Without re-opening the controversial debate of the Lord Balfour Declaration that led to the creation of the Israeli state in 1948, more than a hundred years later, no one can deny the legitimate right of Israel to exist, more so now that the majority of countries around the world have recognised it as an independent, sovereign state.

Still, antizionism has become the most dangerous and effective form of anti-Semitism in our time by systematically delegitimising, defaming and demonising the state of Israel. Although not expressly anti-Semitic, the calls to dismantle the Jewish state, whether coming from Muslims, the extremist left or the radical right, increasingly rely on an anti-Semitic stereotypization of classic themes, such as the 'manipulative Jewish lobby', the Jewish Zionist 'world conspiracy' or the Jewish/Israeli 'warmongers'.

One fundamental reason for this anti-semitism and anti-zionist ideology and creed is the transformation of the Palestinian cause into a 'holy war'.

The latest common denominator has been the systematic effort to criminalise Israeli and Jewish behaviour so as to place it beyond the pale of civilised and acceptable conduct.

Take the Hamas Covenant issued in 1988, for example. Its preamble literally states that "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." This is nothing but a dangerous ideology bent on the destruction of Israel.

Article 15 of the Covenant, then, states that "The day the enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In the face of the Jews' usurpation, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised." This is a call to jihad. The details of how to go about it are laid down in Article 7.

Finally, Article 13 totally rejects any negotiated peace settlement.

Having stated this, I'll now move on to the October 7 Hamas pogrom on Israeli territory last year, during which many Israeli citizens were brutally murdered, and that rightly invited a terrible Israeli reaction and backlash that is still ongoing in Israel's neighbouring territory and countries.

The ongoing war, however, is not like others.

Israel, so grievously wounded by Hamas on October 7, is going to extraordinarily violent lengths to destroy the group responsible for that day's atrocities. In doing so, it is committing atrocities of its own.

Many Palestinians have died to date, most of them innocent. The indirect death toll from starvation and disease will likely be higher. Almost two-thirds of Gaza's homes have been damaged or destroyed. The majority of Gaza's population has been displaced.

But the war is not limited to Gaza. It has spread to neighbouring Lebanon and is stretching so far as Yemen, the legitimate excuse being that Israel is necessarily pitted against the terrorist groups of Hezbollah and the Houthi Movement that have struck an alliance with Hamas.

There's no doubt that Israel has done significant damage to Hamas's infrastructure. Its army and air force have killed or captured somewhere around one-third of Hamas's fighting force, destroyed at least half of its rocket stockpile, and demolished somewhere between 20 and 40 percent of its tunnel network under Gaza. The more the war goes on, the higher those numbers will become.

But as significant as these achievements are, none of them come close to eliminating Hamas.

The Israeli government describes civilian death as a regrettable but inevitable consequence of waging a war to eliminate Hamas. But as of right now, that goal is still very far away and may ultimately prove to be impossible.

Israel's stated aim of "destroying Hamas" is at once maximalist and open-ended. It isn't clear how it can be accomplished or what limit there might be on the means used in its pursuit. Israel's conduct in the war so far shows this. The embrace of an objective at once so massive and vague has dragged Israel down the moral nadir with unclear and perhaps even self-defeating ends.

The current situation in the Middle East is an era-defining catastrophe.

Things did not have to be this way. After the horrific events of October 7, Israel had an obviously just claim to wage a defensive war against Hamas. It also had the tactical and strategic capabilities to execute a smarter, more limited and more humane war plan.

Yet Israel couldn't have had a worse government to respond to a worse moment. It appears that it has failed in its just cause, all because of an extremist government and a venal prime minister who placed personal interests over their country's during such a critical time as wartime.

War cannot be ethically waged without having reasonable prospects for success. It inevitably involves a lot of killing, and killing can only be justified if it accomplishes a greater good. If the objective behind the killing is impossible or extremely implausible, then there is no greater good to be won from the bloodshed.

While the Israeli government is not willing to change course voluntarily, both Israeli voters and the Biden administration have significant leverage over their policies. Their combined pressure might produce either a change in policy or a change in government, pulling Israel away from the abyss.

Anyone with goodwill and intentions should eagerly wish for such a welcome development.

But should it not come about, a postwar Israel might have to reckon with the deeply mistaken assumptions behind its terrible policy and, in doing so, transform the future of the Israel-Palestine conflict, much removed from any possible two-state solution.

Dr Mark Said is a lawyer