- Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin and philosopher Asa Kasher, two
respected men around here, published an article entitled: "A just
war of a democratic state," (Haaretz, April 24, Hebrew).
-
- A remark about the first part: There are wars that are
necessary for self-defense or to fight injustice and evil. But the expression
"just" is problematic when speaking of war itself - which involves
killing and destruction and leaves women, children and old people homeless,
and sometimes even kills them.
-
- Our sages have said: "Don't be overly righteous."
And there is absolutely no question that dropping cluster bombs in an area
populated by civilians, as we did in the Second Lebanon War, does not testify
to great righteousness. The same thing can be said of using phosphorus
bombs against a civilian population.
-
- Apparently, according to the Yadlin and Kasher definition
of justice, in order to eliminate terrorists it is just to destroy, kill,
expel and starve a civilian population that has no connection to the acts
of terror and no responsibility for them. Perhaps had they adopted a more
decent and less arrogant approach they would have tried to explain the
reasons for the fury and intensity that brought about the shocking killing
and destruction, and even apologized for the fact that these exceeded any
reasonable necessity.
-
- But after all, we are always right; moreover, these things
were done by "the most moral army in the world," sent by the
"democratic" Jewish state - and here is the meeting point of
the two concepts in the title of Yadlin and Kasher's article.
-
- As for the army's morality, it would have been better
had they remained silent and thereby been considered wise. This is because
the statistics on the destruction and harm to civilians in the Gaza Strip
are familiar to everyone, and not divorced from the oh-so-moral behavior
of our army in the occupied territories. In the context of this behavior,
for example, the army operates with great efficiency against farmers who
demonstrate against the theft of their lands, even when the demonstrations
are not violent.
-
- The long-term evidence of abuse by soldiers against civilians
at the checkpoints - including repeated instances of expectant mothers
who are forced to give birth in the middle of the road, surrounded by armed
soldiers who laugh wickedly - is no secret either. Day after day, year
after year, the most moral army in the world helps to steal lands, uproot
trees, steal water, close roads - in the service of the righteous "Jewish
and democratic" state and with its support. It's heartbreaking, but
the State of Israel is no longer democratic. We are living in an ethnocracy
under "Jewish and democratic" rule.
-
- In 1970 it was decided that in Israel religion and nationality
are one and the same (that is why we are not listed in the Population Registry
as Israelis, but as Jews). In 1992 it was determined in the Basic Law on
Human Dignity and Liberty that Israel is a "Jewish state." There
is no mention in this law of the promise that appears in the state's formative
document, the Declaration of Independence, to the effect that "The
State of Israel will ensure complete equality of social and political rights
to all its inhabitants, irrespective of religion, race or sex." The
Knesset ratified the law nonetheless.
-
- And so there is a "Jewish state" and no "equality
of rights." Therefore some observers emphasize that the Jewish state
is not "a state of all its citizens." Is there really a democracy
that is not a state of all its citizens? After all, Jews living today in
democratic countries enjoy the full rights of citizenship.
-
- Democracy exists in the State of Israel today only in
the formal sense: There are parties and elections and a good judicial system.
But there is also an omnipotent army that ignores legal decisions that
restrict the theft of land owned and held by people who have been living
under occupation for the past 42 years. And since 1992, as we mentioned,
we also have the definition "Jewish state," which means an ethnocracy
- the rule of an ethnic religious community that strictly determines the
ethnic origin of its citizens according to maternal lineage. And as far
as other religions are concerned, disrespect for them is already a tradition,
since we have learned: "Only you are considered human beings, whereas
the gentiles are like donkeys."
-
- >From here it is clear that we and our moral army
are exempt from concerns for the Palestinians living in Israel, and this
is even more true of those living under occupation. On the other hand,
it is perfectly all right to steal their land because these are "state
lands" that belong to the State of Israel and its Jews.
-
- That is the case even though we have not annexed the
West Bank and have not granted citizenship to its inhabitants, who under
Jordanian rule were Jordanian citizens. The State of Israel has penned
them in, which makes it easy to confiscate their land for the benefit of
its settlers.
-
- And important and respected rabbis, who are educating
an entire generation, have ruled that the whole country is ours and the
Palestinians should share the fate of Amalek, the ancient tribe the Israelites
were commanded to eradicate. At a time when a "just war" is taking
place, racism is rife and robbery is called "return of property."
-
- We are currently celebrating the 61st anniversary of
the State of Israel. We fought in the War of Independence out of a great
hope that we would build a "model society" here, that we would
make peace with our neighbors, work the land and develop the Jewish genius
for the benefit of science, culture and the value of man - every man. But
when a major general and a philosopher justify - out of a sense of moral
superiority - our acts of injustice toward the other in such a way, they
cast a very heavy shadow on all those hopes.
|