Double Standards in Action: Why the World Holds Israel Back from Its Survival Battle

 

Calls for a ceasefire are nothing but thinly veiled attempts to allow Hamas and Hezbollah to regroup and strike again. Period.

Israel’s recent military actions against Hamas and Hezbollah are more than a response—they are a battle for survival in a region where the threats are relentless, calculated, and specifically targeted at the only democracy in the Middle East. Critics often cast Israel as an aggressor, but a deeper look reveals a troubling hypocrisy, one that demands to be exposed. This ongoing conflict is not just another episode in the Israel-Palestine saga; it's a showdown orchestrated by Iran’s cold determination to crush the Jewish state while the world watches, often with selective moral outrage.

The chain of violence saw a brutal escalation on October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched a sudden and bloody attack, leaving over 1,200 Israelis dead and propelling the conflict to unprecedented levels of violence. Since then, Hezbollah and Iran have ramped up the pressure, with the latest salvo of 181 missiles fired by Iran raining down on Israel as recently as October 2024. If any nation faced attacks of this magnitude, the response would be unequivocal. Yet, as Israel fights for its right to exist, the Western outcry against its so-called "disproportionate response" is deafening. Do these critics truly believe that Israel should sit by idly and accept such aggression, simply because they happen to inhabit the most precarious neighborhood on Earth?

History, particularly that of the past year, teaches us that Iran is not an innocent bystander, but a dangerous player actively engaged in proxy warfare against Israel. Iranian officials from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard boast openly about their capabilities and their intention to see Israel fall. Hezbollah, Iran’s willing ally, has continued to launch missile barrages in coordination with Hamas, effectively keeping Israel under siege from multiple fronts. To expect Israel to hold back under such conditions is nothing less than lunacy—would Washington or London respond with anything less than full force if Tehran's rockets were landing in Times Square or Trafalgar Square?

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made the stance of the state abundantly clear: “We will act at the place and time of our choosing.” Israel’s military response isn't about expansion or conquest—it’s about survival. It’s about ensuring that an attack like that of October 7 never repeats itself. It’s about stopping Hezbollah and Iran from tightening their grip around Israel’s borders. It’s about sending a message to Iran that their ambition to dominate the region through terror tactics will be met with an iron wall.

Iran’s desire to "resist" does not end at Gaza or Lebanon—it extends to the destabilization of the entire Middle East. The fact that Iran continues to expand its ballistic missile arsenal while defying the international community in its nuclear pursuits should serve as a wake-up call. Iran's ambitions are dangerous not only to Israel but to the entire region. Yet, the world seems more concerned with condemning Israel’s actions rather than addressing the root of the problem. Why do we so conveniently forget that Iran is the one pushing for instability by funding terror groups that are committed to Israel's destruction?

This irony is underlined by the world's reaction—or lack thereof—to the suffering of Israelis. When Hezbollah launches rockets into Israeli cities, the calls for restraint are almost exclusively aimed at Israel. These critics forget that no sovereign nation could tolerate being attacked from all sides without taking definitive action. Israel's military actions are necessary steps towards ensuring its future. Yet, some Western voices remain fixated on labeling these defensive actions as "excessive." Imagine for a moment if Hezbollah fired rockets into New York or Berlin—would the United States or Germany be asked to negotiate with those terrorists?

The narrative pushed by some international observers is dangerously skewed. Terrorists are painted as "freedom fighters," while Israel, the victim of unprovoked and vicious attacks, is depicted as the aggressor. This distorted narrative is not only misleading but also emboldens Iran and its allies, sending them a clear signal that the world might tolerate their actions if they dress them up as “resistance.” Israel cannot afford such misinterpretation, nor should it bow to the hypocrisy of those who can’t see past their selective outrage.

Consider the October 2024 missile attack that saw over 181 missiles raining on Israel. This was not an isolated act but a calculated escalation, designed to provoke fear, chaos, and international condemnation of Israel’s inevitable response. If the tables were turned and these missiles targeted Paris, would any government hesitate to eradicate the threat by any means necessary? Of course not. Yet, in the eyes of some Western critics, Israel must live by different rules, even as it faces coordinated attacks from Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Iran from afar.

The double standards applied by many international leaders and observers aren’t just an insult—they’re a danger. They embolden Israel's enemies, signaling to them that attacking Israel comes with little consequence in terms of international backlash. It’s time for a reckoning of the biases that have long influenced global discourse around Israel and its right to defend itself. We must ask: Why do we demand restraint from Israel that we wouldn’t demand from ourselves?

Israel's current offensive is not merely a retaliatory strike; it's a stand for its continued existence. Iran’s proxies—Hamas and Hezbollah—act on Iran’s bidding, and their increased coordination means a greater threat to Israel’s future. As such, Israel’s actions should be understood as a strategic necessity, not an optional venture. Any nation in Israel’s position would do the same, but unlike Israel, they might not be faced with the same global criticism, which so often appears politically motivated rather than grounded in a genuine concern for peace.

And then there is the human cost—both sides feel it, but only one side has been explicitly clear about its goal: to annihilate the other. Israel's enemies want it wiped off the map, while Israel wants nothing more than to live in peace. It’s time to support Israel’s right to secure its borders without constantly questioning its morality. The argument that Israel should negotiate with groups committed to its annihilation falls apart upon any serious examination. Would America sit at the table with those explicitly plotting its destruction? History and logic say no.

Israel stands alone at a crossroads: between survival and annihilation, between self-defense and self-sacrifice. In a region where enemies lurk at every border, the strategy is straightforward: to eliminate those who threaten to erase the nation from existence. The West must wake up and understand this—not hinder Israel in its quest for security. A proverb says, "When there is no enemy within, the enemies outside cannot hurt you." For Israel, those enemies are real, present, and as dangerous as ever. The only path to lasting security lies in their total elimination.

For those who condemn without understanding, the challenge is simple: imagine if it were your home, your children, under attack. Imagine if the rockets were falling on your cities. The reaction wouldn't be so tempered then, would it?