A moral collapse in real time: Gaza and the death of Western ethics

By Janna Kadri
Source: Al Mayadeen English
25 Oct 2023 00:53
27 Shares

By dismantling the moral veneer of Zionism, the US manifested that it now holds the reins of decision-making.

(illustration by Zaynab El-Hajj for Al Mayadeen)

October 17, 2023 — a date that will be remembered as one of the darkest chapters in modern history. The bombing of al-Ahli Hospital revealed an unprecedented level of cruelty by the Israeli regime. A place meant to serve as a refuge for the ill, the wounded, and the displaced was obliterated in a single strike, claiming the lives of nearly 500 people in an instant. Those behind the massacre briefly surfaced on social media, only to later erase all traces of their involvement. In the aftermath, President Biden shifted blame onto the Palestinians, further distorting the narrative. In the face of such horror, one must ask: how can such evil exist? And as world leaders continue to stand by in silence, the question lingers — has the world gone mad?

"Israel" ceased to exist

With the onset of genocide in Gaza, "Israel" ceased to exist — not in a physical sense, but in terms of its moral and political legitimacy. A regime already struggling to maintain credibility on the world stage has now shed even the illusion of legitimacy. The massacre at al-Ahli Hospital marked a definitive rupture, exposing the collapse of the values it once claimed to uphold, and laying bare the fragility of the Western moral framework that continues to enable it.

This act of mass violence does not merely deepen the crisis of the Israeli regime — it also jeopardizes the future of its own working class, which now finds itself implicated in a war that serves elite and foreign interests. Historically, the ruling settler classes expanded power through expropriation and depopulation. Today, however, that power appears to be waning.

The dismantling of Zionism's "moral" veneer reveals a deeper shift: the United States has taken the reins of decision-making. The war on Gaza is no longer just about breaking the will of Hamas fighters — it is a geopolitical signal, directed squarely at Iran, and orchestrated under US strategic priorities.

Why Iran?

Since the 1979 revolution, Iran has endured continuous sanctions that have strained its economy while fostering a strong sense of self-reliance and deep-rooted opposition to Western interference. Over time, the Islamic Republic has garnered substantial popular support, but its most significant achievement lies in its autonomy — a direct challenge to imperial hegemony. Despite external pressures, Iran has demonstrated a capacity for reform, particularly in social domains such as women's rights, and its relative stability holds potential for broader social progress.

The United States has long sought to confront Iran militarily, viewing its independence as a threat to regional control. Since the beginning of the genocide in Gaza, Iran has issued repeated warnings to the Israeli regime, signaling that prolonged aggression could force its hand. Yet, in provoking Tehran, Washington misjudged the situation — expecting an immediate military escalation that never came. Instead, Iran exercised strategic restraint. In doing so, it exposed the US's disproportionate brutality and revealed the limits of its moral authority on the global stage. Nevertheless, Washington appears unaware of the long-term damage it has inflicted upon its own credibility.

Rising with the people of the West Bank the refugee camps, diaspora, and allies in Lebanon, Turkey, Greece, Spain, Iraq, Yemen, Iran, Morocco and globally erupt in anti-zionist protest in condemnation of the American-zionist massacre carried out at Al-Maamadani hospital in #Gaza pic.twitter.com/JAoLtEIObO
— UBBE AHMERDSON (@OurVisionariess) October 18, 2023

Israeli aggressions unleashed

The Israeli regime has a long history of committing atrocities with consistent disregard for human rights and international law. One example is the 1996 Qana massacre, where Israeli forces bombed a UNIFIL shelter in southern Lebanon, killing women, children, and UN personnel. Syria has likewise endured repeated Israeli airstrikes over the years. Despite numerous international appeals to halt these aggressions, no decisive action has ever been taken to uphold international law.

From its inception under UN Resolution 181, the regime's establishment served a broader imperial agenda: to secure a Western foothold in the Arab region. At the time, the rising momentum of the pan-Arab movement posed a significant threat to Western geopolitical interests. By contributing to the defeat of pan-Arabism, "Israel" helped isolate the Arab masses from broader regional development and self-determination. This process was supported by the US and several European powers, who armed the Zionist project—not out of concern for existential threats to Jews, but to serve imperial objectives.

Today, however, the West is increasingly unable to shield "Israel" from accountability. The warning signs have been evident: for the past ten months, the regime has faced internal political turmoil. Netanyahu's extremist cabinet and his proposed judicial overhaul have eroded the liberal foundations of Zionist governance. What remains is a reactionary state apparatus that has foregone even the pretense of diplomacy, rejecting strategic restraint in favor of open escalation — a move that further undermines its global credibility and long-term durability.

Moral decay

Anti-US sentiment has long been present in countries like Syria, Libya, Iraq, and Yemen — nations that have borne the brunt of American military interventions and foreign policy. Over the past decade, such sentiment has also steadily grown across the Gulf, even among traditional allies like Saudi Arabia, which has begun asserting greater independence in defense matters. Since the onset of the genocide in Gaza, this anger has intensified dramatically among the Arab masses. Viral footage on social media has shown protesters storming US embassies, while resistance groups have targeted military bases and warships. Similar outrage has erupted across the West, but the deafening silence of Western leaders suggests not indifference — but complicity, if not a desire for more massacres to unfold.

This silence is rooted in a deeper moral decay embedded within the logic of capitalism itself. Under this system, labor is commodified — objectified — and this objectification extends into the ethical domain, shaping how human life is valued. Eurocentric moral perspectives often present partial truths as universal, privileging narratives that align with ruling class interests. The categorical imperative — the idea of acting according to a universal moral law — is abandoned whenever it contradicts capitalist imperatives. In its place, we see fragmented, selective ethics that justify atrocity. At times, morality is reduced to lifeboat ethics — the rationale that shooting refugees at sea is acceptable to preserve the security or prosperity of the majority white population.

This warped ethical calculus is mirrored in how US leaders justify war: not as a means of protecting life, but of protecting a way of life — one built on extraction, exploitation, and geopolitical dominance. Within this framework, both Palestinians and Jews are dehumanized — reduced to tools, symbols, or collateral — in the service of sustaining imperial profit and power.

Panic begets panic

There was a time when the United States could launch military campaigns — as it did in Libya and Iraq — with relative impunity. But the global balance of power has shifted. The rise of China and Russia has curtailed Washington's ability to act unilaterally. Russia has formed strategic alliances with Iran and the DPRK, moved to de-dollarize its economy, and asserted its influence by defying NATO's eastward expansion. China, meanwhile, has positioned itself as a champion of national sovereignty and a vocal supporter of Palestinian rights in Al-Quds — directly challenging the role of "Israel" as the vanguard of US-led imperialism.

While the US continues to promote a vision of peace enforced by military dominance, China offers a competing model rooted in trade and development. Unable to match the appeal of this alternative, the US has escalated its direct involvement in Gaza, deploying warships and weapons in a desperate bid to maintain its fading influence in the Arab region. These actions betray a deep sense of strategic anxiety — a realization that efforts to fracture the China-Russia alliance have failed, and that Washington's moral standing is in steep decline.

Indeed, "panic begets panic." As US hegemony unravels, its responses grow more erratic, more destructive — lashing out to preserve a world order it can no longer control. The question, then, is not merely one of diminished credibility, but of existential risk. For in this volatile reconfiguration of global power, the stakes are no longer symbolic. They are nuclear.