We must better consider all the people caught up in modern-day warfare

In some ways, this blog comes full circle to the very second post I wrote on here circa six years ago. That time, in the aftermath of the 2017 Las Vegas shooting, the blog focused on how names and stories appeal to our emotion more than facts and figures. Boy can I see the difference in writing style - 17 year old Kabir bizarrely quoted Stalin in making the point. 

What I grappled with, and have done for a while since, is the unnatural and paradoxically natural emotional response to scales of tragedy. Hundreds of thousands dying is harder to comprehend than ten that are accompanied by names and faces. Yet more people dying is obviously worse globally. Ironically, I forgot the shooting’s details, which in itself encapsulates the point. 

These limits of human empathy are (at least to me) fascinating, but they pose some problems in the globalised, interconnected world we now live in. In a world where our media consumption plays such a key role in how we perceive and interpret life, statistics become ever so important. At what point do we become numb to figures of people suffering, whether that be in war or through physical or mental illnesses? Is it a thousand? A million? Somewhere in the middle? 

The reality is, it depends. It depends upon our own individual association to, and willingness to empathise with, the people within the figure. For example, I know that subconsciously, my own experience with mental illness means that statistics about their prevalence stick with me just that little bit more than other illnesses. 

It relates a lot to the insider-outsider complex is so evident in people’s reactions to current affairs. Ukrainian refugees are welcomed in the majority-white UK unlike non-white ones, trans and non-binary people are demonised for their difference, and there are countless other examples. Much of the political charade is people choosing who they deem deserves help - based upon how much their subconscious and life experiences can relate to others. 

That selective empathy can be dangerous, though. Indeed, the current news cycle about Israel and Palestine is a good reflection of this. At the end of last week, a Palestinian resistance group, Hamas, fired rockets over the Israeli border, whilst  attacking an Israeli music festival and holding hostages. The Israeli response has  been as violent, launching airstrikes into Palestine and cutting off water and power supply to the region. The Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has even declared they will "wipe Hamas from the face of the Earth". At the time of writing, death tolls on both sides stand at just over 1000, and this will likely increase.

The wider backdrop to this stems back to religious disputes. The West Bank and Gaza regions, along with some of Israel, formed Palestinian Territories up until the mid-20th century. Many Jewish communities see the area as lands of their kingdoms, as was written in the Bible. After British occupation ended in 1948, Israel was declared as a state, prompting violent responses from Palestinians. On-off wars since have resulted in Israel occupying areas of the West Bank, building settlements that are deemed illegal under international law. 

The Gaza region, where many Palestinians live, has been frequently subjected to a blockade by Israel and Egypt, isolating them from the world and in doing so, prohibiting access to crucial supplies. Hamas’ election in Palestine in 2006 has led to some violent resistance like the most recent attack, but the impact of the blockade remains.

That is context that needs to be considered when considering Hamas’ most recent attack, it is not unprovoked. It would be remiss of me not to condemn it, as civilian violence and bloodshed is possibly the most heartbreaking thing to hear. But that condemnation and empathy for victims has to go the other way too, for both Israelis and Palestinians. 

Currently, news and social media representations don’t seem to be giving this. There has been lots of misinformation about the conflict on social media, and much in the Western world centres on Israeli suffering, without consideration of Palestinian occupation over the last 65 years. 

The specific episode this week now bears similarities to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and indeed I touched on hypocrisy of Western responses at the time. Russia bombing Ukraine has led to widespread international sanctions, and yet as Israel does the same to Palestine, they receive moral and the offer of military support from the United States, United Kingdom and other Western countries. 

There is that selective empathy again. There are strong parallels between the two situations, but many responses to tragedy currently only focus on the Israeli victims. It feels like this is because we are seeing videos and testimonies on one side, such is the inclination of Western governments and populations’ support.

The events show the power of storytelling which can warp the true nature of geopolitical conflicts. Our response to the Israeli government bombing Palestine now must be as condemning as our response to Hamas’ initial attack on Israel. Both are targeting civilians; one has provoked in the short-term, the other has systematically occupied Palestine in the long-term. 

It is important we don’t lose sight of the significance of statistics. For the 2000 killed on both sides so far, each is a person with a story, with a life as valuable as yours or mine. It is possible to take a political stance but still have empathy for victims on both sides - as indeed I have here. Russia and Ukraine is a good example of that, as many dead Russian soldiers are a cog in the Putinist machine. 

But the limits of our mind mean our empathy doesn’t stretch to everyone. This shows the limits, imperfections and frankly bonkers logic of the human brain. Our flawed nature makes us un-robotic, albeit many people’s flaws will likely lead to the destruction of the planet we have ourselves occupied. 

So the next time you see a tragic statistic, think of those individual stories. It really should not matter what your political stance is, because people dying is one of the cancers that rich, old politicians and billionaires have put upon the world. De-numbing ourselves from these figures can provide motivation to fight the tragedies and the institutions that cause them.

Borders are manmade constructs. To be selective in our empathy based off lines and divisions is a callous disregard for the sanctity of individuals’ lives.