by Elisa Garfagna
On October 16, the killing of Yahya Sinwar, leader of Hamas, by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) marked a crucial moment in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This event occurs within a broader historical and political context that calls to mind Hannah Arendt’s reflections on totalitarianism and the atrocities committed by Adolf Hitler. Exploring the commonalities between the Nazi regime and Hamas, despite their differing historical and geographical contexts, reveals shared characteristics that warrant attention.
Hannah Arendt, in her seminal work “The Origins of Totalitarianism,” describes how totalitarian ideologies take root in societies marked by instability and resentment. According to Arendt, totalitarianism feeds on fear, terror, and the dehumanization of the enemy. Hitler’s Nazi regime, founded on an ideology of Aryan supremacy and anti-Semitism, manipulated resentment to justify oppression and genocide. Similarly, Hamas promotes an ideology that denies Israel’s right to exist, based on an extremist view of Islam that dehumanizes its adversaries.
Both movements utilize propaganda as a tool for manipulation. The Nazi regime, through state-controlled media, spread anti-Semitism and extreme nationalism, while Hamas exploits similar means to propagate its ideology and recruit followers, distorting reality to justify violence. The dehumanization of the enemy is another shared trait. The Nazis stripped Jews and other minority groups of their humanity to justify the atrocities of genocide. In the same vein, Hamas dehumanizes Israelis, legitimizing violence against them as a form of resistance.
Terror remains central to maintaining control. In the Nazi regime, the Gestapo and concentration camps served to instill fear, while Hamas resorts to terrorism and missile attacks not only to threaten Israel but also to consolidate its power among Palestinians.
The resolution of the conflict with the Nazi regime came through a combination of military force and subsequent rebuilding and reconciliation. Military defeat was necessary to dismantle the Nazi war machine and put an end to genocide. However, true peace was achieved through the reconstruction of Europe and the promotion of democratic values and human rights.
Applying these lessons to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict highlights the need to address Hamas not only through security measures but also through strategies that promote long-term stability and peace. Targeted defensive interventions, such as the killing of Sinwar, must be part of a broader framework aimed at reducing Hamas’s operational capacity. It is crucial to identify moderate and impartial Palestinian leaders willing to engage in constructive dialogue and work toward peaceful coexistence.
The post-war reconstruction of Europe, facilitated by the Marshall Plan, offers a model for similar investments in Palestinian territories, which could decrease support for extremist groups like Hamas, improve quality of life, and foster a culture of peace. While the context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is unique, the lessons learned from the defeat of Nazism and subsequent reconstruction provide valuable guidance. Israel’s fight against extremism must be accompanied by efforts to promote stability, peace, and coexistence, building a safer future for all parties involved. As Hannah Arendt stated: “Evil is never ‘radical,’ but only extreme; it has no depth and no demonic dimension. It can grow and devastate the whole world precisely because it spreads like a fungus on the surface. It ‘challenges’ thought, because thought seeks to reach depth, to go to the roots, and when it tries to confront evil, it is frustrated because it finds nothing. This is its ‘banality.’ Only good is profound and can be radical.”