Losing our instinct for danger
Radicalisation is not merely political; it is deeply rooted in Jew-hatred, a core pillar of Hamas's doctrine.
The world is once again confronted with a horrifying reminder of what happens when we ignore the obvious: the brutal murder of the Bibas family in Gaza. The tragic fate of this beautiful young family, whose images have haunted our collective conscience since October 7, is not an aberration—it is a direct consequence of Gaza’s radicalization and the global reluctance to acknowledge this reality.
For decades, the international community has chosen to believe in the illusion that a meaningful distinction exists between civilians and combatants in Gaza. The truth, however, is starkly different and becoming increasingly problematic to deny. Hamas does not merely govern Gaza—it is Gaza. The indoctrination, the glorification of martyrdom, and the eradication of dissenting voices have ensured that radical jihadist ideology is not just prevalent but fundamental to life in Gaza. This radicalisation is not merely political; it is deeply rooted in Jew-hatred, a core pillar of Hamas’s doctrine.
A Firsthand Account of Radicalisation
In a poignant reflection on her harrowing experience, Mia Schem, a 21-year-old French-Israeli woman abducted during the October 7, 2023, Nova music festival massacre, shared chilling insights into the pervasive indoctrination within Gaza. After enduring 54 days of captivity, Schem recounted being held in a confined space, often taunted by young children who, despite their tender ages, exhibited deep-seated animosity. She observed that even the youngest members of Gazan society are inculcated with extremist ideologies, leading her to conclude, “Everyone there are terrorists… there are no innocent civilians, not one.”
Initially, Schem’s statements upon release suggested she was treated with care; however, she later clarified that these remarks were coerced by her captors for propaganda purposes. Her subsequent accounts underscore the psychological manipulation and the extent of radicalization present, even among children in Gaza. Schem’s experiences highlight the profound challenges in distinguishing between combatants and non-combatants in such an environment, raising critical questions about the societal structures that perpetuate such pervasive hostility and Jew-hatred.
I was initially sceptical upon hearing Schem’s accounts. However, as days turned into months and now years, with no signs of moderation or softening of radical Islam in Gaza—or within Australia’s local Muslim community, for that matter—I find myself re-evaluating my earlier perspective.
Without Precedent: The Radicalisation of an Entire Society
Throughout history, barbarian hordes have threatened the survival of civilizations—whether it was the Vandals sacking Rome, the Huns sweeping across Europe, or the Visigoths dismantling the remnants of classical antiquity. These peoples, often painted as ruthless invaders, wielded brutality as a weapon, yet their violence was driven by conquest, not by an ideology that consumed their entire societies from infancy to adulthood. The thorough radicalisation of the Gazan population, including its youth, has no clear historical parallel.
Unlike past barbarian tribes, who waged war to gain territory and resources, Gaza’s radicalisation is ideological, absolute, and multi-generational. This transformation has not occurred through the natural ebb and flow of tribal warfare but has been accelerated by the modern information age—an era in which propaganda spreads faster than armies ever could. Put simply, we have enabled this by incentivising and rewarding bad behaviour. It is an uncomfortable truth that the West must confront; we have played a direct role in cultivating this extremism.
Through decades of funding institutions like UNRWA, Western taxpayers have unknowingly financed the indoctrination of an entire generation, ensuring that hatred—especially Jew-hatred—is not merely sustained but deeply institutionalised. From Gazan kindergartens teaching martyrdom to West Bank clerics preaching genocidal rhetoric, the extremism we now face is, in part, a product of our own misguided benevolence. This is not just a regional crisis; it is a stark warning of what happens when societies unwittingly finance their own destruction.
International Humanitarian Law and the Radicalization of Gaza
International law is clear about what transforms a civilian into a combatant. Under the Geneva Conventions, civilians lose their protected status when they take direct part in hostilities. But what constitutes direct participation? Does it extend to those who aid combatants before or after an attack? What about those who take or imprison hostages, serve as lookouts, or facilitate military operations? The legal consensus is that individuals who knowingly contribute to the war effort—whether by transporting fighters, relaying intelligence, supplying weapons, or providing logistical support—may forfeit civilian protections.
Likewise, when a mosque, school, or UN facility is repurposed to store weapons, coordinate attacks, or shelter combatants, it ceases to be a protected site and becomes a legitimate military target under international law. The presence of civilians, including children, in such locations does not automatically reinstate their protected status if the site is actively used for military purposes. These principles reinforce that the true responsibility for endangering civilian lives lies not with those enforcing the laws of war, but with those who systematically violate them by embedding their forces among non-combatants, using human shields, and weaponizing civilian infrastructure.
The principle of proportionality dictates that military responses must not inflict excessive harm relative to the military advantage gained. Legal scholar Natasha Hausdorff emphasizes, “Proportionality does not mean an equal response; it requires that the force used is necessary and not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.”
The Radicalisation of Gaza is Total
The murder of the Bibas family compels us to ask: What does it say about a society when such horrors are not condemned but celebrated? What does it mean when a population cheers the abduction of children?
Douglas Murray, one of the most lucid commentators of our time, has long warned against the West’s naive engagement with radical Islamists. “The problem,” he states, “is not just the people with guns and bombs, but the ideology that supports them.”
Andrew Fox, a former British military officer, echoes this concern. “We have been conditioned to second-guess ourselves, to silence our gut reactions in the name of tolerance and diversity,” Fox observes. But misplaced tolerance has lethal consequences.
The West Must Regain Its Instinct for Danger
The survival of Western civilisation depends on our ability to recognize and confront threats as they truly are, not as we wish them to be. The murder of the Bibas family is not just another tragedy—it is a warning. If we continue to suppress our instinct for self-preservation, we will condemn ourselves to a future far darker than we dare imagine. The time for illusions is over.
Michael Scott CSC is the CEO and Founder of the 2023 Foundation, a charity focused on combating antisemitism and fostering peaceful coexistence.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not reflect the positions of the Australian Defence Force or the Commonwealth Government of Australia.
comments