When ‘moral equivalency’ becomes moral blindness

The United Nations (UN’s) latest draft report on sexual violence in conflict reveals two very different stories and a hypocritical attempt at false moral equivalency.

On the one hand, we have the Dina Project, a meticulously documented study from Bar-Ilan University that gathered survivor testimony, forensic analysis, and verified evidence of Hamas’s deliberate use of sexual violence, both during the 7 October 2023 massacre and in captivity. These findings aren’t anecdotal. They are corroborated, chillingly consistent, and have now led UN Secretary-General António Guterres to add Hamas to the blacklist of perpetrators who use rape and sexual assault as weapons of war. It’s a long overdue recognition of crimes that have left deep physical and psychological scars, and a rare instance where the UN has acted decisively on evidence against Hamas.

On the other hand, we have unconfirmed and isolated reports alleging sexual violence by Israeli personnel against Palestinian detainees. These claims remain largely unverified. They are often drawn from second-hand accounts, filtered through politically hostile channels, and lack the forensic corroboration that underpins the Dina Project. Yet some activists, academics, and UN officials present these allegations in the same light as the meticulously documented atrocities committed by Hamas. This is done in an attempt to deflect the world’s attention from Hamas’s barbarism and place equivalent blame on Israel.

This is where the danger lies. The universal impulse toward “balance” in conflict reporting too often distorts the moral landscape. In the name of impartiality, the narrative places a democratic state’s military, which operates under judicial oversight, on the same moral plane as a terrorist organisation whose founding charter calls for the annihilation of the Jewish people.

Equating the Israel Defense Forces with Hamas erodes the moral clarity necessary to confront crimes against humanity. It aims to reduce the suffering of mass rape and sexual-torture victims to nothing more than an accepted behavioural norm within conflict. It dilutes accountability for the perpetrators, who have openly celebrated their crimes. Unlike Hamas, whose crimes are celebrated by its leaders and embedded in its war strategy, Israel operates under a legal system that allows for the investigation and prosecution of its own soldiers. Allegations of sexual crimes against Palestinian detainees, if reported, fall under the jurisdiction of Israel’s Military Advocate General and can be investigated by the Military Police Criminal Investigation Division. These investigations follow established evidentiary rules, allow for legal representation of the accused, and are subject to review by Israel’s civilian courts, including the Supreme Court sitting as the High Court of Justice.

The existence of such mechanisms, as well as the fact that Israeli personnel can face charges and prison sentences if found guilty, marks a fundamental and significant difference from Hamas, where sexual violence is neither prosecuted nor condemned, but rather deployed as a weapon of terror.

The UN’s recognition of Hamas’s sexual violence, grounded in the Dina Project’s evidence, should be a turning point. International bodies and the media must differentiate between substantiated terrorist acts and unverified claims. This isn’t about shielding Israel from scrutiny, it’s about ensuring that truth and justice aren’t sacrificed on the altar of artificial equivalence.

Because when we pretend that all accusations carry equal weight, we’re not being fair. We’re being blind.

• Rozanne Sack is a co-founder of Koleinu SA, a helpline and advocacy organisation for victims of gender-based violence and child abuse in the Jewish and wider