Ceasefire 'Strained' When One Side Holds All the Bombs
The FT headline reads like a weather report: an 'exchange of fire' between Israel and Hamas. Conveniently sidelined is the fact that one side controls all entry and exit, food, water, and electricity, and recently dropped 90,000 bombs on a civilian population. This isn't an equal exchange; it's resistance against an ongoing occupation, conveniently framed as a symmetrical conflict. According to
UNICEF, 80% of children in Gaza are experiencing severe food poverty. How many starving children does it take before 'strain' becomes something more? We've seen this narrative before. Every 'ceasefire' that doesn't address the root causes of the conflict—the blockade, the expansion of settlements, the denial of basic human rights—is merely a pause for Israel to regroup, and for mainstream media to
reset the clock on reporting new 'tensions.' It's a journalistic sleight of hand: Focus on the smoke, ignore the burning house. One might wonder why 'tensions' only arise when the oppressed fight back, not when they're simply being oppressed.