An imprudence that only history will judge with rigor

On June 28, 1914, the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria by Serbian nationalist Gavrilo Princip, a member of the separatist group known as the Black Hand, aimed to promote the cause of Yugoslav nationalism and the unification of South Slavic territories under Austro-Hungarian rule. This act sought to liberate the South Slavs from Austro-Hungarian control and create a large, independent Slavic nation. The assassination triggered a series of diplomatic and military events that culminated in the outbreak of World War I. At that time, few realized that the death of one man could lead to the carnage of millions, but history shows us that short-term actions, driven by emotion and a thirst for revenge, often have far-reaching consequences that no one could foresee. They could not have imagined the beginning of World War I and the death of approximately 16 million people.

More than a century later, it seems we have not yet learned the lesson. The recent elimination of prominent Hezbollah and Hamas figures by Israel – although morally justifiable in the eyes of many – raises the same question: was it wise? The fleeting euphoria of vengeful justice can quickly turn into a nightmare of uncontrollable escalation.

Assassinating leaders in the midst of a conflict is like cutting the heads off the Hydra: one head cut off, two grow in its place. Fuad Shukr and Ismail Haniyeh were just targets? Undoubtedly. But their elimination brings to light issues that go beyond the simple act of retaliation.

As Maimonides warned in his work “Guide for the Perplexed,” true justice is not achieved through isolated acts of revenge, but through deep understanding and equitable application of law and morality. He argued that true justice is both an act of kindness and reason, a harmony between the need for order and compassion for the human condition. “It is not retaliation that brings peace, but wisdom and mutual understanding,” he wrote.

In a world where the line between justice and vengeance is thin, where the ethics of killing to prevent death are constantly questioned, we must ask ourselves: what have we really achieved with these actions? The glow of served justice quickly fades, giving way to the fear of repercussions. When Israel chose to eliminate Haniyeh in Tehran, during the inauguration of the new Iranian president, it was not just seeking justice. It was flirting with escalation, challenging the status quo in a way that could ignite a dangerous flame.

Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, in his reflections on morality and politics, observed that “true victory is not achieved by destroying the enemy, but by transforming the conditions that gave rise to the conflict.” This perspective challenges us to consider not just acts of immediate justice, but the deep roots of enmity and violence.

Some say the risk was calculated, that Israel wants to provoke a response that leads the United States to become directly involved, distracting the world from Netanyahu’s internal failures. But the question remains: at what cost?

Ipcha mistabra – the Aramaic concept that makes us think the opposite of what is evident – should be our guide. What is gained by publicly humiliating a powerful adversary like Iran? Instead of strengthening Israel’s position, such an act may consolidate the enemy’s determination and trigger a devastating response.

Martin Buber, in his work “I and Thou,” highlights the importance of seeing the other not just as an enemy or an object of retaliation, but as a complete human being, worthy of dignity and respect. He reminds us that “all true life is encounter,” and that lasting peace can only be achieved through mutual recognition and genuine dialogue.

Ultimately, the human experience is a complex weave of emotions, rationalities, and impulses. The decision to assassinate, even if based on principles of justice, cannot be separated from its human and political implications. We live in a world where every action reverberates, and where the nuances of diplomacy and strategy are as important as the act itself.

If there is a lesson to be learned from the past, it is that quick and violent solutions rarely solve deeply rooted problems. History repeats itself not for lack of alternatives, but for lack of wisdom in choosing them. While we celebrate served justice, we must prepare for the storms these actions may unleash. After all, true intelligence lies in foreseeing the consequences and navigating the turbulent waters of global politics with a long-term vision, something that, unfortunately, still seems to elude us.

And, amidst all this, we leave our lives in the hands of Benjamin Netanyahu and his far-right group in Israel. It does not seem prudent or intelligent. The leadership that flirts with escalation and conflict without fully considering the repercussions puts us all at risk. It is a high-stakes gamble, and the chips are being played with an imprudence that only history will judge with rigor.