will simply starve.
Social media from Gaza has reached a desperate level. Journalist Nahed Hajjaj wrote on 25 July 2025:
“Day 6 of drinking and water and salt so we our organs don’t fail.
Day 7 is tomorrow, we will do the same.
Day 8, the same.
Week 4, most of us will not be here anymore.
Month 2, the world will wonder how 1.8 million people were allowed to be starved to death.”
This is the precipice upon which the world now stands. South Africa filed a submission with the ICJ on 28 October 2024. Israel was initially required to respond by 28 July 2025, today, but has been afforded an extension of time until 12 January 2026. With legal avenues having failed and starvation inevitable in nothing but water, most people in Gaza will be dead before the end of this year. It is a horrific and undeniably unconscionable waste of life and abrogation of human dignity should the rest of the world allow this to occur.
When we said never again, did we mean it? Because if not, we can all be assured that there will be another Gaza and another and another. Every person, every voice from the individual to the government needs to speak out to stop the eradication of the Palestinians. The Gazans hear the bell tolling and know that it is for them, but how many of us realise that it also tolls for a world compromising its morals?
