Settlers, soldiers in Hebron
Photo: AFP
Who wants to kill the settlers?
There’s a fine line between calling soldiers Nazis and blurring differences between settlers, terrorists
The excited declarations in the media following last week's riots in Hebron prove that the main lesson our politicians learned from the Gaza disengagement was that it pays to verbally attack the settlers.
If in the past politicians jostled to prove who amongst them was the toughest in the face of Palestinian terrorism, today the most popular target is – the settlers.
Instead of dealing with the question of why Mahmoud Abbas refuses to fulfill his promises to dismantle terror organizations, we are busy instead dismantling settler organizations.
Tense Atmosphere
Efrat Weiss
About one hundred Hebron settlers gathered Wednesday opposite the local police station to protest what they called "the Hebron district police's disgraceful conduct in recent days," in a demonstration marking the end of yet another tense day in town
The analogy between the settlers and Israel's enemies did not start with Hebron. The recent events there only strengthened it. Both before and during disengagement, teenagers who lent moral support to Gush Katif residents were decried as "infiltrators" and "illegal entrants."
But after these epithets wore themselves out, they needed to find new ones to label the settlers as the "other," the enemy.
And here we have it – "masked ones," because some rioters hid their faces from security forces. Add on top the headline "Jewish Intifada," and the picture is complete.
Irresponsible leaders
The lack of responsibility on the part of leaders of the Hebron Jewish community who made it possible for several rioters to throw stones and curse IDF soldiers is apparent at every level.
First of all, this sort of behavior only strengthens the government's commitment to evicting them, the sooner the better.
Secondly, such actions send a warped educational message to innocent children who came to help out with the struggle.
Thirdly, this sort of behavior serves first-and-foremost their political opponents, who use photographs of the rioters to blacken the name of an entire community.
Shameless comparison
The shameless comparison drawn by kids in Hebron between Israeli security forces and Nazis engenders scorn and ridicule, and anyone involved in such actions, to say nothing of people who throw stones and put the soldiers in danger, should be arrested for humiliating a public servant.
At the same time, we must understand that there is a thin line between such comparisons and blurring the line between settlers and terrorists.
And we have been involved in such blurring. When former Chief of Staff Moshe Yaalon predicted unilateral disengagement would lead Hamas to gain support (a prediction we see coming true before our very eyes), he was blistered with scorn and charged with overstepping his bounds and mixing politics with IDF business.
But the current chief of staff, Dan Halutz, has thrown blistering criticism at Israel's judicial system, saying the "State of Israel is at war with the State of Judea." But no one condemns him; no one bothers to ask what, exactly, the head of the army is doing involving himself with law enforcement issues.
No provocations
One recent study about the way the media presented disengagement claimed the media "only presented the government line on disengagement, and failed to present any other sides of the issue." In so doing, the media created an image of inexcusable extremists.
Now, the phenomenon continues. There is nothing new about a call to establish a "State of Judea" from none other than the IDF chief of staff. Yes, there are extremists identified with this community, but it is a tangential, small group, and well-known to the relevant security bodies.
Absurd claim
Acting Prime Minister Olmert's claim that subjugating the settlers is "a war over the rule of law in Israel” – is absurd. First of all, because the biggest threat facing the rule of law in this country is government corruption, for which more than a few members of Olmert's Kadima Party are outstanding symbols.
Secondly, as we will surely see in the state comptroller's annual report, due out soon, the government's behavior during disengagement was not exactly a model of a law-abiding body.
Thirdly, because if there really is a threat to the rule of law from the settlers, it comes from a group of teenagers, who must be dealt with, just like we must deal with the teenage criminal who brings a knife to school instead of a sandwich for lunch and is no less of a threat to the rule of law.
Therefore, before we run to blacken the name of an entire community, we would do well to keep things in proportion. As a community, the settlers are not only no threat to the rule of law – as their behavior during disengagement showed – but their loyalty to the State of Israel is beyond question.
As a "Patriotism Survey" to be presented to the Herzliya Conference shows, the national-religious community is the most patriotic community in the country. And they are patriotic to the State of Israel, not the State of Judea.
Anat Roth is a doctoral candidate in political science and the author of "The secret of the Yesha Council's power"
