You are here

Responses

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Commentary
Importance of a broader view of the Hamas–Israel war
Compose a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests

PLEASE NOTE:

  • A rapid response is a moderated but not peer reviewed online response to a published article in a BMJ journal; it will not receive a DOI and will not be indexed unless it is also republished as a Letter, Correspondence or as other content. Find out more about rapid responses.
  • We intend to post all responses which are approved by the Editor, within 14 days (BMJ Journals) or 24 hours (The BMJ), however timeframes cannot be guaranteed. Responses must comply with our requirements and should contribute substantially to the topic, but it is at our absolute discretion whether we publish a response, and we reserve the right to edit or remove responses before and after publication and also republish some or all in other BMJ publications, including third party local editions in other countries and languages
  • Our requirements are stated in our rapid response terms and conditions and must be read. These include ensuring that: i) you do not include any illustrative content including tables and graphs, ii) you do not include any information that includes specifics about any patients,iii) you do not include any original data, unless it has already been published in a peer reviewed journal and you have included a reference, iv) your response is lawful, not defamatory, original and accurate, v) you declare any competing interests, vi) you understand that your name and other personal details set out in our rapid response terms and conditions will be published with any responses we publish and vii) you understand that once a response is published, we may continue to publish your response and/or edit or remove it in the future.
  • By submitting this rapid response you are agreeing to our terms and conditions for rapid responses and understand that your personal data will be processed in accordance with those terms and our privacy notice.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on: 28 March 2024
    Global health, humanitarian, and human rights organisations must be taken seriously in discussions to end Israel’s offensive on Gaza
    • Safiyyah H Abbas, Paediatric registrar The Children's Hospital at Westmead
    • Other Contributors:
      • Rachel J Coghlan, Researcher and physiotherapist
      • Kate E Ahmad, Neurologist
      • Sarah Abdo, Endocrinologist
      • Nilanthy Vigneswaran, Infectious Diseases Fellow and Microbiology Registrar
      • Ruth A Mitchell, Neurosurgeon

    In a February correspondence to BMJ, Greenland et al opined that an end to violence in Palestine “can only occur when Hamas ends its war to destroy the state of Israel...”.[1] The Israeli offensive, the authors argued, is legitimised by the support of “the governments of the UK, the USA, Germany, France, Italy and other sovereign states”[1] and purported “evidence” contained within predominantly North American news outlets including the New York Times, CNN, and the Washington Post.

    What the article glaringly omits are the evidence-based analyses and unified first-hand accounts of global health, humanitarian, and human rights organisations operating in Gaza – organisations borne in direct response to war atrocities and mandated to alleviate suffering, protect rights, uphold international law, and maintain neutrality, peace, security, and diplomacy. How far we have fallen if the experiences of such organisations are no longer considered valid and worthy of reference, but violence and oppression are legitimised through citing unreliable sources at best, and biased standpoints of political and vested interest at worst. Disappointingly, such citations undermine the high ethical standards of journals like the BMJ. In the interests of respecting evidence and facts, we highlight experiences from global bodies to refute Greenland et al’s baseless claims.

    First, the authors dispute the occupation of Gaza itself, claiming – using a misquoted Wikipedia reference[2] – “t...

    Show More
    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on: 20 February 2024
    In support of this broader view

    I would like to register my strong support for this viewpoint. I am part of a large group of >200 physicians, researchers, and academics who endorsed and contributed to this article. Unfortunately, as part of a highly disappointing series of editorial decisions, BMJ Global did not allow the authors to publish our names and information as a supplement to this article (which was the original plan). I therefore would like to register a rapid response documenting that I was one of the extremely large group of academics who endorsed this article.

    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.
  • Published on: 20 February 2024
    Excellent perspective

    An excellent comprehensive, thoughtful review. Until such time as Israel-- a Jewish homeland and liberal democracy-- is accepted as a reality there can be no peace. To paraphrase Golda Meir, ",,,,,,, if the Arab world put down their weapons, there would be peace.,,,,,,, if Israel put down their weapons there would be no Israel".

    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.