If Hamas’ war crimes resembled Israeli war crimes, I would support the Palestinian resistance.

Let me clarify upfront: I’m speaking hypothetically and based on the premise of how war crimes and injustices are portrayed.

If the worst thing I risked by supporting Palestinian nationalism were the war crimes often attributed to Israel—demolitions, evictions, or blockades, painful as they are—I’d still stand firmly with the Palestinian people in their struggle for self-determination. I’d say: "Yes, I am ready to bear that cost if it means the prospect of a one-state or two-state solution where Palestinians live with dignity and autonomy."

if the Palestinian struggle were led by a movement that limited itself to war crimes "as portrayed" against Israel—disproportionate responses, demolishing homes tied to militants, and the like—
I am serious, show me the worst of what Israel is doing and I will be willing to bear that cost. Show me the worst of it, really. While imperfect, it will be within the framework of targeting military objectives, even if it meant collateral damage, or imposing collective punishment in ways that, though condemnable, are at least tethered to some twisted logic of deterrence or retaliation. Such actions, however painful, could still be understood as part of a broader, albeit flawed, strategy to achieve justice or secure a homeland.

In that scenario, I’d unequivocally support it. I could look at such a movement and say, “This is not pure, but it is recognizably a fight for freedom and self-determination.” At least then, the movement would be morally legible—its actions could be debated, criticized, or supported based on principles of justice rather than vengeance or nihilism.

For me, justice means opposing both forms of violence while holding onto the belief that Palestinian liberation is still possible.