In his editorial on the Financial Times of September 16, Gideon Rachman explains how, usually, he manages to deduce the entire constellation of ideas of a person from a single opinion. But on wars in Ukraine and Gaza the map becomes much less predictable. Rachman identifies four categories.

1.⁠ ⁠Pro Ukraine and pro Israel.
Both countries are seen as democracies under attack. Bernard-Henri Lévy rejected the accusation of genocide against Israel, claiming that a genocidal army would not take two years to defeat a “large as Las Vegas” territory.

2.⁠ ⁠Pro Ukraine and Pro Palestine.
In the center there are human rights and the condemnation of war crimes. Russia and Israel are accused of hitting innocent civilians. It is no coincidence that the International Criminal Court has issued arrest against Putin and Netanyahu. Among the most representative, Pedro Sánchez, who accused the West of hypocrisy and Israel of genocide.

3.⁠ ⁠pro Russia and pro Israel.
Viktor Orbán embodies this position: proximity to Moscow for reasons of nationalism and diffidence towards supranational institutions such as NATO and EU. Support to Israel as opposed to Islamic immigration. Donald Trump also seems to be placed here, albeit for reasons other than those of Orbán.

4.⁠ ⁠pro Russia and Pro Palestine.
Tucker Carlson is the best known face: for him Israel and Ukraine try to drag the United States into wars of others. Rachman did not mention it, but it is also the position of those who refuse the use of democracy as a grom to overcome geopolitical red lines.

I add a fifth category not included in the FT editorial:

5.⁠ ⁠chi does not fear to change their mind when the facts contradict the original position. It is not inconsistency, but simple mental hygiene.

preferablearrivatriprimadelleffettomandria