Introduction
Welcome to Open to Debate
John Donvan: Welcome to Open to Debate. I’m John Donvan, and we are gathered for something remarkable here—a meeting between two men who disagree fiercely across an issue that has fiercely divided so many of us within families and on college campuses. And for that alone, for their courage in coming to the same stage, let us congratulate them at the outset, because we know how rare it is in our currently hyperpolarized culture for opposing viewpoints to be heard, spoken aloud, and in competition with each other under the same roof.
But that is the essence of debate, and that is the value that we promote at Open to Debate. And so it is an honor to be here at New York’s venerable Adler Hall, a crown jewel of the New York Society for Ethical Culture, where we cannot and we will not forget how the war in Gaza is steeped in pain and outrage and fear and anger. It’s why this debate matters, and it’s why it is natural to take sides—even necessary to take sides. But listening to the other side, which these debaters will be called to do with one another, and which I hope you will do as members of the audience just by being here, that may be a first step at least in understanding how and why and exactly why we disagree.
The frame—the question we have framed for this purpose, and that we will hear debated tonight, is this:
Debate Topic
“Hamas are funded by your paymasters in Qatar” Eylon Levy vs. Mehdi Hasan FULL DEBATE
Were Israel’s actions in the war in Gaza justified?
Introduction of Debaters
So let’s meet our debaters. I’m going to come back to the center, and again, as they enter the stage, I appreciate applause for each of them.
Answering yes to the question “Were Israel’s actions in the Gaza War justified?”, I want to welcome Eylon Levy. Thank you, Eylon. You are the—if you can stay with me here—you’re the former spokesperson for Israel in the October 7th War, co-founder of the Israeli Citizen Spokesperson’s Office, host of the “State of a Nation” podcast. Welcome to Open to Debate.
And here to argue no to the question “Were Israel’s actions in the Gaza War justified?”, I want to welcome Mehdi Hasan. Mehdi, you’re the founder, editor-in-chief, and CEO of Zeeto, host of Al Jazeera’s “Head to Head,” an award-winning journalist. Welcome to Open to Debate.
Gentlemen, thank each of you for being here tonight. Let’s start it with a handshake, and then we can begin the debate. Glad to take this offline. Thank you.
Opening Statements
We want each of you to take a few minutes to explain why you’re answering yes or no to our question, “Were Israel’s actions in the war in Gaza justified?” And when I say “were,” I just want to be clear: we chose that word to talk about Israel’s immediate actions after what happened on October 7th up through today. It’s everything—it’s not this moment, it’s not that moment; it’s the course of things.
Eylon Levy’s Opening Statement
Eylon, you are up first. Your answer to the question is yes. The floor is yours. Please tell us why.
Eylon Levy:
On October 7th, Hamas perpetrated an act of genocide against the people of Israel. Its death squads invaded with a clear mission to massacre as many people as they could, as sadistically as they could, and to take survivors as hostages. Hamas had a strategy to lure Israel into an urban war and generate enough suffering that the world would pressure Israel to leave Hamas alone to do it again and again.
Hamas slaughtered 1,200 people on that day at a music festival and in their beds. They cremated little children alive. They perpetrated barbaric acts of sexual violence. They beheaded, tortured, and mutilated their victims—alive and dead—and they did it with glee. And then they took over 250 hostages, including little children, paraded them through the streets of Gaza to jeering crowds, hid them in tunnels and homes where they are being starved and tortured and raped and executed.
It was the deadliest terror attack in world history after 9/11, the bloodiest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust, and the opening shot of the Iranian regime’s regional war against Israel on seven fronts.
At this point, Israel faced a choice as Hamas immediately threatened to do it again and again until Israel was destroyed: to do nothing or to do something. Both would have consequences. Doing nothing meant letting Hamas get away with October 7th, leave it free to do it again and again—only this time with thousands of dangerous terrorists released from jail and with its popularity skyrocketing. That’s not an option.
Doing something meant targeting Hamas’s terrorists in accordance with international law in order to dismantle their ability to wage war and live out that threat to do it again and again. That was the choice that Israel faced after October 7th.
Now, after October 7th, that campaign to bring Hamas down and bring the hostages home was the only moral response. Hamas exists for the sake of war, and for the sake of peace, it must go.
Let me explain Israel’s strategy. Israel’s strategy is to get civilians out of harm’s way so that it can target Hamas’s terrorist infrastructure under their feet. Hamas’s strategy is to keep civilians in harm’s way so that it can use them to shield their military infrastructure.
Israel left Gaza in 2005 and never wanted to go back. But Hamas seized power two years later, started firing rockets at our cities, and rigged Gaza’s urban landscape for war. They dug a network of military tunnels one and a half times longer than New York’s subway under homes and schools and hospitals. They booby-trapped tens of thousands of buildings. They started firing rockets at our homes and our towns from inside their schools and their hospitals.
In response, Israel’s actions are to target Hamas’s terrorists and to take unprecedented efforts to keep their civilians safe from their own leaders’ sick strategy to sacrifice them on the altar of jihad. That’s why it keeps repeatedly urging them to get out of harm’s way from Hamas strongholds and flooding the area with over a million tons of aid, because it keeps saying, “This is a war against Hamas, not the people of Gaza.”
Now, the suffering of my neighbors in Gaza is horrific. I blame their psychopath leaders for launching this war, fighting it inside civilian areas, and refusing to release the hostages and surrender.
Now, tonight’s debate is about whether Israel’s actions in the war in Gaza are justified in a context in which I hope we can all agree none of the enemy’s actions are justified, because we are fighting a jihadist army that has as much respect for humanity and law as Mehdi Hasan has for the truth. Mehdi may say, “I condemn Hamas’s acts on October 7th,” but he will not condemn its strategy because he is part of its strategy. Hamas is counting on its defense attorney to shield it from the consequences of the war that it started and deflect blame onto Israel so it can do October 7th again—maybe because they share a goal that Israel shouldn’t exist.
Mehdi Hasan will say tonight that October 7th does not justify Israel’s actions in this horrible war. My question then is this—
John Donvan: I’m sorry, your time is up.
Eylon Levy: What does October—
John Donvan: I’m sorry, your time is up. Thank you.
Eylon: Thank you.
John Donvan: Eylon, in already calling your opponent a liar, you have already crossed one of the lines of the culture that we try to establish here. I wish you hadn’t.
Mehdi Hasan: You don’t—
John Donvan: I don’t mind. It’s fine.
Mehdi Hasan: It’s fine.
John Donvan: It’s fine.
Mehdi Hasan: I do.
John Donvan: You don’t need to do that to make your case. Please.
Mehdi Hasan’s Opening Statement
Mehdi, you are answering no in answer to the question, “Were Israel’s actions in the Gaza war justified?”
Mehdi Hasan:
All right. So, ladies and gentlemen, the question: Were they justified? Were the actions justified? And it would be great if you didn’t feel the need to respond to the personal attack. It’ll waste—
John Donvan: We’ll decide when we get there, John.
Mehdi Hasan: Were they justified? No, obviously not. Of course not. October the 7th, I think we can all agree, was a crime—a war crime, right? We can all agree on that. And taking hostages is a war crime, and those hostages should be released. But to destroy an entire place, an entire people in response, is never justified. Never justified.
How are we still debating—I don’t understand how we’re debating this more than 40,000 deaths later. I don’t understand how we’re still debating this, sitting in the comfort of New York, 7,000 miles away from a place that the UN Secretary-General has called hell on Earth. Justified? Justified?
Was Israel justified in carrying out one of the most intense civilian punishment campaigns in history, according to Dr. Robert Pape at the University of Chicago? Dropping 500-pound bombs, 1,000-pound bombs, 2,000-pound bombs on schools, hospitals, universities, bookstores, libraries, mosques, churches, refugee camps, apartment buildings, cemeteries—cemeteries! Destroying a higher percentage of buildings in northern Gaza than the Allies destroyed in Dresden during World War II, reducing Gaza to 42 million tons of rubble while they got people out of the way.
How is that justified? Dropping a bomb, for example, on a six-story apartment building in central Gaza last October, killing more than 100 people inside, including more than 50 children, with no Hamas target in sight, according to Human Rights Watch, with no explanation offered by the Israeli military even till today. Was that justified, Eylon?
Was Israel justified in telling people to go to safe zones and then bombing them and killing them in those safe zones? According to NBC, there were seven deadly airstrikes between January and April in areas that the Israeli military had specifically designated as safe zones, killing Palestinian civilians like Sabrin Sakani, who was 30 weeks pregnant at the time she was killed in a safe zone in April. Her little baby, newborn baby, died less than a week later. Was that justified too, Eylon?
Was Israel justified in killing a record number of kids in Gaza—16,000 children—turning Gaza into what the UN has called a graveyard for children, according to Save the Children, killing more kids in the first three weeks than were killed globally in each of the past four years? Killing little kids like six-year-old Hind Rajab and her 15-year-old sister, Leen, firing 335 bullets into the car they were in—335 bullets—and then killing the two paramedics who went to try and rescue them. Was that justified too, Eylon?
Was Israel justified in killing a record number of aid workers in Gaza—a record number—targeting again and again, systematically, car by car, according to Chef José Andrés, a specifically, explicitly marked World Central Kitchen aid convoy, killing seven aid workers in the process. Was that justified?
Was Israel justified in starving the people of Gaza, using food and water as a weapon of war, to quote both the EU and Oxfam? Was Israel justified in blocking aid trucks from going into Gaza simply because they carry things like crutches, nail clippers, and even chocolate croissant, according to The Washington Post?
Was Israel justified in raping, sodomizing Palestinian detainees who are charged with no crimes whatsoever, putting hot rods up their rectums—putting hot rods up their rectums—amputating their limbs, according to CNN and The New York Times? Was that rape and torture justified, Eylon?
Was—I mean, Israel, according to the ICC chief prosecutor, who put out a statement calling for the arrest of Eylon’s former boss, Benjamin Netanyahu, said that Israel may have military goals, legitimate goals, but the way they’re carried out—killing innocents and people, starving people—is criminal. He said, “Criminal.” Think about that. Eylon Levy is a former spokesperson for a man who the ICC chief prosecutor wants arrested for war crimes.
Eylon himself has produced a number of lies—sorry, John—in service of those war crimes. He has a bunch of tweets still up tonight which say that babies were beheaded on October 7th, babies were baked in ovens, babies were ripped from their mother’s wombs. October 7th was bad enough, but Eylon had to exaggerate it for atrocity purposes. Those tweets are still up. Why would you trust anything this man says to you tonight?
Look, he’s here—he’s here to gaslight you, to defend the indefensible, to excuse the inexcusable, to justify the unjustifiable. But you don’t need to tonight. You can choose to be on the side not of cruelty, not of criminality, but on the side of the innocent people of Gaza who are being killed as we speak tonight—as we speak—by Eylon’s former colleagues in the Israeli military on the orders of Eylon’s former bosses in the Israeli government. So yes, I choose to oppose this horrific and homicidal motion. Thank you.
Debate
John Donvan:
So we’re going to have a discussion that’s a little bit looser in format, but the first thing I want to say to each of you is, you know, this mutual urination contest is not helping us understand the principles involved. All right? You think he tells untruths; you think he tells untruths. You don’t need to keep hitting that point, I hope, to make your argument. And again, it’s not what we’re about.
Eylon, I heard you in your opening statement say that the only moral response was for Israel to try to take Hamas down and to get the hostages home. I heard your opponent say that the manner in which it’s happening is just enormous overreach with enormous consequences for an enormous number of people that he would certainly say—and I think a number of others would agree—are innocent people. Not all of them, but some of them, and that that represents an unjustifiable response.
What we’re talking about, it seems like, is proportionality. And I want you to address the issue of proportionality. This has been calculated in a number of ways. People have said that, as you said, it was the worst terrorist attack since September 11th, 2001. But others would say that the number of people killed on both sides is wildly out of balance and therefore disproportionate.
There’s an issue to be discussed here; there’s a principle to be discussed here, and that’s proportionality. And what, in your view, justifies the proportionality that Israel has stepped up to in its response? And again, because I want things to move back and forth, I’ll probably jump in on you after about 90 seconds, just so you have a sense.
Eylon Levy:
Israel’s response is proportionate to the threat that we face, which is the threat of annihilation. After perpetrating the savage atrocities of October 7th, the first thing Hamas did was deny that it did them. The second thing that it did was to threaten to do it again and again until Israel is destroyed. That is what is at stake if this war ends with Hamas free, emboldened, and empowered to perpetrate more October 7th massacres, thinking that the world will keep saving it from the wars that it started.
Now, proportionality is a term in international law. It doesn’t mean that if they kill a thousand people, you kill a thousand people and call it quits. It means that for each strike, the anticipated collateral damage—the damage to civilians—cannot be excessive to the anticipated military goal.
John Donvan:
And your argument is that that has been the principle Israel has observed.
Eylon Levy:
Every military expert who has observed Israel’s military efforts, including just recently in The Times, the deputy supreme commander of NATO, has said that Israel is fighting in the most complicated urban battlefield that the world has ever seen, and he’s satisfied that its rules of engagement and standard procedures are at least as rigorous as the UK and other Western allies. That’s the former deputy supreme commander of NATO.
Mehdi Hasan:
So I actually—I actually—I actually want to agree—I want to agree with something Eylon said. Proportionality is a difficult subject, and we shouldn’t talk about this in abstract—X number here, Y number there. Let’s talk specifics. The problem with a lot of spokespersons of Israel, they want to talk in abstract; I want to talk in specifics.
So if we talk about proportionality, we talk about discrimination, we talk about war crimes. Last October, shortly after October 7th, Israeli forces struck a three-story residential building in Gaza City. They killed 15 members of the Al-Dos family—seven children—according to Amnesty International. The survivors say no warnings—Eylon told us there were warnings—no warnings were given to evacuate. Amnesty found no evidence of any military targets in the area, and Israel to this day has offered no explanation for that strike.
So for the dead Al-Dos family members, Eylon, can you tell us why they were killed?
Eylon Levy:
Mr. Hasan, the IDF does not owe you immediate answers, and the fact that Amnesty speaks—the fact that Amnesty, witnesses intimidated by Hamas, does not mean that there was not a military target.
Mehdi Hasan:
But was there? Because Israel has never said there was a military target.
Eylon Levy:
Hamas booby-trapped 40% of Gaza’s buildings. It dug tunnels underneath homes and schools—
Mehdi Hasan:
Back to generalities. No, why kill 15 members of the Al-Dos family?
Eylon Levy:
I do not know, and I do not need to explain every single—
Mehdi Hasan:
No, Mr. Hasan, because in this war, Israel is seeking to neutralize the threat of a terrorist army that has a deliberate strategy—
John Donvan:
I’m going to have to—
Eylon Levy:
—to hide behind civilians.
Mehdi Hasan:
Thank you. Sorry, go ahead.
John Donvan:
Mehdi, Eylon—in the interest of time—you asked—it’s become a rhetorical question to the audience. When he says there was no other option, what is your response to that?
Mehdi Hasan:
Well, no one in the world agrees with that. That’s why Israel has become a pariah in the world, because even—
Eylon Levy:
What was the option, Mr. Hasan?
Mehdi Hasan:
Even—Joe Biden—the most—
Eylon Levy:
Does October 7th—
Mehdi Hasan:
Joe, I already answered that question.
Eylon Levy:
What was the option?
Mehdi Hasan:
Even Joe Biden, the most pro-Israel president of my lifetime, who has backed Israel with weapons and arms, has gone on the record saying, “Too much indiscriminate bombing. You’ve killed too many innocent people.” Even the people on your own side say you’re killing too many people, Eylon. But you not accept that, Mr. Hasan?
Eylon Levy:
Too many people have been killed. The number of people who should have been killed is zero. Too many people were killed when Hamas’s psychopath leaders—
Mehdi Hasan:
When Hamas’s psychopath leaders—
Eylon Levy:
When Hamas’s psychopath leaders, who are funded by your paymasters in Qatar—
Mehdi Hasan:
Maybe you share a slap—
John Donvan:
All right, all right. Let’s please respond to that.
Mehdi Hasan:
I’m going to respond to that. No, no, no, no, no. It’s another cheap shot, and I don’t want to entertain cheap shots. I want to go to you, Eylon, with this question.
When you say that the war is justified, killing in war can only be justified if it serves a greater good. What’s the greater good that’s being served at this moment?
Eylon Levy:
Mr. Donvan, this war is not justified because Hamas should not have started this war in the first place.
John Donvan:
Well, the question is—you are arguing—you are answering the question, yes, Israel’s actions are justified.
Eylon Levy:
The response is an attempt to prevent the next October 7th massacre. On October 7th, Hamas showed us what it was capable of doing, and they immediately went on TV and said, “October 7th, October 10th, October one millionth—everything we do is justified. We’re a nation of martyrs,” they said. “We’re proud to sacrifice millions of martyrs if that’s what it takes.” And we are trying to stop October 7th and to do so in a way that minimizes the cost to their civilians.
Let me just deal with the last point and the previous point, which is the idea—
John Donvan:
Let’s just be real here.
Mehdi Hasan:
Let’s just be real here. And a lot of military experts say this, but you don’t even need military experts—you just need common sense. The idea that you prevent another October the 7th or that you destroy Hamas by making tens of thousands of Palestinian children orphans is insane. It doesn’t protect Israel—forgive Gaza—it doesn’t protect Israel.
And let me just deal with this classic “my paymasters in Qatar.” Yes, I host a show for Al Jazeera English. Let’s just be very clear. In December, The New York Times published a very, very long piece—very, very important here, relevant to the debate.
John Donvan:
Please make it relevant.
Mehdi Hasan:
The New York Times published a very long piece which said a month before October the 7th, the head of the Mossad, David Barnea, went to Doha, Qatar, and the Qataris said, “Do you want us to keep sending money to Gaza?” And he went back to Netanyahu and said, “What should I say?” He said, “Yes, please,” and he went back and said, “Yes, please send the money to Gaza.”
Eylon went to work for the government of Benjamin Netanyahu a month after that. He’s never apologized for that to the Israeli people. Benjamin Netanyahu’s never apologized for that to the Israeli people.
So if anyone should answer questions about Qatari funding of Hamas, allegedly, reportedly, whatever you want to call it, it’s the Israeli government that facilitated it for many, many years. Eylon was in that government; he’s the spokesperson for that. Answer it.
Eylon Levy:
It was a terrible mistake to allow Qatari money into Gaza on the mistaken belief that if we improve civilian life in Gaza, create jobs, create opportunity, Hamas’s psychopath leaders won’t launch this war. They went straight on TV and said, “We tricked the Israelis. We made them think that we were concerned about the civilians in Gaza, all the while we were taking that money to build the tunnels and the weapons and the rockets we are firing at Israel.” If we had known, Mr. Hasan, what Hamas was going to do on October 7th, perhaps we should have started a preemptive war to eliminate that threat before they could have burned the stomachs of children alive on October 7th. But we didn’t. Hamas tricked us, and we won’t repeat the same mistake again.
Mehdi Hasan:
Time out. Going to take a little bit of a 10-second breath and slightly lower the temperature, but only slightly.
Eylon, you were making the argument that Israel’s actions are justified in the pursuit of the destruction of Hamas. We’ve come to the point, though, where even Israeli military officials are saying it can’t be destroyed. Therefore, what happens to that argument that the justification is the destruction of Hamas if it’s an organization—a movement—that can’t be destroyed?
Eylon Levy:
Of course Hamas can be removed from power, just like ISIS was removed from power. ISIS is now a terrorist organization that is trying to blow up concerts in Austria. It no longer controls territory the size of Austria. Following this war, we cannot allow the Hamas terrorist regime—it’s not an organization; it is a terror regime and a terror army—to regroup, restock, rearm, and keep shooting rockets at our towns while it is still holding civilians. It is a regime that must be removed from power because we know exactly what it wants to do if given half a chance, and that is to do October 7th again. And Israel’s war—
Mehdi Hasan:
I’ll yield the stage to you and ask you: Eliminating the Hamas terror regime, removing it from power—a legitimate military objective? Yes or no?
Mehdi Hasan:
Of course there’s a legitimate military objective for Israel, and that’s what I quoted the ICC chief prosecutor saying. But you’re doing a very bad job of it.
Eylon Levy:
Does October 7th justify that?
Mehdi Hasan:
What John said—
John Donvan:
I understand.
Mehdi Hasan:
No, because I want to clarify and understand we’re on the same page.
Eylon Levy:
You want to clarify.
Mehdi Hasan:
The guy who can’t answer why you—
Eylon Levy:
That we are on the same page. Do you agree—
Mehdi Hasan:
I’ll answer your question when you answer mine.
Eylon Levy:
It was legitimate for Israel to remove the Hamas terror regime in order to prevent another October 7th. It’s a yes or no question, Mr. Hasan.
Mehdi Hasan:
No, it’s not. It’s a loaded question. I’m going to say it was legitimate for Israel to defend its citizens inside of Israel. It’s not legitimate to occupy Palestinian territory for decades—decades on end.
And let me answer—can I—you came—
Eylon Levy:
If I can—
John Donvan:
Let me—let me answer John’s question.
Mehdi Hasan:
Let me—you’ve had about two or three minutes in a row.
John Donvan:
Go.
Mehdi Hasan:
Very interesting question of aims. You pointed out—but he keeps saying—notice the sleight of hand. You said that he said, and he said it many times, not just here, “Hamas should be destroyed.” When you asked him, Israeli military experts and generals say it can’t be destroyed. Notice what Eylon said. He said, “Removed from power.” Quickly moved the goalpost there because he knows that Hamas can’t be destroyed by these means. In fact, the former head of Israel’s military—let me finish my point—the former head of Israel’s military, who was a member of Netanyahu’s war cabinet, he said earlier this year, quote, “Anyone who says you can destroy Hamas is telling tall tales.” So it’s not me calling Eylon Levy a liar; it’s the former head of the Israeli military.
Eylon Levy:
Mr. Hasan, from the beginning, Israel has said that its goals are to remove Hamas from power and dismantle its ability to wage war again and to live up to its threat of repeat October 7th. And that is why I ask you: After October 7th, was it legitimate for Israel to remove Hamas from power in order to eliminate the threat of repeat October 7th? Yes or no? Very simple answer.
Mehdi Hasan:
Israel has the right to defend its citizens in its territory. It doesn’t have a right to be an occupier. It doesn’t have a right to—
Eylon Levy:
Let me finish the point.
Mehdi Hasan:
You think they’re your neighbor. The International Court of Justice says Gaza and the West Bank are occupied. They’ve been occupied every day since 1967. You did not withdraw in 2005; you blockaded—
John Donvan:
I’d like to explain—I’d like to explain what the purpose here is.
Eylon Levy:
Mr. Hasan, I’ve already answered the question.
Mehdi Hasan:
I’ve made the point that even if I was an Israeli general trying to destroy Hamas, killing thousands of innocent people only helps Hamas. Every terrorism expert in the world says you are a recruiting sergeant for extremist groups when you go and kill innocent civilians.
Eylon Levy:
Mr. Hasan—
John Donvan:
Understand this—out, time out, time out, time out. I have a question for whoever wants to jump on it. Is Israel’s war in Gaza making Israel more secure?
Eylon Levy:
When this war began, Hamas had a fearsome missile arsenal that rained thousands of missiles on our cities. I had to keep running into a rocket shelter. Israel has now eliminated the threat of rocket fire from Gaza. It has cut off its smuggling routes; it has destroyed its missile silos; and it has destroyed Hamas’s weapons capabilities. That alone has made us safer and makes it easier to sleep in our beds at night.
Mehdi Hasan:
A couple of—so, three quick things. Number one, the Israelis went to Supreme Court recently, and they were having an argument in Israel’s Supreme Court, and they put in the official filing that “We do not control Gaza.” Even after all this time, Hamas is still in control of lots of parts of Gaza. They say the honest stuff when you’re not looking.
Number two—number two—I interviewed Ami Ayalon recently, former head of Shin Bet, former Israeli admiral. He said very explicitly, “Israel will not be safe until we give Palestinians freedom.” This is his words, not my words.
And number three—and number three—I’m glad you had a bomb shelter to protect you because the Al-Dos family in Gaza did not have a bomb shelter to protect them.
John Donvan:
Okay, another question. We have not yet talked about the hostages, and we should. Is Israel’s action in Gaza going to—is it for the benefit of the hostages?
Eylon Levy:
Absolutely. Israel is fighting to bring the hostages home while Hamas is starving and torturing and raping them. We managed in November, because Hamas was being clobbered and it wanted a breather, they released nearly half of the hostages. We’ve sent in special forces to rescue hostages in raids my opponent has condemned. Israel is fighting to put the military pressure on Hamas to release the hostages, but Hamas doesn’t want to release the hostages.
And the reason it doesn’t want to release the hostages is that it knows that the longer this war goes on and the more suffering it generates among its own people in Gaza, the more it advances its own goal of isolating Israel. And Mr. Hasan, it—it—it—it pains me that you do not seem to realize the role that you play within Hamas’s strategy when you deflect blame onto Israel, never demand any accountability—never demand any accountability—from the Hamas regime when you know that Hamas’s goal is to maximize suffering. You give it a reason to drag on this war.
Mehdi Hasan:
If you wanted to let the hostages go, Eylon, you should tell—
Eylon Levy:
Of all the nonsense you said—
Mehdi Hasan:
Hamas to free the hostages.
Eylon Levy:
Of all the nonsense you said, if you really care about the hostages—
Mehdi Hasan:
Of all the demonstrably untrue things you’ve said tonight, this is the big one. So apparently, if you want a deal to end the war,
Discussion on Hostages
Eylon Levy:
Absolutely. Israel is fighting to bring the hostages home while Hamas is starving and torturing and raping them. We managed in November, because Hamas was being clobbered and it wanted a breather, they released nearly half of the hostages. We’ve sent in special forces to rescue hostages in raids my opponent has condemned. Israel is fighting to put the military pressure on Hamas to release the hostages, but Hamas doesn’t want to release the hostages.
And the reason it doesn’t want to release the hostages is that it knows that the longer this war goes on and the more suffering it generates among its own people in Gaza, the more it advances its own goal of isolating Israel. And Mr. Hasan, it pains me that you do not seem to realize the role that you play within Hamas’s strategy when you deflect blame onto Israel, never demand any accountability—never demand any accountability—from the Hamas regime when you know that Hamas’s goal is to maximize suffering. You give it a reason to drag on this war.
Mehdi Hasan:
If you wanted to let the hostages go, Eylon, you should tell—
Eylon Levy:
Of all the nonsense you said—
Mehdi Hasan:
Stop pretending about the hostages. Of the two of us—
John Donvan:
Time out, time out, time out.
Mehdi Hasan:
Hold on. Of the two of us, whose strategy has released more hostages—mine or yours? Because I supported a ceasefire, and we got—we got—hold on—
Eylon Levy:
Our strategy is to give cover for Hamas’s war crimes.
Mehdi Hasan:
Can I let him finish, please?
John Donvan:
All right, let’s—this is fantastic.
Mehdi Hasan:
So put it on.
John Donvan:
Let’s go.
Mehdi Hasan:
Show them you care.
Eylon Levy:
I am in daily contact with family—
Mehdi Hasan:
Show them you care.
Eylon Levy:
I tell them I will do whatever it takes to help you get your kids home. Show them you care and stop trying to exploit the suffering.
John Donvan:
Allow him to respond.
Mehdi Hasan:
You’ve got your bit of stagecraft.
Eylon Levy:
Please take it.
Mehdi Hasan:
Let’s be clear, let’s be clear, let’s be clear. You saw the very, very performative outrage there from Eylon. To be clear, don’t you lecture me about hostages when your government has killed more hostages than it has rescued. That’s on you.
John Donvan:
Time out, time out, time out.
Eylon Levy:
Mr. Hasan—
Mehdi Hasan:
That is on Israel.
John Donvan:
Answer this.
Mehdi Hasan:
I will.
John Donvan:
All right, I—
Mehdi Hasan:
No, I need to finish this point.
John Donvan:
I’m going to let you finish this point, and then we’re moving on.
Mehdi Hasan:
I will—I will happily support this pin because I support the release of all the hostages. And—and—no, no, no, let me finish, let me finish. And I support—I support the release of thousands of Palestinian detainees being raped and tortured and children. Do you support that? Let’s wear it together. Do you support the release—do you support the release of Palestinian children?
Eylon Levy:
I do not support releasing terrorists.
Mehdi Hasan:
Do you support the release of Palestinian children?
Eylon Levy:
Anyone—
Mehdi Hasan:
Let’s wear it together.
John Donvan:
All right, get some space here.
Mehdi Hasan:
He can’t answer the question. He won’t.
Eylon Levy:
I support the release of all innocent people.
Mehdi Hasan:
That’s all you’ve got? A gimmick once again. All you’ve got.
John Donvan:
All right, all right, I have one more question before we pivot to some questions from some journalists who are joining us. And I want to talk about America’s involvement in the situation. The U.S. has been largely supporting Israel. If the war in Israel is unjustified, that implicates the U.S. in an unjust war. If the war is justified, then we have an ally that requires our help. Which is it?
Discussion on U.S. Involvement
Eylon Levy:
When this war began, President Biden said that Israel is facing sheer, pure, unadulterated evil. It was so obvious in the moment of shock after October 7th that for Israel to defend itself, it has to dismantle the Hamas terror regime. That President Barack Obama said, “We must stand by our ally Israel as it dismantles Hamas.” The United States has made valuable support to Israel in its goal of bringing down the Hamas regime. What we need is pressure on Hamas and its patrons, Qatar, Turkey, and Iran, to let the hostages go. That pressure has not been forthcoming.
Mehdi Hasan:
I mean, before I came on stage, Gershon Baskin, who is Israel’s most famous hostage negotiator, he WhatsApped me and said he’s got a deal—three-for-one deal on the table with Hamas that Hamas has agreed to, to release all the hostages and end the war. He says it’s with Netanyahu; the ball’s in Netanyahu’s court. So when he keeps going about hostages, tell him to speak to his former boss to agree to a hostage deal.
As for the United States—
Eylon Levy:
That is a three-for-one deal to free terrorists in exchange for—
Mehdi Hasan:
As for the United States—
John Donvan:
Wait, wait, wait.
Mehdi Hasan:
As for the United States—
Eylon Levy:
Mr. Hasan—
John Donvan:
Wait, wait.
Mehdi Hasan:
As for the United States, it is tragic to me, as a citizen of the United Kingdom and the United States, that my two countries have armed Israel as it carries out what the ICJ has called a plausible genocide, as it arms a prime minister who is wanted for war crimes. The ICC Chief Prosecutor has called for the arrest of Yoav Gallant and Benjamin Netanyahu. The American government should not be arming a man wanted for war crimes, and Eylon Levy should have begun his speech tonight apologizing for working for a man who is wanted for war crimes by the ICC Chief Prosecutor.
Eylon Levy:
Mr. Donvan, you called me to account at the start of the debate and said I should not have called my opponent a liar. The former president of the ICJ, Joan Donoghue, had to go on—
Mehdi Hasan:
Many other judges disagree with that.
Eylon Levy:
Had to go on TV to—
John Donvan:
I believe the ICJ ruling did not define—
Eylon Levy:
Had to go on TV to refute the lie. The only reason for you to make that—
Mehdi Hasan:
The ICC Chief Prosecutor called for arrest warrants.
Eylon Levy:
Mr. Hasan—
Mehdi Hasan:
All right, this is not helping. We are not able to hear what anybody is saying. We’re not able to hear what anybody is saying. You’re both talking at the same time, and I’m talking at the third time. So let’s stop this.
Personal Reflections
I have a question for each of you before we pivot, which I would—I would—I want to ask you if you can answer without attacking one another, and I’m also curious to see if you can do it in under 20 seconds, because we’re just curious.
Each of you came to this debate, and by your decision to participate, we know—we saw on social media that both of you were attacked by members of your own camp for being even on the stage with somebody who’s holding the opposing view. But you showed up anyway. Eylon, why did you show up? 15 seconds.
Eylon Levy:
Because Iran, the Palestinian nationalists, and their allies are waging a war of misinformation that has one purpose. They want to destroy Israel, and they think it will be much easier to destroy Israel if they convince the world that Israel deserves to be destroyed. A full campaign of the most ridiculous lies to try to convince good, ordinary Americans that when they’re ready to pull the trigger and massacre us once more, they should stand to one side and say, “Well, the Jews had it coming,” and I’m not willing to allow that to happen.
John Donvan:
Mehdi Hasan.
Mehdi Hasan:
I believe that what is happening in Gaza—the killing of 16,000 children, the genocide in Gaza—is the great moral tragedy of our time, the great crime of our time, and I will go almost anywhere and take a stage with almost anyone to try and bring that war to an end and convince people that the war needs to end now.
Eylon Levy:
May I add something?
John Donvan:
No. No, we have to move forward.
Questions from Journalists
We have some journalists—we have four journalists—who are each going to ask one, I hope, very short question. They are people who have been writing about the area for a long time, particularly about the situation now, and they are certainly not monolithic in their own views.
Question from Peter Beinart
I first want to go to Peter Beinart. He’s a journalist who’s written for Time, The New York Times, The Atlantic; he’s former editor of The New Republic and editor-at-large of Jewish Currents. Peter, if you can stand up, there’s a microphone, I believe, in the aisle for you, and ask your incredibly short question.
Peter Beinart:
Eylon, you suggested that the goal of the war was to depose Hamas from power. But on October 11th, Benjamin Netanyahu said the goal of the war was to destroy Hamas. On October 12th, Yoav Gallant, the Defense Minister, said the goal was to wipe it from the earth, because I think they understood that even deposing Hamas would not necessarily make Hamas less of a fearsome threat. The Taliban didn’t become less of a fearsome threat to the United States once they stopped holding power. Saddam and his forces didn’t become less of a fearsome threat once they no longer held power. They recognized that winning this war meant destroying Hamas.
And yet your own former colleague, Dani Haloutz, said it’s not possible. I’d like you to be on the record. Do you think it’s possible to destroy Hamas? Or are Netanyahu and Gallant wrong?
Eylon Levy:
I believe it is possible to remove the Hamas terror regime from power. Whether leaders used belligerent rhetoric that exaggerated the goals of the war—no. Look, Hamas needs to be destroyed. It’s an idea. Some ideas deserve to be destroyed. And whether that idea is destroyed or not depends on the lessons that the people of Gaza take from this war. Will they conclude that terrorism is a dead end, that their leaders have repeatedly led them into disaster after disaster as part of their forever war against a Jewish state in any borders whatsoever? Or will they take the lesson that, in fact, they were rewarded for the October 7th massacre? That is what is at stake here, and we are trying to convince the people of Gaza terrorism is a dead end; there is no light at the end of that tunnel.
John Donvan:
Mehdi, you also get to respond.
Mehdi Hasan:
I think Peter made the point very eloquently. It’s a nonsensical war aim. The real war aims, of course, are what the Israeli ministers say when Smotrich says the aim of the war is to annihilate Gaza. That is the aim. I take it at face value.
Eylon Levy:
He literally said that.
Mehdi Hasan:
And when they say this stuff, when they talk about resettling Gaza, when they talk about staying in Gaza, that is what they—
Eylon Levy:
That’s not government policy, and those statements have been condemned.
Mehdi Hasan:
I would just say this: you want to convince the people of Gaza that terrorism is a dead end, then stop inflicting terrorism on them. Every accusation is a confession.
Question from Jillian Lederman
John Donvan:
Our next question comes from Jillian Lederman. Jillian is an editorial fellow at The Wall Street Journal, former chief executive chair of the Israel Leadership Network. Jillian, thanks for joining us, and what’s your question?
Jillian Lederman:
Thank you. My question is: given the current circumstances, do you believe that Israel pulling out of Gaza in 2005 was the right decision?
Mehdi Hasan:
Who’s that a question for?
John Donvan:
Either of you.
Eylon Levy:
It’s a difficult question. Let me just ask you, Jillian, are you pointing that to anybody in particular?
Jillian Lederman:
Both can answer it.
Eylon Levy:
Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip in 2005 and never wanted to go back. It gave them Gaza. They had the option to turn it into Singapore; they chose to turn it into Mosul. They could have had a thriving state in Gaza after Israel pulled out, and Jewish organizations paid to donate the greenhouses. Instead, they chose to rig Gaza for war. The tunnel network under Gaza is the largest public works project the Palestinians have ever undertaken. They did it for the sake of the October 7th massacre.
John Donvan:
Was it a mistake to pull out? That was the question.
Eylon Levy:
I don’t know.
Mehdi Hasan:
No, fair enough, fair enough. Simple answer is, of course, Israel did not pull out of Gaza, as the ICJ has pointed out just recently. Gaza is occupied territory. Let me put it very simply to you. What Eylon doesn’t tell you is when they pulled out, they kept control of Gaza’s land borders, sea—
Eylon Levy:
We control the borders; we’re on the other side.
Mehdi Hasan:
The land borders—have you noticed—I should answer without interruption—the land borders, the sea waters, the air, and—wait, wait, wait for it, wait for it—the population registry. If you’re born in Gaza, you have to be registered with the Israelis. If you were born in New York and your birth had to be registered with a foreign country, would you say you were occupied or not occupied? Would you say you’re a free people or an unfree people? It’s an absolute lie; the occupation never ended.
Eylon Levy:
Israel ended the occupation of Gaza in 2005 under international—
Mehdi Hasan:
No, let me interrupt you.
John Donvan:
Hold it, hold it, hold it, hold it, hold it. We are done with the interruptions. It’s just destructive.
Eylon Levy:
So you call me to account when I interrupt; when he interrupts, it’s—
John Donvan:
You just did.
Eylon Levy:
No, you didn’t call him to account.
John Donvan:
No, you just interrupted me.
Eylon Levy:
He interrupted me.
John Donvan:
He interrupted you. Let’s just be even-handed.
Eylon Levy:
Israel ripped people out of their homes.
Mehdi Hasan:
I know, I know. I was there; I was there.
Eylon Levy:
I witnessed it.
Mehdi Hasan:
He witnessed it, Eylon. It happened.
John Donvan:
Next up.
Question from Dean Obeidallah
We have another question from Dean Obeidallah, a lawyer, a comedian, and a journalist who is host of The Dean Obeidallah Show and a frequent commentator on CNN, MSNBC, and The Daily Beast. Dean, thanks for joining us.
Dean Obeidallah:
Thank you. I have a question for Eylon. You’ve defended everything the Israeli military has done—everything. And Mehdi’s gone through it. My family lives in the West Bank. My question is, is there anything that you would condemn Israel for in terms of killing Palestinian Christians and Muslims, or are they all inhuman in your view and not worthy of any sympathy, dignity, or self-determination as a people?
John Donvan:
All right, hang on a second, hang on. I have an issue with the question. The first part of the question—”Is there anything you would condemn from Israel?”—legitimate question. But the assumption that if he feels differently, that he has no sense of the humanity of Palestinians, is a bit of some baggage loaded into the question. So why don’t you take the question: Is there anything that Israel is doing that you would condemn?
Eylon Levy:
I have gone on TV as a government spokesman when the army said that there was a particular mistake and a certain target should not have been hit. We fess up and admit our mistakes because that is what a responsible military should do.
Mehdi Hasan:
Okay.
Eylon Levy:
But Israel is fighting an enemy whose use of war crimes is strategic and systematic. They’re not investigated on Hamas’s end; no one is ever called to account. Its use of war crimes against its own civilians while they hide behind them in their schools and hospitals to fire at us is strategic and systematic. And so I stand by my country as it fights to use proportionate force to dismantle the Hamas army of terror, because yes, my neighbors are human.
John Donvan:
Okay.
Mehdi Hasan:
Because a better future—
Eylon Levy:
I have an important—
Mehdi Hasan:
I have a very important technical program note. I’ve received a message that the audience clapping volume is so loud that in the recording, very frequently it’s been impossible to hear what our debaters are saying.
John Donvan:
So what I would like you to do is to clap in between their points, let them finish, and then go for it, please.
Mehdi Hasan:
The gentleman challenged my humanity, and I would like to defend it.
Eylon Levy:
I tried to let this go.
Mehdi Hasan:
I want a future of peace between us and our neighbors. That cannot happen as long as the Hamas terror regime is in power.
Eylon Levy:
On the subject of—I’ll wait for the applause.
Mehdi Hasan:
On the subject of Eylon’s humanity, I asked him earlier if he supported the release of Palestinian children. He refused to say so. He can tonight. We’ll all wear this pin. Let me say this on the West Bank.
Eylon Levy:
He cannot help but cherry-pick the evidence.
Mehdi Hasan:
He cannot help but cherry-pick the evidence. He just said a moment ago—he tried to gaslight you—he said Hamas is never held to account. Actually, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court gave out five arrest warrant requests—three for Hamas, two for Israel. I support all of those arrest warrant requests. Do you?
Eylon Levy:
Every single line—
Mehdi Hasan:
It’s a yes or no question.
Eylon Levy:
Every single line—
Mehdi Hasan:
It’s a yes or no question.
Eylon Levy:
You support accountability for all of them?
Mehdi Hasan:
Absolutely.
Eylon Levy:
But you—
Mehdi Hasan:
Do you support arrest warrants for Netanyahu?
John Donvan:
Wait, wait, wait. Now we can’t hear what you’re both saying.
Mehdi Hasan:
Do you support arrest warrants for Netanyahu?
Eylon Levy:
No, Mr. Hasan, because every single line—every single line in the request by the prosecutor is based on lies, like the allegation of starvation, impossible to reconcile with over one million tons of aid that have entered Gaza since the start of this war—more than 52,000 trucks.
Mehdi Hasan:
52,000?
Eylon Levy:
52,000—69 trucks right now. Did you know that, Mr. Hasan?
Mehdi Hasan:
69 trucks, according to 15—
Eylon Levy:
According to 15 aid agencies.
John Donvan:
All right.
Mehdi Hasan:
Who are they?
John Donvan:
I can’t hear what either of you are saying.
Mehdi Hasan:
Who should we believe, 15 aid agencies or you?
Eylon Levy:
Mr. Hasan—
Mehdi Hasan:
Who should we believe, Mr. Hasan—15 aid agencies or you?
Eylon Levy:
These aid agencies are quoting—
John Donvan:
Do you believe that Eylon’s statistics are accurate, yes or no?
Mehdi Hasan:
Actually, no.
John Donvan:
Wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.
Closing Statements
We are coming down to the end for our closing statements, and that’s where each debater has the floor again exclusively to make their case one more time for you.
Eylon, you’re up first in this one more time to remind people—I think they know—that you’re arguing that Israel’s war in Gaza—I’m sorry, Israel’s actions in Gaza are justified. You can take the floor, and you have two minutes to tell us why.
Eylon Levy’s Closing Statement
Eylon Levy:
After the sadistic massacre of October 7th, Hamas immediately told us, “If you leave us on our feet, we will do this again and again.” It wasn’t enough to cremate little children; it wasn’t enough to commit acts of gang rape, rape, pedophilia, necrophilia; it wasn’t enough to gag people, bind them, tie them to trees, and strip them. They told us, “We’re coming for you. If you leave us on our feet, we will do this again and again.”
This war has been horrible. We have paid a horrific price for it. We are trying to prevent the threat of a repeat October 7th massacre, and we are fighting a sadistic enemy that rigged the battlefield in a way that said, “We’ve hidden our military assets under civilians. The only way that you can get to us is by going through civilians.” And that’s why Israel has taken more actions than any military in the history of the world—and so every commander from Afghanistan and Iraq will agree—in order to keep the civilians safe from their own leaders’ sick strategy of trying to sacrifice them.
I asked Mr. Hasan: Removing Hamas from power—legitimate, yes or no? And he wriggled out of it. He said, “Well, defending Israel is legitimate, but not the point—you go into Gaza.” Okay, his response: End the occupation. Let Hamas have an Ismail Haniyeh International Airport; let it have a Mohammed Deif naval base. There is nothing you can do with a terror regime that is sworn to your destruction, whose goals are legitimately genocidal.
We need this war to end, but we need this war to end in a way that ensures that Hamas cannot restart it at a time of its choosing, feeling emboldened and empowered because of international pressure generated by people like Mehdi Hasan to keep saving it from the wars that it starts.
John Donvan:
Time.
Eylon Levy:
And I just need to say—
John Donvan:
And Mehdi Hasan, you have the final word in this debate. One more time, your argument for why Israel’s actions in the Gaza War were not justified.
Mehdi Hasan’s Closing Statement
Mehdi Hasan:
Ladies and gentlemen, were the actions of Israel in Gaza justified? Look, the argument is pretty simple tonight and pretty hypocritical from Eylon. What we’ve heard tonight is that October—nothing justifies October the 7th, but October the 7th justifies everything. Well, I’m here tonight to tell you, no, October the 7th does not justify everything. It does not justify the suffering in Gaza; it does not justify the killing of kids in Gaza; it does not justify the starvation in Gaza; it does not justify the rape and torture of Palestinian detainees, which Eylon refused to condemn tonight; it does not justify any of that. It doesn’t justify the tearing up of the Geneva Conventions, the defiance of international law and the ICC and our own laws.
Yes, October the 7th was a war crime, but the response to a war crime is not to commit your own series of war crimes on an epic scale—33 times as many people killed since October the 7th as were killed on October the 7th.
And I’ll say this to you, look, very, very clearly: If you support this motion tonight, you are opening the gates of hell—not just in Gaza but globally—because every dictator and tyrant around the world will say, “Israel’s actions were justified; then so are mine.” Putin, Assad, Kim—they all say, “Israel killed kids; Israel killed aid workers; Israel killed journalists. So can we.”
And I will be—I will be very clear—I will be very clear with you tonight. If you are here tonight, ladies and gents—if you’re here tonight to defend what Israel’s done, knowing full well what Israel has done, if you’re defending the human suffering in Gaza, the amputation of little kids, if you’re doing that in full knowledge, then you’re not just here to defend the indefensible or justify the unjustifiable—I’m sorry, you’re a sociopath.
And I will say to you, don’t—please, please, please don’t be a sociopath tonight. Don’t support war crimes. Don’t defend a genocide. Join me and every human rights organization in the world, every humanitarian aid agency on the planet, every American doctor and nurse who’s been out to volunteer in Gaza. Join us in opposing this ridiculous and offensive and horrendous motion.
And on behalf of the Al-Dos family, who Eylon clearly doesn’t give a damn about, I beg to oppose this motion.
John Donvan:
I am curious—did anybody have their minds changed tonight by anything they heard? Wow. All right.
So here’s the thing—the reason I turned down John’s question, we really try to preserve the integrity of what a debate is supposed to be, and it’s supposed to be about the question, and it’s supposed to stay on the question; it’s supposed to avoid personal attacks. But you came all this way, and Mehdi would actually, it seems like, like to answer the question. So go for it. This is an extra.
Final Exchange
Mehdi Hasan:
Eylon accused you of being in the pay of Qatar earlier. You took objection to that. I’d like you to be able to dispel that you’re taking any money from Qatar by confirming that you’re not taking money for Zeeto—from Qatar. Is Qatar funding Zeeto or no?
John Donvan:
It’s a great question, John, because you work as a media correspondent for the New York Post.
Mehdi Hasan:
No, I’m not. I’m answering your question. Patience.
John Donvan:
No, no, we can’t have this.
Mehdi Hasan:
We waited for you. You’re a media columnist for the New York Post, were you not?
John Donvan:
I’m sorry, we’re not—I’m sorry, we’re not here to talk about your career.
Mehdi Hasan:
Political reporter for the New York Post.
John Donvan:
I know you are, and I’m not. So I’m sorry, John. If you want to come up with a question that’s on point about Israel’s actions in Gaza, go for it, please.
John Leven:
Yeah, I can, because this is a debate where you ask questions.
John Donvan:
No, we’re going to pass on it. Thank you.
Mehdi Hasan:
I now really want to answer the question.
John Donvan:
I regret taking that question. I regret the times this debate failed to be high-minded by two people whom I otherwise respect.
And I want to say that concludes our debate. I want to thank our debaters, Eylon Levy and Mehdi Hasan. We appreciate that you did show up and that you at least talked—maybe not to one another but at one another vigorously and vociferously. And in fact, you were listening to one another, if only to counter, but you were listening to one another, and I think that’s progress.
And I want to thank all of you in the audience for being here and being open to debate, and I want to thank all of the journalists who joined us as well for moving the conversation in a more interesting direction.
So that is a wrap on this debate. We’re Open to Debate. I’m John Donvan, and we’ll see you next time.
