We need to hold a discussion about collateral damage

Avi Shilon argues that the documentary about Gaza, which won the Venice Film Festival, requires a public discussion in Israel about the costs of the war in Gaza, even if the act itself is repulsive. He distinguishes between support for Hamas and a legitimate moral question about Israeli action, and calls for not settling for ready-made answers.

Avi Shilon argues in his article that the documentary about Gaza, which won the Venice Film Festival, requires a public discussion in Israel about the costs of the war in Gaza, even if the act itself is morally, emotionally, and nationally repulsive. He distinguishes between support for Hamas and a legitimate moral question about Israeli action, and compares the required discussion to the public debate that developed after the War of Independence about the wrongs committed in it. Shilon calls for not settling for ready-made answers, and argues that both possibilities – that the war justified cruelty, or that it should have been conducted with greater restraint – are open for discussion. He criticizes the filmmakers for sending the film to an international festival at a time of rising antisemitism, and for ignoring the question of all questions: whether it was possible to fight Hamas without causing collateral damage, especially given that Hamas itself sought to exploit collateral damage. Shilon also criticizes their call to abolish Israel's qualitative edge over the Palestinians as hypocritical, arguing that in the broader circle against the Muslim world, Israel is a minority that must preserve its advantage. He concludes that the correct approach is to ignore the film, which does not represent the reality in all its layers, but to ask what we have done and to what extent we are at peace with everything we have done.