Josephus, before becoming the great Jewish historian of the first century, led Jewish rebels against the Romans in defense of Jerusalem. But after the battle was lost, he surrendered to the Romans and won the favor of Rome, living out the rest of his life there as a successful writer. His story has led many to see him as a traitor to his people and his work as thinly disguised Roman propaganda. William den Hollander argues that this reading is mistaken (free registration required):

One of the key contributors to the negative assessment of Josephus’ character, which has also affected the manner in which his narratives have been read, has been the scholarly and popular misunderstanding of his relationship with the Roman generals/emperors. The traditional view has been that Josephus served as an imperial lackey and that his writings, in particular the Jewish War, were nothing more than works of propaganda advancing the interests of the imperial throne. Since the early 1980s, however, this view has been increasingly questioned by experts. By close examination of his narratives and careful contextualization of Josephus and his writings within ancient society, scholars have begun to recognize that his relationship with the emperors was not quite as close as had been assumed (or, perhaps, as close as Josephus wished to have us believe) and that, furthermore, his narratives do not quite fit the characteristic of propaganda. In fact, they are at times quite the opposite.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.