Dec 7th 2014

Israel’s Terrorist Aid

by Aryeh Neier

Aryeh Neier, President Emeritus of the Open Society Foundations and a founder of Human Rights Watch, is the author of Taking Liberties: Four Decades in the Struggle for Rights

NEW YORK – The decision by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s government to demolish the family home of Abdelrahman al-Shaludi, a Palestinian who rammed his car into a group of pedestrians, killing two (including a three-month-old baby), was both callous and counterproductive. By punishing people whose only known offense was being related to a criminal, Israel inadvertently shifted the focus from the attack, the perpetrator of which was killed immediately after his crime, to Israel’s apparent embrace of a policy of collective punishment.

If Israel’s principal concern is deterring terrorist attacks, it should be doing everything in its power to ensure that such acts are universally condemned. This includes making sure that people who carry out attacks, and those who aid and abet their crimes, are lawfully punished.

Punishing terrorists’ families and neighbors, or those who share their ethnic and religious identity, has the opposite effect, intensifying hostility toward Israel and dissipating the moral outrage that should be mobilized against the actual perpetrators of terrorism. As observers increasingly equate the two sides, regarding both as victims and victimizers alike, international support and sympathy for Israel wanes.

This is not the first time that Israel has been accused of collective punishment. Israel’s government regularly destroyed the family homes of alleged terrorists for years before acknowledging that the policy was damaging its image – without deterring terrorist acts. The latest house demolition seems to confirm that Israel’s government is resuming the practice of collective punishment that it abandoned a decade ago.

Why would Netanyahu’s government resume a failed policy? The most likely explanation is that Netanyahu wants to reassure the Israeli public that no act of terrorism will be tolerated – even if that means a vindictive and cruel response. In fact, such domestic political considerations were probably also a major driver of the killing and destruction that took place in Gaza over the summer.

Of course, Israel has the right to defend itself against indiscriminate rocket barrages like that launched from Gaza into its territory, and to punish lawfully those responsible. But Israel did more than defend itself. It mounted a demonstrably disproportionate response, killing a large number of noncombatants, including hundreds of children, and destroying thousands of homes and commercial enterprises. While the initiative may have appeased Israeli public outrage over the rockets, it damaged Israel’s standing in many other countries considerably.

More problematic, Israel’s actions in Gaza probably increased its vulnerability to terrorist attacks, not only by fueling animosity toward Israel, but also by suggesting that Netanyahu’s government will most likely discredit itself with its response. That propensity to act against its own interests to appease an enraged and emotional public was underscored by the recent destruction of al-Shaludi’s family home.

To be sure, Israel is not alone in responding irrationally to terrorist provocations. Some aspects of the United States’ response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, reflect the same tendency – but on a significantly larger scale and with more far-reaching consequences. While the attacks were immensely costly in terms of lives lost and material damage, the US-led war in Iraq that followed was beyond disproportionate; it was truly devastating. And its consequences continue to unfold, as the brutal predations of the Islamic State attest.

It is time for governments in Israel, the US, and elsewhere to recognize that by allowing their citizens’ outrage to drive their responses to terrorist attacks, they are offering themselves as the terrorists’ best weapon. Only by adopting a pragmatic and legal approach can they galvanize support against their enemies and reduce their citizens’ vulnerability to attack. That, rather than slaking the public’s thirst for vengeance, should be their primary objective.



Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2014.
www.project-syndicate.org




 


This article is brought to you by Project Syndicate that is a not for profit organization.

Project Syndicate brings original, engaging, and thought-provoking commentaries by esteemed leaders and thinkers from around the world to readers everywhere. By offering incisive perspectives on our changing world from those who are shaping its economics, politics, science, and culture, Project Syndicate has created an unrivalled venue for informed public debate. Please see: www.project-syndicate.org.

Should you want to support Project Syndicate you can do it by using the PayPal icon below. Your donation is paid to Project Syndicate in full after PayPal has deducted its transaction fee. Facts & Arts neither receives information about your donation nor a commission.

 

 

Browse articles by author

More Current Affairs

Jul 5th 2008

The main French defense manufacturer called a group of experts and some economic journalists together a few years ago to unveil a new military helicopter. They wanted us to choose a name for it and I thought I had the perfect one: "The Frog".

Jul 4th 2008

"Would it not make eminent sense if the European Union had a proper constitution comparable to that of the United States?" In 1991, I put the question on camera to Otto von Habsburg, the father-figure of the European Movement and, at the time, the most revere

Jun 29th 2008

Ever since President George W. Bush's administration came to power in 2000, many Europeans have viewed its policy with a degree of scepticism not witnessed since the Vietnam war.

Jun 26th 2008

As Europe feels the effects of rising prices - mainly tied to energy costs - at least one sector is benefiting. The new big thing appears to be horsemeat, increasingly a viable alternative to expensive beef as desperate housewives look for economies.

Jun 26th 2008

What will the world economy look like 25 years from now? Daniel Daianu says that sovereign wealth funds have major implications for global politics, and for the future of capitalism.

Jun 22nd 2008

Winegrower Philippe Raoux has made a valiant attempt to create new ideas around the marketing of wines, and his efforts are to be applauded.

Jun 16th 2008

One of the most interesting global questions today is whether the climate is changing and, if it really is, whether the reasons are man-made (anthropogenic) or natural - or maybe even both.

Jun 16th 2008

After a century that saw two world wars, the Nazi Holocaust, Stalin's Gulag, the killing fields of Cambodia, and more recent atrocities in Rwanda and now Darfur, the belief that we are progressing morally has become difficult to defend.

Jun 16th 2008

BRUSSELS - America's riveting presidential election campaign may be garnering all the headlines, but a leadership struggle is also underway in Europe. Right now, all eyes are on the undeclared frontrunners to become the first appointed president of the European Council.

Jun 16th 2008

JERUSALEM - Israel is one of the biggest success stories of modern times.

Jun 16th 2008

The contemporary Christian Right (and the emerging Christian Left) in no way represent the profound threat to or departure from American traditions that secularist polemics claim. On the contrary, faith-based public activism has been a mainstay throughout U.S.

Jun 16th 2008

BORDEAUX-- The windows are open to the elements. The stone walls have not changed for 800 years. The stairs are worn with grooves from millions of footsteps over the centuries.

May 16th 2008
We know from experience that people suffer, prisons overflow and innocent bystanders are injured or killed in political systems that ban all opposition. I witnessed this process during four years as a Moscow correspondent of The Associated Press in the 1960s and early 1970s.
May 16th 2008
Certainly the most important event of my posting in Moscow was the Soviet-led invasion of Czechoslovakia. It established the "Brezhnev Doctrine", defining the Kremlin's right to repress its client states.
Jan 1st 2008

What made the BBC want to show a series of eight of our portrait films rather a long time after they were made?

There are several reasons and, happily, all of them seem to me to be good ones.