An Anarchist Perspective on Israel, Palestine, and the Endless Cycle of Violence

The roots of this catastrophe go back decades: to the end of the British Mandate, the 1948 war, the establishment of the State of Israel, the displacement and expulsion of more than 700,000 Palestinians, and the emergence of what Palestinians call the Nakba — the catastrophe. Following the 1967 war, the occupation of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza, the expansion of Israeli settlements, and extensive restrictions on Palestinians’ lives and freedom of movement further entrenched structures of inequality and domination.
 
Today, nearly 5.9 million Palestinian refugees are eligible for services provided by UNRWA.From an anarchist perspective, the question is not simply: “Which state has the right to govern which territory?” The more fundamental question is:
Why should human beings have to submit to states, armies, borders, and military institutions in order to live, enjoy freedom, and secure their safety?
 
 October 7: A Crime That Cannot Be Justified
On October 7, 2023, Hamas forces and several other Palestinian armed groups attacked southern Israel. Approximately 1,200 people were killed, and 251 were abducted and taken to Gaza. Civilians were among those targeted in the assault. According to the findings of the United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry, hostage-taking, murder, torture, and other acts against civilians constituted war crimes. From an anarchist standpoint, no occupation, repression, or historical injustice can justify the deliberate killing of civilians or the taking of hostages. But this principle must be applied consistently, without exception. If killing an Israeli child is a crime, killing a Palestinian child is equally a crime. If taking an Israeli civilian hostage is a crime, depriving an entire civilian population of water, food, medicine, and security cannot be justified as a “right to self-defence” either.
 
From “Revenge” to Collective Punishment
Following October 7, the Israeli government launched a large-scale war in Gaza. The scale of killing, destruction, displacement, and deprivation of basic necessities went far beyond a limited military operation against armed groups.In 2024, the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry reported that Israeli operations in Gaza involved war crimes and crimes against humanity, including murder, extermination, forcible transfer, torture, and the use of starvation as a method of warfare. The same Commission also identified Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups as responsible for war crimes committed during the October 7 attack. In September 2025, the same Commission went a step further, concluding that, based on its investigation, Israel had committed genocide in Gaza. This is a finding by a UN Commission of Inquiry; it is not the same as a final ruling by the International Court of Justice in the genocide case, and the two should not be conflated. South Africa's case against Israel remains before the International Court of Justice. In November 2024, the International Criminal Court also issued arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity. These decisions, however, do not constitute final convictions; they are part of an ongoing international judicial process.
 
 An Anarchist Is Neither a Supporter of the Israeli State nor of a Palestinian State
This is where the difference between an anarchist perspective and many prevailing narratives becomes clear. Anarchism fundamentally opposes turning human beings into soldiers serving a state. From this perspective:

• The State of Israel, even if it regards the protection of its citizens as its responsibility, has no right to pursue security through mass killing and military domination over another people.
• Hamas, even if it describes itself as a resistance movement, has no right to kill civilians or take hostages in the name of the Palestinian people. No state, army, or armed organization owns human lives.
• “National security” cannot be used to justify depriving millions of people of their freedom and dignity.
• The suffering of one community must never become an excuse for repressing another.
• Victims must not be turned into soldiers serving state ideologies.From this perspective, the binary choice between “Israel or Hamas” is fundamentally incomplete.

 
The anarchist questions are:

• What does an Israeli living in fear of rockets and attacks want?
• What does a Palestinian living under siege, occupation, and displacement want?

 Before belonging to any community, both are human beings.
 
 After the Ceasefire: Has the War Really Ended?
The October 2025 ceasefire brought an end to the large-scale war, but it did not put an end to violence. A September 2026 UN report states that the ceasefire remains fragile, Israeli attacks continue, large parts of Gaza remain subject to severe access restrictions, and reconstruction is proceeding on a scale far below what the population needs. According to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), between the announcement of the ceasefire on October 10, 2025, and September 2026, at least 1,402 Palestinians were killed and 4,881 injured in Gaza. These figures are attributed to Gaza's Ministry of Health and do not encompass all the consequences of the war and the destruction it has caused. The situation in the West Bank is no different. Settler violence, home demolitions, restrictions on movement, settlement expansion, and the forced displacement of Palestinians continue. The United Nations has reported that in 2026, an average of approximately 17 Palestinians were displaced every day as a result of settler violence and demolitions — twice the average recorded in previous years.
Therefore, a “ceasefire” does not necessarily mean “freedom” or “peace.”
The sound of bombardment may diminish, but as long as domination, occupation, discrimination, siege, settlement expansion, imprisonment, military borders, and structural poverty remain in place, the conditions that reproduce violence will remain as well.
 
 The Problem Is Not Just War; It Is the Structure of PowerAnarchism compels us to take a step back and examine the bigger picture.
States usually say:

• “We need an army to protect your security.”

The military says:

• “We need more weapons to defend you.”

Politicians say:

• “You must give the state more power to confront the enemy.”

And ultimately, ordinary people, both Israeli and Palestinian, pay the price of this cycle with their lives, homes, freedom, and future.
 Under such circumstances, each side can present the other side’s crimes as evidence that it needs even more power.Hamas says: Occupation and repression exist; therefore, armed resistance is necessary.The Israeli government says: Hamas and other armed groups exist; therefore, a military and military control are necessary.And this cycle can continue for generations. Power justifies its own violence through the violence of the opposing side.This is one of the most fundamental lessons that an anarchist perspective can draw from this catastrophe.
 
 
A Third Way: Beyond StatesAnarchism does not necessarily mean indifference to the security of Israelis or the rights of Palestinians. On the contrary, it can demand security for both, but a form of security that is not built upon the domination of one group by another.The path that deserves serious consideration is one based on direct cooperation among people, democratic local councils, trade unions, mutual-aid networks, women's groups, peace activists, human rights defenders, anti-war movements, and all those who refuse to reduce human beings merely to “Israeli,” “Palestinian,” “Jewish,” “Muslim,” or “enemy.”Movements for Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions — BDS — can also be examined from this perspective: as efforts to exert pressure from below rather than send human beings onto battlefields. However, even these movements are compatible with anarchist ethics only as long as they do not turn into hatred of Jews, Palestinians, or any ethnic or religious group.If the cycle of violence is ever to be genuinely broken, the demand must go beyond “Israel's victory” or “Palestine's victory.” It must be something much deeper:

• An end to the killing of civilians.
• The release of hostages and prisoners, with their rights respected.
• An end to occupation and military domination.
• An end to the siege and collective punishment.
• An end to settlement expansion and forced displacement.
• The right of return or fair compensation for displaced people, within a framework that recognizes the rights of all inhabitants.
• Full legal and political equality for all human beings, regardless of ethnicity or religion.

And, most importantly:

• The right of people to determine their own destiny, without states, armies, or armed organizations deciding that destiny on their behalf.

From an anarchist perspective, the issue is not to prove that “these people are good and those people are bad.”
The issue is to understand how states, armies, nationalist ideologies, and armed organizations trap ordinary people in a cycle in which every death becomes an excuse for the next. October 7 cannot be separated from the history of occupation, displacement, and repression. But the history of occupation cannot justify the deliberate killing of civilians or hostage-taking either. Likewise, the crimes of October 7 cannot justify the killing, starvation, displacement, and collective punishment of millions of Palestinians.
If we are to escape the cycle of revenge, we must also move beyond the logic of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” A peace achieved solely through the victory of one army over another is not the peace of the people. Real peace begins when no child has to be sacrificed so that another can live freely.
And perhaps the fundamental question here is this:

• How can we build a society in which people's security comes not from the barrels of state guns, but from freedom, equality, mutual aid, solidarity, and the organized collective power of the people themselves?

 
 
Conclusion: No to States, Yes to Human Beings
From an anarchist perspective, choosing between Israel and Hamas means choosing between two armed powers; it does not necessarily mean choosing between two paths to liberation.
We can:

• Condemn the killing of civilians on October 7.
• Condemn hostage-taking.
• Condemn occupation and settlement expansion.
• Condemn the collective punishment of Gaza's population.
• Condemn violence against Palestinian and Israeli civilians.
• And, at the same time, refuse to turn any state or armed organization into an idol.
• No to antisemitism.
• No to hatred of Palestinians.
• No to extreme nationalism.
• No to terrorism.
• No to occupation.
• No to apartheid and discrimination.
• No to collective punishment.
• No to the glorification of armies and war.

And yes to:

• Freedom, equality, solidarity, self-determination, and the equal dignity of all human beings.

Anarchism has never sought to replace one flag with another. Instead, it asks us to consider: Why should a human being have to possess a state in order to be free? Perhaps the way out of this cycle is not the victory of one community over another, but the creation of a society in which no state, army, armed organization, or ideology can turn human beings into instruments of its own power.

• An Israeli life lost is no less human than a Palestinian life lost.
• And as long as human lives are not valued equally, no victory can truly be a victory for humanity.

 
Original Link:

• Telegram Channel: https://t.me/AnarchistFront_English
• Image Link: https://t.me/AnarchistFront_English/1288
• Post Link: https://t.me/AnarchistFront_English/1289