'A few bad eggs': how the West will package the genocide after Netanyahu
By Jaron Sutton
Contributor pieces are free to read thanks to our paid subscribers. Please consider upgrading today to help Cheek pay more writers for their perspectives.
As the Israeli Government continues its campaign of genocide against the Palestinian people, Western political sentiment is turning - but history tells us it will only go so far.
In the not too distant future, the Netanyahu Government will fall. When this happens, it will become politically fashionable (and indeed necessary) for Western governments to intellectually “package” the genocide in Gaza.
What do I mean by packaging? In short, the attribution of blame. Inevitably, the blame for the innumerable war crimes committed in Gaza will be squarely laid at the feet of Benjamin Netanyahu and a small handful of extremists in his cabinet (positioned broadly as the bad eggs). This will, of course, play out much later and less predictably for Israel’s biggest backer: the US.
Nonetheless, the collective positioning effort will be fundamental to convincing Western publics to store what they have seen in the appropriate intellectual folder and to move on quickly from Gaza.
It will be argued that Netanyahu and the extremists went overboard in their response to October 7. It will be argued that Western governments tried to stop Israel by calling repeatedly for a ceasefire and for aid to flow; by sanctioning some of the bad eggs, and by recognising a Palestinian state. Under questioning, it will be admitted that individual war crimes were committed by leaders in Israel. It will not, however, be accepted that Israel committed a genocide.
Why won’t these governments accept the charge of genocide? Because the Western political elite who championed the creation of a modern ethno-religious state will not confess that the very same state is responsible for the most serious of Big Bad Crimes set out after the Second World War: genocide. Because by their own logic, after decades spent championing the fusion of state and religion, to admit Israeli state criminality is, ipso facto, tantamount to anti-Semitism. The very last thing Western governments want is to be labelled anti-Semitic, even if that means denying a genocide.
You see, in the Western mind, Big Bad Crimes are done by The Bad Guys. Israel can never be the one of these bad guys because (among other reasons) the West created it, in part, to relieve the guilt that Christian Europe had committed the most heinous of crimes during the Second World War. The West does not want to be reminded that Christian Europe committed the Holocaust. This moment is a mirror. Hence, the West accusing Israel of committing a genocide is not on the discourse-building menu.
Instead, a key pillar of this discourse building effort will rely on the distinction between Israel, as a nation and populace, and the Netanyahu Government. Take, for example, the mass public demonstrations we saw in Israel this week, calling for an end to the war and release of the remaining Israelis held in Gaza (with little regard for the murder of Palestinians).
Such protests will be held up as proof that the Israeli public didn't support the genocide. But polling suggests otherwise. According to Penn State University surveys, 82 percent of Israelis support the expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza. This expulsion would constitute ethnic cleansing. Yet, it’s unlikely Western leaders will acknowledge any widespread endorsement of genocide.
More insidiously, to explain this complicity, many will point to past trauma. This argument, which is already doing the rounds, holds that the genocide in Gaza is the manifestation of Holocaust trauma. What makes this argument dangerous is how it is being used: as a tool for absolution. It will feed into the line that there is trauma and criminality on both sides, and that this is an "age old conflict". As such, the argument suggests we should call it a draw and move forward towards a two-state solution.
Two states. Shared trauma. Culpability on both sides. A few bad eggs here. A few bad eggs over there. This is the form the packaging will take. A neat and tidy conversational starter pack for the suburban dinner table or the hushed conversation between colleagues at the microwave. This view will be swallowed hook, line and sinker by large swathes of the Western public, who love a "peace" deal and take pride in their centrism and happy endings.
The sprouts of this discourse building, the packaging of Netanyahu and a small number of his cabinet colleagues as the ones responsible for it all, are already starting to show. But the project can’t begin at scale while Netanyahu retains power with US-backing. When he falls, it will begin at lightning speed.
Here in Australia, while they can’t admit it publicly, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, and Foreign Minister Penny Wong, are craving this moment. They are craving the moment that they can start rolling out this neat packaging to the Canberra Press Gallery and morning breakfast shows. A key ingredient in that effort will be the whitewashing of their own role in the story. The months - years - of silence. Of stonewalling. Of refusing to condemn. Of refusing to sanction. Of complicity.
About the author
Jaron Sutton
Jaron Sutton is an Arabic language scholar and writer with an interest in Australian politics, the Australian media landscape, climate change, the Arab world, contemporary Arabic literature, and history. He has worked in the higher education sector in Victoria and has lived in both Syria and Egypt. Hailing from central Victoria, he is currently based in Melbourne/Naarm. He has degrees in politics/history and international relations, and recently completed an advanced Arabic fellowship in Cairo. He is, it’s fair to say, very concerned with the direction we’re heading.
For more from Jaron, you can follow him on Substack.
Heartbreaking The systems are broken. Only the people together can change this.
Deplorable. And absolutely true.