One of the most prominent philosophers of recent decades, German thinker Jürgen Habermas (1929–2026), passed away recently. He made significant contributions to philosophy, sociology, communication studies, and political science. He was widely known for his role in developing the German critical school, also known as the Frankfurt School, for founding the Theory of Communicative Action and for advocating rational and free dialogue. For decades, Habermas was seen as an icon of rationality and enlightenment in the contemporary world. But after his death, debates emerged among Arab intellectuals and academics, particularly regarding his political biases. Central to these discussions was Habermas’s continued support for the occupation of Palestine and his unconditional backing of the Zionist settler war against the Palestinian people, the indigenous population of the land. His position on the past two years of Gaza’s devastation and siege drew criticism and scrutiny from many thinkers worldwide. The fundamental question is why a philosopher who dedicated his life to defending democracy, rationality, and free communication would support a settler-colonial occupation founded on historical fabrications and religious myths. Indeed, Israel’s occupation directly contradicts the intellectual project Habermas championed.
It also clashes with other instances in which he adhered to his “principles,” such as his 2021 rejection of the Sheikh Zayed Book Award. After an article in the German magazine Der Spiegel highlighted repression, the denial of freedoms, and the lack of justice in the United Arab Emirates, he refused the award. This stance was seen as evidence of Habermas’s consistency in defending democracy and freedom. In the case of the Israeli occupation, however, Habermas denied that the war on the people of Gaza constituted genocide , despite the unprecedented scale of the killings, accompanying massacres, war crimes, forced displacement, and starvation. Over 10% of Gaza’s population was killed or injured, and the death toll exceeded 72,000, mostly children, women, and the elderly, according to the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics (16 March 2026).
Some analysts explain this contradiction between Habermas’s stated principles and his political alignment with the settler-colonial occupation of Palestine as a product of the local context of the German elite. For decades, this elite has carried a profound sense of guilt stemming from the Nazi legacy and its crimes against Jews. Part of contemporary Germany’s attempt to atone for Hitler’s crimes has been unconditional support for the Israeli state, which positioned itself as the official representative of Holocaust victims and their reparations. Others attribute this stance to the influence of the German pro-Israel lobby over state institutions, to the point where some describe Germany as effectively under a combined U.S.-Israeli tutelage, limiting its autonomy. This explanation is reinforced by the positions and rhetoric of current German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, which some see as echoing that of convicted war criminal Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as by the German government’s repressive policies against Germans opposing the Gaza killings. These policies, in many cases, rival the brutality of authoritarian regimes in what they call the “Third World". Beyond these explanations, another interpretation sheds light on the gap between Habermas’s principles and his actions regarding Palestine. This view considers the contradiction not as unique to Habermas or to German thinkers and politicians but as pervasive throughout Western thought historically, with few exceptions. The reason for this inconsistency is what the author calls “exclusive humanist principles", where a group adopts values and ethics for its own members but abandons them when dealing with people outside the group . In other words, Western ethics and principles remain universal in discourse only; in practice, they are applied selectively to those recognised as belonging to the in-group and ignored entirely for the "Others".
The brutal history of colonialism offers stark evidence. While the French professed fraternity, justice, and equality among citizens in France, they simultaneously annihilated entire populations in the Americas, Africa, and Asia. Britain portrayed itself as a defender of human rights and minority freedoms while killing millions worldwide to seize wealth, without seeing a contradiction with human rights principles. This model extends to the modern U.S. empire, which justifies resource plundering under the banner of spreading democracy and free-world values, sending armies to kill and destroy. Western philosophers, thinkers, and reformers produced tens of thousands of texts on European humanist principles over centuries of colonialism, largely ignoring their application in occupied countries, and those few who noticed faced harsh local criticism. The concept of exclusive humanist principles applies to all “non-Western” peoples, including non-European residents of Western countries. Even those with citizenship face forms of discrimination and racism contrary to Western humanist ideals. Right-wing ideologies express this bias overtly, and the U.S. administration’s rhetoric against immigrants exemplifies these selective humanist principles, often justified by myths of European white supremacy and calls for globalising Western culture. As such, Habermas did not betray his principles by supporting the killing of Palestinians. Rather, he remained faithful to the Western exclusive humanist principles, which only recognise humanity when reflected in the in-group. Habermas did not advocate for global rationality and democracy or defend free communication worldwide. His defence of these values was limited to the Western sphere; outside it, Western principles do not exist. Emad Abdul-Latif is Professor of Rhetoric and Discourse Analysis at Qatar University Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab, its editorial board or staff, or the author's employer. Article translated from Arabic by Afrah Almatwari. To read the original, click here .