“Voluntary Starvation” and the Death of International Conscience
Gaza and the Calculus of Ethnic Supremacy
The War Behind the Euphemisms
Let us begin with first principles.
It is not humanitarian to control aid at gunpoint. It is not “neutral” to starve a population while negotiating their surrender. And it is not “security” to force civilians from their land by making life unlivable. These are not military strategies. They are policies of ethnic cleansing, dressed up for polite society in the hollow wardrobe of “counterterrorism.”
We have entered a new phase in Gaza. And let there be no mistake: it is not a phase of war. It is a phase of erasure.
“To engineer hunger is not to win a war. It is to lose one’s soul.”
The Evidence on the Record
This week, the Israeli government moved from siege to conquest. With quiet approval, and not-so-quiet declarations from far-right ministers, the Netanyahu cabinet endorsed a full military occupation of Gaza. Not a temporary buffer. Not a conditional incursion. A conquest. Their words, not mine.
And as part of this plan—this calculated, deliberate, meticulously bureaucratized plan—the government announced that it would assume control of all aid entering the Strip. The Israeli military, joined by private security contractors, will oversee food distribution to a population of more than two million people, 70 percent of whom are displaced, half of whom are children, and thousands of whom are already starving to death.
Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, a man whose very presence in government would once have been scandalous, said the quiet part out loud: “The only aid that should enter Gaza is aid for voluntary migration.” He added—without shame, without nuance—that “no food, no electricity, no other aid should be allowed… not even by the [Israeli army].” This, while proposing the bombing of food warehouses and generators.
These are not slips of the tongue. These are policy positions. This is a government whose actions are not incidental but intentional. And no amount of diplomatic phrasing will sanitize them.
Let Us Call Things What They Are
There is a reason tyrannies throughout history have feared plain speech. Precision strips power from propaganda. It collapses the euphemism. So let us be precise.
When a government uses starvation to pressure civilians into displacement, it is not “negotiating a ceasefire.”
When it controls humanitarian aid to extract political concessions, it is not “coordinating relief.”
When it renders civilian zones uninhabitable to encourage population flight, it is not “clearing battlefields.”
And when it does so against a population already besieged, bombarded, and buried under rubble, it is not “security.” It is ethnic cleansing.
Yes, the term is heavy. It is supposed to be. Because the crime is grave. And the international system—already tattered by inaction—is being tested once again.
“This is not military strategy. This is ethnic policy masquerading as doctrine.”
A Doctrine of Supremacy, Not Security
Netanyahu and his cabinet are no longer managing a war. They are engineering a future. And that future is built on demographic redesign.
By proposing the full “holding” of Gaza, the Israeli state is not only ignoring the principle of proportionality—it is dismantling it. The conquest of a civilian population is not a military operation. It is a political project. A colonial one.
There is now open discussion in the Israeli political sphere—among lawmakers, cabinet ministers, and think tank architects—of “resettlement zones,” “voluntary transfer corridors,” and “security administrations” that answer only to Israeli command. They speak of “rebuilding Gaza,” but only after Gaza has been erased.
And let us not forget: this is not a war on Hamas. Hamas is a pretext. Gaza is the target. Palestinian presence is the problem. And displacement is the solution.
Humanitarian Blackmail
The use of food as leverage is not a moral gray area. It is illegal. And it is evil.
International law is not unclear. The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits collective punishment. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court includes starvation of civilians as a method of warfare under Article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of war crimes. And yet, here we are—in 2025—watching food shipments delayed, denied, and weaponized to achieve political objectives.
This is not an accusation. It is an observation. And it is happening with such clarity, such deliberate design, that the question is no longer “if” this is ethnic cleansing. The question is: what will be done about it?
To date, the answer is chilling: nothing.
The UN, to Its Credit, Refused
The United Nations Humanitarian Country Team (HCT) in Gaza has rejected Israel’s proposed system of military-controlled aid distribution. Their position is unequivocal: no aid should be delivered under coercive military conditions. No international organization should legitimize a process designed to control, manipulate, and ultimately displace the very civilians it purports to help.
Their statement warns of a dangerous precedent. It is more than a warning. It is a line in the sand. But lines, if not held, are easily washed away.
“No credible actor should call it humanitarian aid when it is handed out under the shadow of an occupying soldier’s rifle.”
The Flour Massacre Was a Preview
One might remember the so-called “Flour Massacre” of February 2024, when Israeli forces opened fire on hungry Palestinians gathered around food trucks. Over 100 people were killed. The trucks had been coordinated by private contractors—outside the purview of the UN or Red Crescent. The result was chaos, carnage, and complete impunity.
That event was not an aberration. It was a test balloon.
When no international consequences followed, Israel understood the lesson: it could bypass international frameworks, establish its own aid mechanisms, and control not just food—but life itself.
The Global Stakes: What Happens After Gaza?
If the conquest and subjugation of two million people is permitted in one place, it can be justified in others. If food can be weaponized once, it can be again.
There is no such thing as “localized impunity.” Once the law is broken without consequence, it is not broken locally—it is broken globally.
Gaza is the tip of the spear. The broader project is demographic supremacy. And that project, whether advanced by bombs or bureaucrats, is incompatible with any claim to liberal democracy.
Shame on the 80th Anniversary
As we mark the 80th anniversary of the defeat of fascism in Europe—of that long, bloody campaign to bury supremacist ideologies that saw entire populations exterminated—we must ask what it means that in 2025, ethnic cleansing is being broadcast live and met with little more than murmurs of “restraint.”
It is no coincidence. It is a regression.
To starve civilians while commemorating the end of fascism is not just shameful. It is obscene. It exposes the gap between memory and moral action. The world swore it would “never again” allow atrocity to march forward under flags of legitimacy. And yet, here we are, watching it dressed in fatigues, issuing press releases, and rationing bread.
The Cowardice of Complicity
The governments that claim to defend human rights—those that speak grandly of international norms, rule-based orders, and universal values—have so far said little. They have watched as one of the most densely populated civilian territories on earth is reduced to rubble, and now to hunger.
Why? Because to speak plainly would mean acknowledging the crime. And to acknowledge the crime would require confronting the criminal.
Final Note … The Moral Verdict
What is happening in Gaza is not an Israeli “mistake.” It is a choice.
It is not a failure of diplomacy. It is a triumph of supremacist ideology.
It is not a lapse in strategy. It is the strategy.
And history will not excuse those who equivocated while it unfolded.
Gaza is not asking for favors. It is demanding what international law already promises: protection of civilians, delivery of aid, respect for life, and an end to starvation as statecraft.
Let us not pretend this is complicated. It is not. What is happening in Gaza today is an atrocity foretold, declared, and televised.
If the international community does not act, then it will not merely be a bystander to ethnic cleansing. It will be its sponsor.
“Bread may be withheld, but dignity cannot be devoured.”
