Strength Evaluation
Which of the following two arguments is stronger?
Argument A

Israel cut off electricity and water supplies to Gaza soon after October 7th. Additionally, food supplies to Gaza have been significantly reduced, with aid groups citing difficulty coordinating with the Israeli military as the primary reason. Evidence indicates civilians deliberately denied access to Food and water. Several humanitarian and government officials have indicated that the IDF has denied certain key items. Some Israeli citizens have also attempted to block aid trucks. These limited food supplies have led to the starvation and deaths of many innocent people, particularly vulnerable children. All reports to the contrary come from Israeli sources, not independent ones.

These policies clearly constitute "collective punishment", which is strictly prohibited under international law. It is important to note that the popular Israeli argument of "collateral damage" does not even apply in this case.

Source: Middle East Eye/AFP/Omar al-Qattaa

Argument B

When Hamas came to power in 2006 after a fair election, as confirmed by the UN and US, they repeatedly sent peace feelers to the Israeli government. This implied they were seeking some form of settlement and peaceful coexistence with Israeli citizens. However, the Israeli government dismissed all these efforts. Although a ceasefire was later reached, it was soon broken unilaterally by Israel.

While it's true that Hamas at the time of sending peace feelers asked for the right of return for all refugees expelled from their homes in 1948—a demand not favored by Israel—one should note that, first, international law does recognize the right of return for expelled people, and second, Hamas presented it as a topic of negotiation, which Israel refused to engage in.

Israelis often accuse Palestinians of not wanting to peacefully coexist with them. However, factual events suggest otherwise.

Overview