Casualties of IDF attack in Khan Younis
Photo: Reuters
Call to kill civilians absurd
Jewish ethics requires us to fight Palestinian terrorists, but not to target civilians. A response to Yisrael Rosen
It is hard to figure out what is more absurd about the last 10 days – Ehud Olmert's apologies for the deaths of Palestinian civilians or Yisrael Rosen's frightening assertion that "Jewish ethics require us to kill civilians."
Jewish Tradition
Yisrael Rosen
In face of intellectuals stabbing nation in back, Jewish tradition and law require us to respond to enemy fire in like kind
Said simply, Rosen's call for Israel to use the same methods as our enemies in warfare is nothing less than a bastardization of Jewish law, tradition, and ethics. The logical extension of his argument would be to for Israel should dispatch suicide bombers to the American Colony Hotel in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of Jerusalem, or to send IDF soldiers to break into Palestinian homes in order to murder children sleeping in their beds, in full view of their parents. Is that really what the good rabbi suggests?
Still, Rosen is not altogether wrong, at least insofar as his use of the Talmudic phrase "if someone comes to kill you, stand up and kill him first" is concerned. That phrase is undoubtedly appropriate and correct in the case of Israel's war of attrition with the Palestinian Authority.
In addition, Rosen's assertion that an aggressive – or defensive, for that matter – IDF battlefield policy will necessarily lead to Palestinian civilian deaths, and that there is little Israel can do to stop such deaths, short of surrendering unconditionally (one shudders to think about what such a surrender might entail, seeing as there are no Israeli civilians or troops left in Gaza).
Palestinian win-win
Why is this necessarily so? Because Palestinian soldiers position themselves amongst Palestinian civilians to create what they seem to view as a "win-win" situation: Either their attacks will wound or kill Israelis, or Israel's response will kill produce footage of dead Palestinian civilians for the international media, creating a public relations victory for the Palestinian cause.
In this light, Prime Minister Olmert, Defense Minister Peretz and senior IDF officials sound no less ridiculous that Mr. Rosen in their repeated apologies to the Palestinians for the deaths of civilians in a war that they started.
Instead of apologizing for civilian deaths, Israeli officials at every level should express sincere regret for the deaths of civilians, and point out that IDF forces will continue have orders to respond to enemy fire, wherever it may originate. An appropriate declaration might look something like this:
"IDF troops came under fire early this morning and returned fire at the points where that fire originated. Unfortunately, Palestinian forces chose to shoot from a civilian apartment building, and several civilians were killed in the exchange. We deeply regret the loss of innocent lives and condemn the Palestinian terrorists who positioned themselves in such a way as to ensure civilian casualties.
"Unlike Palestinian groups across the political spectrum who have murdered Israeli civilians in cold blood for decades, Israel has never, and will never, target Palestinian civilians. But IDF troops will continue to defend themselves and this country when fired upon, even when enemy soldiers position themselves amongst the civilian population. The responsibility for Palestinian civilian deaths in these cases lies squarely on Palestinian shoulders."
Little effect
Such a declaration would surely do little to pacify inherently hostile foreign elements such as the BBC, United Nations or leaders of the international boycott Israel movement. But no declaration is going to pacify them. To them, Israel is no more than a colonial occupier that must be excised from the map– not because Jews live in Efrat and Tel Rumeida, but because they live in Ashkelon and Tel Aviv.
But many, many Israelis find it difficult to reconcile the par between Olmert's and Peretz's defensive posture and the correct image they would like to have of the IDF as a defensive army that tries to respond strongly to enemy attacks while correctly trying to avoid hurting or killing civilians when possible.
There is little Israel can do to discourage Palestinians from their cynical use of civilians in this manner. There is also little Israel can do to prevent the out-of-context reproduction of these images by hostile foreign media. But at the moment, there is not even a strong Israeli voice to counterbalance the false picture being presented overseas. Strong Israeli statements placing the blame for these casualties squarely on the proper shoulders would at least serve as such a counter-balance.
More importantly it would serve as a clear message to Israelis of all stripes: We do regret the deaths of civilians, and we must (and do) try whenever possible to avoid such deaths. But in the situation created by the Palestinians, this is not always possible. In those cases, responsibility for their deaths lies squarely on Palestinian shoulders.
Andrew Friedman is opinion editor of Ynetnews
