Israeli_bulldozer_small.jpg

Does bulldozing the homes of Palestinian terrorists deter further attacks against the state of Israel? Is the act of razing their houses a just punishment for militants who endanger thousands? The practice of demolishing the homes of terrorists' families, which has been condemned internationally as a violation of human rights -- and, quite possibly, also a violation against international law -- was discontinued in 2005. From The Forward:


"The measure, introduced by the British during the mandate period and continued by Israel, was standard practice until three-and-a-half years ago. Some 270 homes were destroyed during the second intifada alone. Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz discontinued the policy in 2005, while he served as Defense minister. Mofaz was following the still-secret recommendations of the so-called Shani Committee. The military committee, which is headed by Udi Shani, a major general, is widely believed to have questioned the deterrent effect of home demolition."


So why then is the question of home demolition back on the radar screen of Israeli politics? On July 2, East Jerusalem Palestinian Hossam Dwayyat, a construction worker, drove a bulldozer into oncoming traffic reportedly yelling 'Allahu akhbar,' killing three women and wounding dozens in the process. It could have been much worse, considering the attack took place on a busy weekday in Jerusalem. Dwayyat, who has a criminal record, aimed his front-end loader at bus full of commuters. Moshe Plesser, an off-duty officer, shot Dwayyat at close range putting an end to the rampage. Hours later, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who may or may not have further political ambitions, answering public outrage, ordered the Israel Defense Forces to prepare to raze the homes of terrorists who attack Jerusalem. The deceased Hossam Dwayyat's home is to be the first.


Israel is presently debating whether or not such an action moral. A community leader from Dwayyat's village told Israeli Parliament's Internal Affairs Committee that Dwayyat, who acted alone, was mentally impaired. Since Dwayyat is already dead, a demolition would directly impact and punish his family. From ABCNews:


"According to the Holy Bible, you don't take revenge on the sons because of the sins of the fathers," (Israeli news anchor Yaron London) told ABC News. "This is a very ancient and just principle of Judaism and Christians. You just don't do it."


Still, public outrage and concern over this brazen attack in the capital city during peak hours are legitimate. A quarter of a million Palestinians live in East Jerusalem. Already there are calls for an eye for an eye, or, more brutally stated, a bulldozer for a front-end loader. Attorney General Menachem Mazuz last week concluded that razing of the homes of terrorists is legal. But the question citizens of Israel are presently asking: Is it moral?


[image: Tuftsgloballeadership]

Comments (1)

Political and social calls in 1876 for "action" resulted in the Little Big Horn fiasco. Subsequent retaliatory slaughters of Indian villages followed.

When the Cherokee were burned out of Northwest Georgia by the state militia...and so forth.

Moral certitude requires a very high benchmark for "action." History does not "take prisoners."
md///

Post a comment