Message from ARZA President, Rabbi Bob Orkand about current Israel situation:
Dear Friends:
As we approach the new year we are focused, once again, on the violence in Gaza. We pray for a quick end to the military action launched by Israel against Hamas and we agonize over the death of innocent civilians on both sides of the border.
As usual, Israel's critics are quick to denounce the Jewish state for its actions. How easy it is for critics to ignore what led to the current military action: Population centers in southern Israel have been the target of over 4,000 rockets, as well as thousands of mortar shells, fired by Hamas and other organizations since 2001. The first Grad/Katyusha strike on Ashdod took place on December 28. There had been no formal cease fire between Israel and Hamas, but only an informal six-month tahadiya (lull) during which 215 rockets were launched at Israel. On December 21, Hamas unilaterally announced that the lull had ended.
On December 27, UN Secretary Ban Ki-moon's spokesman issued a statement saying that while the Secretary-General recognized "Israel's security concerns regarding the continued firing of rockets from Gaza," he reiterated "Israel's obligation to uphold international humanitarian and human rights laws." The statement specifically noted that he "condemns excessive use of force leading to the killing and injuring of civilians (emphasis added). French President Nicholas Sarkozy, who holds the rotating presidency of the European Union, also condemned Israel's "disproportionate use of force," while demanding an end to rocket attacks on Israel. Brazil also joined the chorus, using the same language. Undoubtedly, a powerful impression has been created by large newspaper headlines describing massive Israeli airstrikes in Gaza without any explanation of Israel's reasons for such actions.
There are several ways to respond to this criticism. While one must always be sensitive to the deaths of innocent civilians, one must also ask what any civilized nation would and must do to defend its citizens from missile and rocket attacks. One can only wonder what the United States would do, for example, if terrorists in Mexico indiscriminately fired missiles toward cities in Texas. The charge that Israel uses disproportionate force keeps resurfacing whenever it has to defend its citizens from non-state terrorist organizations and the rocket attacks they perpetuate. Alan Dershowitz noted two years ago: "Proportion must be defined by reference to the threat proposed by an enemy and not by the harm it has produced." Waiting for a Hamas rocket to fall on an Israeli school, he notes, would put Israel in the position of allowing "its enemies to play Russian Roulette with its children" (Alan Dershowitz, "The Hamas Government has Declared War Against Israel: How Should Israel Respond?" Huffington Post, March 14, 2008).
Abraham Bell of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs reminds us that "if the attempt has been made to minimize civilian damage, then even a strike that causes large amounts of damage—but is directed at a target with very large military value—would be lawful" (Abraham Bell, "International Law and Gaza: The Assault on Israel's Right to Self-Defense, Jerusalem Issue Brief, Vol. 7, No. 29, January 28, 2008, Institute for Contemporary Affairs/Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs). The fact that the number of civilian deaths, as tragic as they are, have been minimal, attests to Israel's care in striking only Hamas military targets.
One must also take into account the fact that most armies seek to achieve military victory by the defeating the military capacity of an enemy. That is what Israel is now doing. The targets thus far have been training facilities, bomb depots, and Hamas military headquarters.
Again, any loss of civilian life is regrettable. No one in Israel rejoices when such casualties occur. In fact, Israel has in the past cancelled military operations over concern for the loss of civilian lives. However, when an operation is legitimate and there are civilian casualties despite best efforts to avoid them, the ultimate responsibility lies with Hamas. As Michael Walzer said in 2006, "When Palestinian militants launch rocket attacks from civilian areas, they are themselves responsible—and no one else is—for the civilian deaths caused by Israeli counter fire" (Michael Walzer, "How Aggressive Should Israel Be? War Fair," The New Republic Online, July 31, 2006).
Over the coming days we will see attempts at fairness—to place the blame on both Israel and Hamas. Our approach must be to express sorrow for any loss of life, but to do all we can to help others understand that once again Hamas is clearly the aggressor in this conflict and that Israel has no choice but to respond in such a way as to defeat those who would benefit from an ongoing conflict. Enough is enough.
Rabbi Robert Orkand, President
ARZA
______
Message and reflections from Rabbi Stanley Davids
Terror and War in Gaza,
A Personal Reflection
Resa and I had wanted an opportunity to bring together our Israeli friends, family and neighbors for a Chanukah party in our apartment.
We have both been incredibly busy these past several months, so the invitations went out for a gala combined celebration of Shabbat, Chanukah and Rosh Chodesh (the beginning of the new month) mid-day on Saturday, December 27th. There would be fresh Sufganiyot (jelly doughnuts), 100's of latkes, kugel, salmon, salads of great diversity, M&M peanuts – and a rather massive crowd. We did our shopping; Resa did the cooking; I swept and dusted and prepared the obligatory D'var Torah (Yes – even during a Chanukah party we would pause to reflect and to study!). I rushed home early from synagogue to help with the last minute preparations.
Our guests began arriving mid-day, but the atmosphere was far different than we had planned. The Israeli Air force bombardment of Hamas's military infrastructure in the Gaza had begun at 11:30 AM. For the next four hours we ate, sang, played Hebrew Scrabble and Sheshbesh, ate, met new friends, endured my D'var Torah, ate and found ourselves constantly diverted by the news that was coming in by phone calls, SMS and our two computers. The quantifiables were staggering: the number of sorties flown by Israeli pilots, the number of targets hit and destroyed, the number of the dead and the wounded, and the number of missiles launched against Israel.
No one was actually surprised by the Israeli assault. We had all seen it coming. The trips by Israeli officials to Egypt were no secret. The conversations between Foreign Minister Livni and Secretary of State Rice were known to be taking place. There had been a noticeable build up of Israeli ground forces. But then word came out of PM Olmert's office just three days ago that despite the horrific bombardment by missiles from Gaza that Israel was enduring, perhaps more time could yet be found for diplomacy. Minister of Defense Barak then announced on Thursday that he was opening Gaza for shipments of needed medical and relief supplies – and the Israeli right wing went on a rampage of wrath and of vilification, accusing the government of abdicating its responsibility of providing for the national defense.
In fact, there was even a fevered call for Barak to face a special tribunal for his act of dereliction by extending comfort to a cruel and heartless enemy whose goal was without any doubt the destruction of Israel.
The six month cease fire between Israel and Hamas had expired. Hamas publicly said that it had no intention of renewing the ceasefire. In one day this week more than 80 missiles had been fired at Israel. The situation had passed the point of being tolerable.
As news filtered into our apartment, it became clear that Barak's opening of Gaza for relief shipments and Olmert's comments were specifically orchestrated to lure Hamas to lower its guard, to relax.
And both acts were highly successful. Israel was demonstrating from the very first hours of what has become the most ferocious fighting in Gaza since 1967 that it had learned the lessons that had so terribly hindered the effectiveness of the Second War in Lebanon two years ago. The troops were prepared, there was a coherent and integrated plan of battle, there was effective communication with many foreign governments, and Israel was striking with great force on day one.
Not one of our guests questioned the need for such an assault, even as many confessed to being profoundly saddened at the inevitability of serious loss of life on both sides. Resa and I could not help but reflect upon the fact that we had seen the superb Israeli film 'Waltz with Bashir' just three days ago, a graphic/animated movie about the massacre in Sabra and Shatilla during the 1982 First War in Lebanon. War, no matter how necessary and how fully justified, still unfailingly reveals some of humanity's most unsavory aspects.
Would Israel be able to withstand the international pressure to stop its assault before the smuggling tunnels could be destroyed, before the missile launchers could be rendered inoperative, before the leaders of terror could be killed? Bitterness swirled around our guests as many began predicting (accurately, as it turned out) what the press conferences in many Western capitals would piously proclaim:
That Israel's response to Hamas's daily bombardment is inhumane and disproportionate. In fact, Israel's act of self-defense would come to be viewed as the CAUSE, not the RESULT, of rising tensions and human suffering. Logic dies easily when it comes to Jewish survival.
Someone pointed out that the timing made sense: The Bush Administration had only three weeks left – and no one could be absolutely certain how the Obama Administration would respond to Israel's retaliatory attacks; Barak and his Labor Party are far behind in the polls leading up to the February 10th national elections – a decisive victory in Gaza (if such a victory can be achieved – and if it could even be defined!) would give Labor a significant boost in electoral support; and the Fatah Government in the West Bank had been quietly suggesting that it would welcome Israel's help in destabilizing Hamas in Gaza so that the Palestine Authority could unite its territories and move more rapidly toward a Two State Solution.
Some of our guests have sons and daughters either in the reserves or on active duty. Their personal fears were tangible. Some of my cousins live in the so called "envelope" of Israeli settlements that were built not far from the Gaza border – clearly within missile range.
They would be driving home Saturday evening to a dramatically different set of conditions.
Hamas has immediately threatened a resumption of suicide bombing – and we all know that the Olmert government has not finished the defensive wall, which despite its ugliness and despite some highly controversial aspects of its routing has done a great deal to protect us against such incursions. And the unfinished sections of the wall are in and around Jerusalem. By late afternoon, riots had already broken out in some parts of the West Bank. This was not going to be an easy time for any Israeli, nor for anyone devoted to the search for a meaningful, enduring peace.
As I write this, some 6,500 Israeli reservists have been called up for duty, and the surge of tanks toward Gaza has made it quite obvious that at any moment Israeli troops will cross into Gaza.
Our guests departed more than 24 hours ago. The apartment has been cleaned once again. Resa and I lit our Chanukiah for the last time this season and the kitchen was flooded with light. We sang again about ancient miracles and about Zechariah's vision of a time when "Not by might, nor by power, but by Spirit alone" could we gain the right to live in freedom and in peace. But until that time comes, until sanity reigns, until reasoned compromise among reasonable people can resolve the bitter conflicts that divide us, we offered an additional prayer for the well-being and the success of the Israel Defense Forces, and for the lives and safety of all innocents.
ARZA
633 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10017
212-650-4280