The Relevance of King Solomon’s Judgement On the Hamas Held Hostages

Peloni

King Solomon judges two harlots who claim the same child. By Binyamin – Facsimile Editions, Public Domain

My instinctive response to the insightful question raised by Dianne Bederman in her essay, “What would King Solomon do [notably in regards to the dilemma of the hostages held and tortured by Hamas]”, is to recall that, while making his judgement over the fate of the child claimed as the son of two women, Solomon was dealing with a simple dispute between two parties, each of whom were his own subjects, and neither of whom represented an existential threat to his reign nor to the whole of his people. Indeed, judicial decrees which seem reasonable and relevant in the context of civil disputes, or even those of a criminal nature, should not be understood to be well disposed towards being applied to international affairs involving existential threats to both a single nation nor to civilization itself, as is objectively and honestly the reality being considered as to how best to deal with the threat extending from Hamas towards Israel and Western Civilization. In fact, Solomon’s decision was based on the grasp of human psychology in determining the single truth of which woman was the child’s mother, the solution of which would not affect anyone beyond the relevant parties and the child in question.

Consequently, in approaching the question of what would Solomon do regarding the hostage dilemma, we must appreciate that Israel is at war and that the outcome of this war will affect every citizen in Israel, and many beyond her borders. Indeed, it is impossible to argue that civilization is, itself, not under threat from any victory which might arise from the manipulation of those hostage families who advocate for Israel to surrender to the savages which now hold their loved ones in their grip. Furthermore, the threat emanating from Gaza is not, itself, limited to Gaza, as it is but one of many proxy forces of Iran, and Hamas’ own political leadership have been additionally well sheltered by the venomous Qatari state, whose corrosive corruption extends into the institutions and political leaders of many western nations.

Recall that war itself is the undoing of civilized norms, even as it is an undertaking to preserve civilization. So what would normally seem abhorrent and unacceptable, such as ordering a force of men to use every advantage while eliminating an opposing force of men without regard for the relevant niceties which would be routine in any court of law, should be understood to be both necessary and routine in the context of fighting a war. And yet the reality of the plight of the hostages remains both too raw and too relevant within the Israeli public’s consciousness, in such a way which is neither politically feasible nor publicly acceptable to easily ignore.

So, while I can not venture to consider what steps might be taken by Solomon, a king whose reign was exclusively marked by peace as the inheritance of his father’s reign of many wars, I believe the answer which seems most reasonable is to isolate Gaza, cutting it off from any and all aid, while addressing the greater war which faces Israel from Iran. Indeed, eliminating the threat center in Iran will in large part, if not entirely, act to destabilize and shaken what remains of Hamas into reconsidering their well established resolve to not release a single captive, dead or alive, without exacting a painful price to Israel. Notably, during these past 18months, Hamas has never been isolated. It has had the unequivocal military support of Iran and its many proxies, as well as the duplicitous diplomatic support from the US Democratic leadership, as well as the Sunni nations all advocating on behalf of the preservation of Hamas and the restraint of Israel being limited to only a defensive response to the barbarism standing against them.

With the change of leadership in the US having led to the election of a far more sympathetic leader in Trump, should the metaphorical head of the radical Shia axis be decapitated, the shifting sands which now support and embolden Hamas will collapse. Eliminating the Mullahs control over Iran will also provide the necessary cover for the Sunni states to end their support for preserving Hamas, just as it will leave each of Iran’s other proxies in either a state of catatonic vulnerability or at minimum, with only the military assets which they currently have or can produce.

The problem with this arguably sound suggestion is that Trump, while more sympathetic to Israel’s position than his duplicitous predecessor, is not disposed to using military force in eliminating the threat emanating from Iran before first trying to sanction Iran into a capitulation which would be little more than a temporary humbling hudna masked in agreeing to end its nuclear ambitions, should it be successful. The consequence of this limiting reality is that the head of the radical Shia axis is under no immediate or direct threat, and as a result, Hamas will be neither isolated nor shaken into a state of surrendering any of the remaining hostages without exacting a significant and mortal price to Israel.

Hence, ultimately, the question which might face Solomon in Diane’s rhetorical thesis, and faces both Israel and the Western world currently, is whether capitulating to personified evil is a sound or survivable policy, even as the lives of some 3-5 dozen lives weigh in the balance. With an understanding that 7.2 million Jews live in Israel, representing slightly more than half of the world’s Jewish population, along with the Druze and Christians living alongside them, it must not be forgotten that the deaths of every one of these people would lead to a similar spectacle of celebration among the Gazans as was demonstrated during the medieval and macabre celebration over the slaughter of Shiri Bibas and her two infant children.

So, while I make no claim to any grasp of the discerning wisdom of Solomon, who had the agreeable gift of peace to contemplate his decrees in the context of complete stability and security, I find it impossible to believe that Solomon or anyone else should adopt the position advocated by some of the hostage advocates who demand that Israel surrender to the personification of abject evil which thrives throughout Gaza and actually emanates across much of the region from the Mullahs in Tehran. Indeed, while the worlds’ leaders continue to ignore the fact that the evil which recorded the slaughters of October 7 as personal Go-Pro trophies is not limited to Gaza, they also pretend that eliminating this evil is neither probable nor even possible, a conclusion which is only based on their predetermined decision to not act as if these warriors of barbarism intend to bring October 7 to the distant lands of America and Europe as well. This conclusion is as false and misguided as advocating that Israel should surrender to Hamas to save the lives of the remaining hostages, and I believe if Solomon were alive today, he would reasonably conclude that, for the employment of such wisdom and judgements as he was renowned for rendering, it would first require that his nation be made secure and his people be made safe, and that the depravity and horror which is celebrated from Hamastan to Tehran must not be further empowered, even as they hold the precious lives which they have stolen to specifically barter for the victory which they must be deprived of gaining.

This is the hard reality which faces both the Israeli people and the Western world, but I don’t believe that it requires the wisdom of wise old Solomon to grasp the conclusion that the threat emanating from Iran and Gaza are in fact of an existential nature, even as too many have adopted the position that they have the luxury of pretending otherwise.