Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Heavy Hangs the Head
Sgt. Elor Azaria.
Some issues are harder to write about than others. Some touches of the keyboard are preceded by doubt and confliction, juggling the impulses of the heart alongside the knowledge of the mind. Nothing sums up this battle more than the sorrowful saga of the Israeli soldier Sgt. Elor Azaria, and as I follow the news of the verdict in his case, I gather that little resolution or healing will come of it. Azaria has come to be a symbol of whatever either side of this argument thinks is right, and that is a form of emotional argumentation that is perhaps understandable but potentially harmful to the fabric of the Israeli nation.
Three judges convicted Azaria of manslaughter for shooting Palestinian terrorist Abdel-Fattah al-Sharif in the head, 15 minutes after al-Sharif had already been incapacitated after he had attempted to kill a soldier in the town of Hebron. There was video of the event used as evidence in the highly publicized case — and despite several attempts by politicians on all sides to influence the case or use it to further their own careers — the 97-page verdict shows that the proceedings were surprisingly straightforward. The aftermath, however, proved to be anything but.
The judges presiding over the case have had their lives threatened, and similar threats have been made at IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gadi Eizenkot. This comes as many, particularly on the right, are calling for Azaria to be pardoned. The reasons for this are that he is “the nation’s son,” “a child,” and that his actions are understandable given the enormous pressures he was under. Saying otherwise is now referred to as “breaking ranks,” and I guess that is what I am about to do. As a right-winger and a Diaspora Jew, I will surely travel well beyond my purview.
The men and women who serve Israel and ensure its defense are not children. They are somebody’s child but they are not children, and saying they are infantilizes them individually and undermines their heroic efforts collectively. Furthermore, the IDF, like any army, is dependent on the chain of command, and breaching it endangers the entire army, including many parents’ children. Pardoning one soldier sends a very mixed and confused message to all those who serve alongside him. However understandable Azaria’s actions were on a human level, we ask the superhuman of our IDF soldiers, and in an overwhelming majority of cases, they live up to that steep expectation.
If we pardon Azaria, a soldier who broke the chain of command and acted of his own volition, what does that then say about all those who go against their own hearts and wishes while following orders to evict Jewish residents from illegal outposts, hold fire when feeling both fear and threat or go into the lion’s den when every bone in their body tells them to retreat? The soldiers of the IDF do the impossible and unthinkable time and time again, and despite the horrors presented by their enemies, they remain the world’s most ethical army — or is it perhaps because of this very fact?
I learn Torah weekly with a study partner, and the lessons we learn leak into events throughout the following seven days. Last week, as I saw the reactions to the verdict, I recalled the conversation we had about the massacre of Shechem, in which Simeon and Levi avenged the rape of their sister Dinah by killing all the newly circumcised men and looting the city. I instinctively sided with the brothers against their father, Jacob. Jacob’s level-headedness angered me, knowing full well how I would react if, God forbid, something of that caliber happened to a child of mine. But my study partner quite rightly pointed out the burden of leadership and the importance of not making strategic decisions based on impulse or emotion. The pain Jacob felt must have been doubled by the fact that he was forced by his role as leader to keep his emotions in check.
The IDF is lucky I am not in charge, for I would have rushed into Shechem on heart and anger. And I am lucky that others are willing to hang that heavy crown on their heads, facing many awful choices. Our enemies care little for honor, regulations, or accountability, but we are not like them; we couldn’t be if we tried. We Jews are defended by the most accused and least guilty army, and there is great pride in being able to speak those words, perhaps not knowing but sensing the sacrifices that they entail. I feel for Azaria and I cannot say I would act differently in his shoes or even that I, on an emotional level, condemn him. But I also see his place in a larger entity, and we cannot act out of compassion in one case if it endangers the welfare of all others.
Many have said that the IDF is betraying Azaria by charging and convicting him and that parents no longer can be expected to give their children to this potentially life-threatening service if the IDF does not have their backs. But the IDF does, by honoring the code under which they serve, and we owe it to the IDF to honor them right back. This is not a left- or right-wing issue; it is a matter of trust in the eye of the storm and faith when the heart fails us. That is what we ask of the soldiers, and we should ask it of ourselves, to trust the leadership and the code, knowing it is there to protect us from human emotion, no matter how hard that may be.
Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community
of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.
The country doesn’t have ROE. Each military operation has ROE. What is appropriate for Guadalcanal and Iwo Jima is not appropriate for Aid missions. In both, deadly force can be allowed, but under different conditions. Part of the orders for every operation is the ROE, and this has been true since the first cavemen attacked their neighbors, sometimes more formally than others.
Would I have preferred different ROE when I was in Iraq? Yes. But where I was operating, the rules were fairly loose, comparatively. Our main restrictions were concerning mosques, which I agree should have all been destroyed much more liberally if they were spewing anti-American prayers, or instructions to kill us. As it was, we weren’t allowed. But the rules were not mindless. A lot of Iraqis were very good people and about a year after I left the strategy worked. The sheiks realized that we were the good guys and the precursors to ISIS in our area were murderous.
We also had buckets of bullets at the door of each CP for people to grab as many as they wanted, and liberally distributed grenades to everyone wanting any. Years later in Afghanistan, we weren’t allowed to keep our weapons loaded and we had to sign and inventory every bullet issued to us, and woe to any Marine who lost one. That was insane.
Annika,
I am afraid life in Israel can’t be reduced to left wing fantasy standards or even just the rules of military engagement. The entire country of Israel is at all times mobilized. All of Israel can be under siege from without or within at any moment. Israelis live with this so well others don’t realize the reality. The recent Truck attack in Jerusalem was stopped not by the heavily armed soldiers who the attack was directed at, but by an Israeli Tour Guide.
Scroll down to the bottom of the story and you will see the interview of Eytan. I am afraid that whatever the logic and outcome of the trial, Israel simply will not be able to afford this level of restraint. Those that wage Jihad within Israel’s borders can not expect the Israeli Military to hold back. The hesitation of the soldiers cost them 2 possibly 4 lives and badly injuring 15. When someone has lost all touch with moral reality, such as a suicidal killer, restraint isn’t appropriate. They must be stopped before they can kill or kill more.
To sit comfortably in America and judge ordinary Israelis by some perfectionist standard I will not do.
Regards,
Jim
Except that the post-attack autopsy revealed a soldier’s bullet killed the driver. The soldiers said they didn’t hesitate and I don’t believe they did. There is nothing comparable between a considered decision to kill a terrorist on the ground (who conceivably might still be a threat) and a reaction to an ongoing attack (where there is clearly a threat).
The soldiers didn’t react immediately, but they reacted far faster than I would have. You can see the video. But they weren’t combat soldiers – they weren’t preprogrammed to respond to these sorts of attacks/threats.
Shabbat Shalom!
The problem is we have way too much “law” involved in the battlefield. The rules and regulations involving combat have grown to ridiculous lengths.
Richard,
This isn’t a basketball game and you aren’t watching the instant replay. One mistake and many innocent lives are in the balance. The bomb or gun or knife can be strapped under clothing or in a backpack. I would like some of the critics, including a prominent Israeli Judge who has visited our synagogue a few times, to spend 1 week on guard duty. They can relieve an Israeli male or female soldier for that time. After they have faced the reality of the responsibility and danger they can tell me all about it. The tour guide was right there. Why would he lie and say the soldiers hesitated? I’m sorry but I’m hearing convenient answers. We are talking about cold-blooded murderers in the act of murdering. Reciting the Israeli prosecution’s case against the soldier doesn’t cut it. When Hamas murders openly they celebrate. There’s no trial.
Soldiers, no matter how highly trained, are human beings. They aren’t programmed. Jihadist suicide killers are programmed. Let’s keep it straight.
Regards,
Jim
There’s nothing ambiguous about the rule that you may not execute a surrendered prisoner of war. No matter what the government might do with that prisoner, you may not kill an unresisting POW. Sgt. Azaria decided to ignore the rule, like bad soldiers have done in every army and every conflict, proving himself the exception to thousands upon thousands of good soldiers who do follow the rules, no matter how tempted they might be to do otherwise.
Manslaughter is a lesser crime to murder, and involves a killing where the circumstances mitigate against the killer’s malice. A killing performed in the heat of passions that would try the conscience of a reasonable person in the same circumstances is considered manslaughter, as is the honest but unreasonable belief that killing was necessary to protect the life of the killer or others. The argument that Azaria was thinking “they’re just going to let this guy go on a prisoner exchange” smacks of politics to me: as a tool to use against the government that engaged in the prisoner exchange.
If Azaria chose to kill the prisoner as a political statement, he deserved a conviction for murder. If he did so because he was angry and F’ing Fed UP!!!! and still awash in his battle hormones, then manslaughter seems more reasonable.
It will be interesting to see what political fallout the case generates.
You are conflating cases. The truck attack was a near instant reaction, the Azaria case had a far longer timeline.