On 10 August 2025, Germany announced it would suspend the export of offensive weapons to Israel, citing the risk of mass civilian casualties during Israel’s planned incursion into Gaza City. Yet Germany’s military trade with Israel is a two-way street. As crucial as Berlin’s arms exports are its growing imports of Israeli weapons, military technology, and security expertise, including training.
A tempting but corrosive thought about Israeli politics – and about many other places – is that we have already embarked on a one-way road to authoritarianism. This “authoritarian determinism”, sometimes presented as a kind of seasoned realism, assumes that political trajectories continue unidirectionally. There is a world of difference between the many political contexts in which authoritarianism seems to be on the rise. And yet, a common question seems to be asked: in the face of authoritarian determinism, what can be saved of the democratic process? Until when does it make sense to hold on?
Genocidal intent does not necessarily pop, prefabricated, out of the perpetrator’s state’s head. It emerges – gradually, often unevenly – as a product of action, omission, emotion, and political opportunity. A war that once had legal justification as defence can thus harden into something else: the destruction of a group as such. This is as true in the specific conditions of Gaza, as it is as a matter of principle.
Von Straußen, Eulen und Oktopussen
Ostriches, Owls, and Octopuses
When does sharing information become an act of disloyalty to the state? Three bills advancing through Israel’s Knesset aim to answer this question decisively: any cooperation with international justice mechanisms, particularly the International Criminal Court (ICC), would constitute a betrayal of the state punishable by up to life imprisonment. This legislative package marks a dramatic shift from merely opposing international criminal jurisdiction to criminalizing the very act of documentation and information-sharing about potential human rights violations. For Israeli scholars researching international humanitarian law, the message is clear: our academic work could become a criminal offense if it finds its way to international courts.
As political analysts debate the reasons for Trump’s victory, one contributing factor is surely the utter failure of Biden’s Gaza policies. As the US has continued to fund an Israeli war of annihilation against Gaza, the democratic ticket became a hard sell for many who care about Palestinians. Yet, Gaza has also triggered a veritable renaissance of international litigation. With Gaza destroyed and Trump in the White House, this tension may have reached a terminal point. And yet, I argue, the ghost of a rule-based order lingers in our political imagination despite its inability to shape outcomes.
Der Deutsche Bundestag hat heute eine Resolution verabschiedet, die öffentliche Gelder für Kultur und Wissenschaft an die Antisemitismusdefinition der International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) knüpft. Weithin erforscht wurde das Potenzial der IHRA-Definition, die Meinungsfreiheit der Palästinenser:innen zu beschränken. Doch daneben verdienen auch andere Probleme Aufmerksamkeit: vor allem das Potenzial der Definition, jüdische politische Identität auf eine einzige Version zu reduzieren, die mit dem Staat Israel übereinstimmt. So ermächtigt die Resolution den Staat Israel, über eine Frage zu entscheiden, die in jüdischen Kreisen tatsächlich heiß diskutiert wird.
The German Bundestag is soon expected to vote on a resolution on “protecting Jewish life in Germany” that would tie public funding for culture and science to compliance with the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism. While IHRA’s potential in curbing Palestinians’ political speech has been largely studied, another set of problems should warrant additional attention: the definition’s potential to regulate Jewish political identity into a singular version: one that coincides with the state of Israel. In doing so, it gives the state regulatory power to decide on what is, in fact, a burning question within Jewish circles.
Today, various commentators are asking about the purpose behind the pager attack and the subsequent communication device attack yesterday. The New York Times’s detailed report of the incidents announces in its title that Israel has built a “Modern-Day Trojan Horse”. The idea comes from Greek history, but perhaps a better comparison might be found in Greek myth. Prometheus stole fire from the gods. Today, Israel is attempting to develop secularized but God-like technological capabilities, at least in terms of their ability to generate surprise and change reality overnight. Yet, by discarding moral or political considerations in favor of pyrotechnics, Israel risks Prometheus’s ultimate fate: punishment.
13. September 2025
Giovanni Capoccia
12. September 2025
Anne Peters
12. September 2025
Anne Peters