Some time ago, back in December 2023, I wrote an article examining the ethical responsibility of scientists, particularly those working on military projects. The Manhattan Project, the WW2 American scientific-military project to construct an atomic bomb, was an obvious example of the troubling ethical implications of deploying science for military outcomes.

Let’s explore this topic further. First, let’s begin with some definitions.

What is hasbara? It is an Israeli term meaning ‘explaining’. The Israeli government, realising that public opinion is a powerful force, has deployed what we would call propaganda to promote the Zionist cause. Articulated by the Polish Zionist activist Nahum Sokolow in the early 20th century, Hasbara is a propaganda effort to control and influence perceptions of debates surrounding Israeli government policies and practices. 

In the age of social media, Hasbara has adapted to the new medium. Sowing doubts about the veracity of Palestinian and anti-Zionist critics of the Israeli state, Hasbara is a refined, granular application of what in the old colonial days would have been called propaganda. Private sector companies, working in collaboration with Israeli government institutions, produce copious amounts of propaganda material, advocating the Israeli government’s perspective and countering its critics.

Shaping perceptions of Israeli government actions is not new in this age of social media. Through Hasbara, Zionism’s supporters have promoted an image of Israel as a scientifically advanced, technologically sophisticated society. There is an element of truth to this; Israeli leaders from David Ben Gurion (1886 – 1973) and Chaim Weizmann (1874 – 1952) emphasised the importance and development of science to consolidate the Israeli government’s control of occupied Palestinian land.

What is left out of this picture is that Ben Gurion, Weizmann and their colleagues were specifically interested in the development of military applications for scientific projects. Weizmann, for instance, was a chemist, and he used his technical skills to develop weapons for the fledgling state. Ben Gurion made no secret of his desire to see Israel become a nuclear power. He never wrestled with the ethical consequences of atomic power, and never once hesitated advocating its use against his Arab neighbours. 

Israeli government leaders have, since the initiation of its secretive nuclear programme in the 1950s, neither officially confirmed nor denied the development and possession of nuclear weapons.

Though I did not fully realise it at the time, I got an instructive lesson in the power of Hasbara in June 1981. In that month, Israeli warplanes struck and destroyed an unfinished Iraqi nuclear reactor located 17 kilometres south east of Baghdad, Iraq. Named Osirak, it was being constructed by French technicians. The Israeli air strike, ironically, came after forces from the Islamic Republic of Iran bombed the nuclear facility. Iran and Iraq were engaged in warfare at the time.

Israeli forces violated the airspace of several Arab nations to target this reactor. Whether it was actually capable of building a nuclear weapon is still questionable. What the attack demonstrated was the Israeli government’s willingness to maintain a monopoly on nuclear weapons. Opponents of the Israeli state were not going to be permitted to develop any nuclear capability.

This air strike was portrayed as a purely defensive reaction to the allegedly aggressive ambitions of the Ba’athist state in Iraq. The West was quite happy to support Iraq’s ambitions against Iran at the time, supplying Baghdad with weapons and intelligence information. Israel’s status as just a puny David confronting an Arab Goliath was promoted in the aftermath of the Osirak attack. 

Ironically, the only achievement of the June 1981 attack was to convince the Iraqi leadership of the necessity to pursue nuclear weapons. A rogue air strike, which violated international law, only convinced the Iraqi government that the best way to protect itself in the future is to arm itself with nuclear weapons.

There has been a deluge of coverage regarding the so-called Twelve Day War of 2025 between Iran and Israel. Each side exchanged missile and bombing attacks, and I do not intend to go into an extensive analysis here – that would require a separate essay. However, we can make some pertinent observations here. 

Tehran targeted numerous military sites and installations in Israel. One of the targets was the Weizmann Institute of Science. Yes, numerous civilian scientists have graduated from that institution, and some have gone on to win Nobel prizes. It is also heavily involved in Israeli military research, producing technologies deployed by the Israeli military against the Palestinians.

The Iranian attack, in June 2025, inflicted heavy damage on the facility in Rehovot, Israel. Multiple labs, scientific equipment and projects were destroyed. No, it is not right to attack a scientific institution, but I am not going to outright condemn it either. Israeli authorities, for decades, have bragged to overseas audiences about their scientific capabilities and its purportedly sophisticated military technology. 

Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu boasted, for instance, about the Iron Dome, the allegedly state-of-the-art mobile air defence system. It was so effective, so we were told, even Australian military chiefs were demanding that such a defence system be developed in Australia.

Iran’s missile strikes against Israeli military installations and government facilities exposed not only the many holes in the Iron Dome, but also the gap between Israeli government propaganda and reality. Scientists are not operating in a social vacuum, they reflect the values of the institutions for whom they work.

Iran, we are instructed by Hasbara, is controlled by mad, fanatical ayatollahs. That may be the case. Perhaps the mad mullahs want to fight until the bitter end, and welcome Armageddon. The twelve day war demonstrated that the Iranian military developed sophisticated technology, capable of responding to its opponents. That indicates a degree of preparation, scientific research and knowledge gathering, rational decision making and evaluation of enemy capabilities.

Perhaps the madness resides, not in the minds of the supposedly insane ayatollahs, but in those politicians in the imperialist West who are banking on nuclear weapons as a safeguard. Indeed, nuclear proliferation and all its attendant consequences is the inevitable result of paranoia-driven national and scientific security policies.