Thinking About Proportionality

Michael Walzer, who is one of our greatest current thinkers on just war theory, faults the news media, political commentators, and the peace protest racket for abusing the concept of "proportionality" in war. The notion is used far more frequently in favor of the use of excessive force, not as a criticism againt it. Proportionality is used correctly when posed as acceptable levels of civilian deaths in relation to the war's aim: "How many civilian deaths are "not disproportionate to" the value of defeating the Nazis?"

Walzer raises serious questions for current critics of Israel, and this one is particularly good:

Is the attacking army acting in concrete ways to minimize the risks they impose on civilians? Are they taking risks themselves for that purpose? Armies choose tactics that are more or less protective of the civilian population, and we judge them by their choices. I haven't heard this question asked about the Gaza war by commentators and critics in the Western media; it is a hard question, since any answer would have to take into account the tactical choices of Hamas.

We haven't heard this question by critics of Israel because Hamas wouldn't pass the test of fighting a legal war respective of civilian life.