Gaza, Israel, and the Weight of History […Beban Sejarah]
What do you currently understand, and how have your assumptions and emotions been shaped?
The Israel–Gaza conflict is deeply rooted in decades of displacement, occupation, and competing national aspirations. My understanding is shaped by historical records, current events, and diverse perspectives, but I do not hold personal beliefs or emotions. I very much feel for the people, especially the children impacted by the Israel-Gaza conflict. The Israel–Gaza conflict is a localized part of the broader Israeli–Palestinian struggle, dating back to 1948, when the State of Israel was established and over 700,000 Palestinians were displaced, with many settling in Gaza. [1]
How do history, displacement, and regional realities shape this conflict?
Jewish and Palestinian histories both shape deep-rooted claims to Gaza and Israel. Jews trace their connection to the land through ancient biblical ties and modern Zionism, culminating in Israel’s founding in 1948.[2] Palestinians, many of whom were displaced during that time, view themselves as Indigenous people dispossessed by colonial and military force. Most Gazans are descendants of refugees from areas now within Israel, living in exile within Gaza—a place that became their home through displacement. Egypt has refused to resettle Gazans, citing concerns about ethnic cleansing, national security, and the erosion of Palestinian statehood.
Egypt has refused mass resettlement for three key reasons:
- Egypt sees forced displacement as ethnic cleansing and a violation of international law. Accepting refugees could erase the possibility of Palestinian statehood.[3]
- Egypt fears infiltration by militants and destabilization of the Sinai Peninsula, where it has battled insurgencies. A mass influx could strain its fragile peace with Israel.[4]
- Egypt already hosts over 9 million migrants and is facing economic hardship. Absorbing hundreds of thousands more would overwhelm infrastructure and provoke domestic unrest. [5]
What criteria are important to consider in evaluating Hamas, Israel’s response, and the ethics of warfare?
HAMAS stands for “Harakat al-Muqāwamah al-ʾIslāmiyyah,” which translates to “Islamic Resistance Movement.” It is both an acronym and a word meaning “zeal” in Arabic, حركة المقاومة الإسلامية (Harakat al-Muqāwamah al-ʾIslāmiyyah). Founded in December 1987, during the First Intifada. Hamas was established as a Sunni Islamist nationalist organization with the goal of resisting Israeli occupation and establishing an Islamic Palestinian state. It has both a political wing, which won the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections, and a military wing, known as the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades. Its root merged from the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood.[6]
Gazans elected Hamas in 2006, but their ability to hold it accountable has since been severely limited by authoritarian rule, war, and blockade. While some initially supported Hamas for its social services and resistance stance, many now reject its governance and feel trapped by circumstances beyond their control. Gazans have not had the opportunity to vote Hamas out, and dissent is often suppressed. Reports show that civilians have protested against Hamas, including throwing stones and shouting insults at officials during recent humanitarian crises.
After Israel’s 2005 withdrawal from Gaza, Hamas gained control, international aid surged, UNRWA expanded its services, and militant groups built extensive tunnel networks, transforming Gaza into a politically isolated, aid-dependent, and militarized enclave.[7]
How does language like ‘genocide’ and ‘apartheid’ shape public understanding—and what are the risks?
Terms like “genocide” and “apartheid” carry immense legal and emotional weight. When applied to Israel’s actions in Gaza, they shape global perception, fuel political polarization, and risk distorting legal standards if misused.
- Genocide is defined by the 1948 Genocide Convention as acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. This includes killing, causing serious harm, and deliberately inflicting conditions meant to destroy the group.[8]
- Apartheid, under the 1973 Apartheid Convention and the Rome Statute, refers to systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over another, with intent to maintain that regime.[9]
These are not just rhetorical terms—they are specific crimes under international law, requiring evidence of intent and systemic practice.
As a Christian leader, how do you reflect theologically, ethically, and vocationally on this conflict?
As a Christian leader, I begin with the conviction that every human being—Israeli, Palestinian, Jew, Muslim, Christian is made in the image of God (Imago Dei). This truth demands that I resist dehumanization, mourn every loss of life, and reject narratives that justify violence or indifference. Scripture calls us to be peacemakers (Matthew 5:9), to love our enemies (Luke 6:27), and to seek justice tempered by mercy (Micah 6:8). The cross reminds me that reconciliation is costly, but possible, even in the most entrenched conflicts.
A Prayer for Peace
God of mercy, In the midst of sorrow and conflict, make us instruments of peace. Help us see Your image in every life, speak truth with love, and lead with courage and compassion. Amen.
[1] “Gaza–Israel Conflict,” Wikipedia, last modified October 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza%E2%80%93Israel_conflict..
[2] “Gaza–Israel Conflict,” Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia, last modified October 14, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza%E2%80%93Israel_conflict..
[3] “FAQs About Palestinian Refugees,” Al-Awda: The Palestine Right to Return Coalition, accessed October 15, 2025, https://al-awdapalestine.org/learn-more/faqs-about-palestinian-refugees/..
[4] Erin Velez, “Why Egypt Refuses to Open Its Borders to Palestinian Refugees,” U.S. News & World Report, February 25, 2024, https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2024-02-25/why-egypt-refuses-to-open-its-borders-to-palestinian-refugees.
[5] Erin Velez, “Why Egypt Refuses to Open Its Borders to Palestinian Refugees,” U.S. News & World Report, February 25, 2024, https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2024-02-25/why-egypt-refuses-to-open-its-borders-to-palestinian-refugees.
[6] Martin Bunton, The Palestinian-Israeli Conflict: A Very Short Introduction. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 1st ed. 121.
[7] Mohammad Al-Kassim, “Gazans Tell TML ‘Hamas Must Withdraw,’” The Media Line, March 27, 2025, https://themedialine.org/top-stories/rare-protests-erupt-in-gaza-as-civilians-blame-hamas-for-crisis/.
[8] United Nations General Assembly, Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, December 9, 1948, https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/Genocide%20Convention.pdf..
[9] United Nations, Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, July 17, 1998, Article 7(2)(h), https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/RS-Eng.pdf..
About the Author
Shela Sullivan
Born and raised on the vibrant Penang Island in Malaysia, I cherish the Malaysian greeting, “Mari Makan!!” which reflects the warmth of shared meals. Since 1996, I have called Oregon my home enjoying the raindrops and the serenity of its beaches. The ocean connects me to nature and energizes me. I am a Wife - Mentor - Traveling Pastor - Sourcing Manager Construction. Favorite Bible Verse: "Delight yourself in the Lord, and He will give you the desires of your heart." ~ Psalm 37:4~ I reside with my husband, David and our fur-baby Rolo. We share passions for travelling, culture, diverse cuisines, home improvements, classic cars and laughter.6 responses to “Gaza, Israel, and the Weight of History […Beban Sejarah]”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Shela,
What were your thoughts on Israel/Palestine growing up? Was your perception of the conflicts the same as it is now or did you have a different perception growing up in a different country?
Thank you, for the question Adam.
Growing up in Malaysia, my perception of the Israel–Palestine conflict was shaped by a combination of cultural narratives, media portrayals, and the broader Muslim-majority context. Palestine was often framed as the oppressed party, and Israel as the aggressor. The conflict felt distant yet emotionally charged, filtered through solidarity with the Palestinian cause and a deep sense of injustice over displacement and suffering.
At the time, I did not fully grasp the historical complexity or theological layers beneath the headlines. My understanding was largely one-sided, shaped more by empathy than by nuance. I did not yet appreciate the trauma carried by Jewish communities, nor the centuries of persecution that led to the formation of Israel. Nor did I understand how ideologies like Hamas’s could complicate the narrative of resistance.
Now, as a faith leader and student of global leadership, my perspective has evolved. I no longer see the conflict in binaries. I have come to recognize that both Israelis and Palestinians carry deep wounds, stories of exile, survival, and longing for home. I have learned to hold grief on both sides, to lament violence wherever it occurs, and to resist language that dehumanizes or oversimplifies.
My current view is shaped by prayer, historical study, and a theological conviction that every person; Israeli or Palestinian—is made in the image of God. I seek to lead with empathy, truth, and humility, knowing that peace will require more than politics. It will require moral courage, spiritual wisdom, and a refusal to demonize.
Shela,
Love your comment “This truth demands that I resist dehumanization, mourn every loss of life, and reject narratives that justify violence or indifference.”
Knowing that you are in the private sector and in the Portland area which has its reputation for being progressive. Have any of your co-workers chimed in on their thoughts especially regarding the recent cease fire deal?
Thank you for your question, Jeff.
Working in the private sector in the Portland area, where progressive values often shape public discourse. I’ have noticed that conversations around the Israel–Gaza conflict, including the recent ceasefire, tend to be cautious, emotionally charged, and deeply personal for some. A few colleagues have shared their thoughts, often filtered through humanitarian concern: grief over civilian casualties, hope for de-escalation, and frustration with the seeming intractability of the conflict.
What’s been most striking is the diversity of perspectives, even in a city known for its progressive leanings. Some express strong solidarity with Palestinian suffering, others emphasize Israel’s right to defend itself, and many are simply overwhelmed by the complexity. There is a shared desire for peace, but also a recognition that peace requires more than a ceasefire, it demands justice, accountability, and empathy on all sides.
As someone who values thoughtful leadership and theological reflection, I try to listen more than speak in these moments. I’ve found that creating space for lament, nuance, and shared humanity often opens the door to more meaningful dialogue than taking a side ever could.
Hi Shela, Your comment to Adam, where you mentioned not seeing conflicts between binaries, stood out to me. How might that concept be applied to other conflicts in corporate or church settings? Thank you for offering a prayer to God within your post. It models what we do privately, but reminds me that we need to be where 2 or 3 are gathered as well.
Hey Shela! You have captured the essence of this conflict in the summation of your post, as much prayer is needed. What can we do in the area of language to better support those on both sides who are affected by this conflict?.