This opinion article, recently published in the New York Times, examines a dangerous outcome of the Israel-Hamas war which the conflict seems to be tending towards – a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, where after Hamas control is overthrown, no sound governing body takes its place. The article details how Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and its extremist government are sending soldiers into the Gaza strip without any plan for control or governance, yet they refuse to enlist Palestinian Authority to help take control of the situation. The article then compares this to how the US never established a strong democracy in Iraq after liberating it and asserts the claim that it is the responsibility of invading countries to provide aid and structure for the invaded countries in the aftermath of a conflict.  

Since the article was published in the New York Times, it reaches a broad audience, of various political views, but perhaps with a slightly liberal bias. The title, though slightly misleading, is good at grabbing the attention of readers and drawing interest — I initially read the article thinking it would relate to nuclear science, but it was just about geopolitics. However, the word “radioactive” in the title ends up serving as an apt metaphor in the article, since the unlivable landscape of a post-war Gaza is comparable to one ravaged by radiation.  

The purpose of the article is to draw attention to the responsibility of Israel to provide support Gaza to prevent the humanitarian crisis from escalating. To that effect, the article is mostly informative, but also slightly persuasive. The article seems to be mostly unbiased, as it abstains from taking extreme political views and acknowledges fault in both Hamas and Israel for the escalation of the crisis.  

The author demonstrates the use of ethos in the article, since he lists his experience traveling to Israel during the conflict, as well as his experiences in post-war Iraq, and connects his observations of the unfortunate circumstances to his narrative. Similarly, the author’s history of covering topics related to this current conflict adds to his credibility. The article is also persuasive through its use of logos; it connects the historical conditions in Iraq to the current conditions in Gaza, and it presents scientific data showing how a mismanaged Gaza will end up negatively impacting citizens in Israel, too.  

Overall, I found the article to be interesting and informative, even if it wasn’t about nuclear radioactivity. The article gave me a new perspective of what is at stake in this war, and in the actions following this war.