<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Thursday, April 15, 2004


ETHICS - WEEK 3 - FROM JERUSALEM

An Ethic of Self-Defense

We have heard in some of the sessions here at the conference the phrase, "an ethic of self-defense". What does this mean, and for whom? It is very different in meaning from an Israeli perspective as it is from a Palestinian. For the Israeli's, it means the construction of a "security fence"/prison wall, complete with sniper towers, around the West Bank, on their land, which, if stretched out in a straight line, would reach Switzerland. For the Palestinian's, it means throwing rocks at soldiers and tanks. For the fundamentalist militants, it means opening fire on Israeli soldiers, suicide bombing (not an idea invented by the Palestinians!), and vicious attacks on citizens.

The horror of these conditions lie in stark contrast to the beauty of the city and the warmness of it's inhabitants, making it that much more painful. But how do we/they break out of these cycles of violence? An ethic of self-defense needs to metamorph from picking up a rifle to laying one down? Sometimes, it takes more courage to lay down arms then to take them up. For many in this country, death has become preferable to life, contributing to the list of willing and waiting martyrs.

An ethic of self-defense must be combined with stable authority and stable, agreed upon borders. That means the Israeli government is in violation of international law by building their so-called "fence" on Palestinian land. They want to build a wall? Fine. Let them build it on their own land! Stable authority and government must also be implemented, especially for the Palestinians, who have no stable, agreed upon government. No reliable police force. That is so important to this entire situation.

Now, let us talk more about self-defense. True story for a year ago or so: An Israeli incursion into Gaza involves several tanks. A 6 year old Palestinian school boy sees the tank and is so angry. He does not know what to do. So, he picks up a rock and throws it at the tank. What happens to the tank? Well it wasn't destroyed, as much as that may have been the hope. No, nothing happened at all; the rock bounced off with hardly a clang. How does the tank respond? The gunner on the top swivels his 50 caliber machine gun onto the boy and opens fire. Riddled with bullets, he falls to the ground, his blood coloring the dust red. 6 years old. His father, seeing this all occur, runs to his son, now dead and it doesn't take long for the machine gun to spit out fire again. I have been deliberately graphic in this description because I want to drive home the point of how serious a crime this is. Now describe an ethic of self-defense to me, from this ituation, that makes sense. A rock strikes the metal walls of a tank, designed to absord artillery fire. Bullets, in response, strike the boy's flesh, designed to withstand a splinter. Which is self-defense? Atrocities occur such as this many times here, and the international community does nothing. How's that for an ethic, of any flavor?!

-R

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?