Phalapoem editor, 6/8/26
History is often described as humanity’s greatest teacher. We say “never again” because we believe that remembering suffering should make us more compassionate, more restrained, and more determined to protect human dignity. But history also confronts us with difficult and uncomfortable questions.
How does an occupied people defend themselves against a state they believe is oppressing them, when that state emerged from one of history’s greatest tragedies?
For many people watching the conflict in Israeli apartheid and occupied Palestine, this question lies at the heart of a profound moral dilemma.
The Holocaust remains one of the darkest chapters in human history. Six million Jews were systematically murdered by Nazi Germany, alongside millions of other victims. Remembering this atrocity is essential, not only to honour those who died but to remind future generations of the consequences of racism, dehumanisation, and unchecked power.
Yet history does not grant any nation permanent moral immunity from criticism.
Across the world, growing numbers of human rights organisations, legal scholars, and international bodies have raised serious concerns about Israel’s racist and inhumane policies towards Palestinians. Some, including organisations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have described the system as apartheid. The humanitarian consequences of decades of illegal occupation, ethnic cleansing , and repeated cycles of massacres and genocide have become impossible to ignore.
For Palestinians living under apartheid and enduring war, the debate is not merely academic. It is about checkpoints, restrictions on movement, demolished homes, fear, bereavement, and uncertainty about the future.
Supporting Palestinian rights does not require denying Jewish history or diminishing the suffering of Holocaust victims. Likewise, acknowledging Jewish suffering should never prevent honest discussion about the treatment of Palestinians or scrutiny of government policies. Criticism of a state’s actions is not the same as hostility towards an entire people.
Perhaps the most difficult question is whether suffering always teaches empathy.
History suggests that it does not. Communities that have experienced unimaginable trauma can still become fearful, defensive, or convinced that extraordinary measures are justified to ensure their survival. Trauma can inspire compassion, but it can also reinforce insecurity. This is not unique to any one nation; it is a recurring pattern throughout history.
The true lesson of the Holocaust should not be that one people deserves protection more than another. It should be that no people should ever be dehumanised, dispossessed, or denied their fundamental rights.
Human rights cannot depend on nationality, ethnicity, religion, or political allegiance. They must apply equally to everyone or they lose much of their moral force.
The question, then, is not simply how an occupied people can defend themselves. It is how the international community can uphold justice while protecting civilians , ensuring accountability for violations of international law, and working towards a future in where Palestinians can live freely without occupation.
How could anyone justify the Israeli destruction of Gaza and the slaughter of more than 73 thousands people including 20000 children? How could the world just watch this ongoing genocide and the settlers’ terrorism protected by Israeli army in the West Bank ? How could the western countries still refuse to sanction this rougue state to stop its racist policies? Israeli security cannot be achieved by killing innocent civilians and destroying their houses. This is criminal behaviour and should be immediately stopped and punished.
History belongs to all humanity. Its purpose is not to justify new suffering but to prevent it.
If “never again” is to mean anything, it must mean never again for anyone.
