My new article on the right’s difficulties with the army is up at The American Prospect:
Driving through the West Bank recently, I picked up two hitchhikers. Both wore the long, thick sidelocks and extra-large skullcaps that have become the mark of young men on the religious right, especially among settlers. Since they were what Israelis call army age (what Americans would call college age), the conversation turned to military service.
Despite Israel’s universal draft, the hitchhiker in the back seat said he didn’t intend to serve. The Israel Defense Forces, he argued, hurts Jews — a point he presumed was obvious from the “uprooting” of settlements in Gaza four years ago and the occasional dismantling of tiny, illegal settlement outposts in the West Bank more recently. Besides that, he said, the IDF “doesn’t want to kill Arabs because it wants to look nice in the world.” He didn’t want to die because commanders were too concerned with Arabs’ lives. As a student at a yeshivah — a religious seminary — he had a deferment, and he intended to keep it till he was past draft age.
“I share his opinion,” said the hitchhiker sitting next to me. He’d received a call-up order, ignored it, and was arrested and sent off to basic training. After three months, an army committee ruled him unfit and discharged him. Given the views he shared with his friend, I was happy to hear of the committee’s decision, but I politely refrained from saying that.
My passengers’ choice of evading service isn’t unique, but it does belong to a small, radical fringe. The Israeli army’s real dilemma with the religious right isn’t draft evasion. Over the years, the army has come to depend on the enthusiasm of religious draftees for serving in combat units and becoming officers.
But it’s increasingly clear that some of those soldiers believe in a right-wing version of selective conscientious objection: They won’t carry out orders that conflict with their pro-settlement principles. In their view, they answer to a higher law, which says Jews have the right to live throughout the Whole Land of Israel, which includes Judea and Samaria, a.k.a. the West Bank. Many have also studied under clerics with a harsh view of combat ethics that doesn’t fit the IDF’s official stance of seeking to minimize Arab civilian casualties. In recent weeks, political controversy within the ranks has become glaring.
The tempest creates a curious challenge for the left in Israel (and beyond). For years, it was the left that argued about selective disobedience — particularly about refusing to do reserve duty in the occupied territories. Now that the right is claiming that soldiers can’t be asked to violate their principles, the left can’t simply demand obedience. …
Read the rest here, and hitchhike back to South Jerusalem to comment.
An antithesis:
Yeah, well, that’s your opinion. I’ve got my opinion too. Everybody knows that his own opinion is divine law, or natural law, or “universal value of human life and dignity”, or something else that might give him the individual authority to disobey the state’s positive law. Cool!
I share a rare moment of agreement with you that politics should be kept out of the army. If I had to choose between left wing objectors (shministim) and right wing objectors, I would pick the right wing objectors, who have a disagreement with a specific policy, but would fight to defend me if I were in trouble. The left wing objectors would not defend me if I were in trouble, and go around the world campaigning against the existence of Israel. If I were Iranian intelligence, I would contact them because they could be a tremendous asset against Israel
Sure, it’s all well and good to refuse to serve in the Territories because of ethical problems with the occupation – but then all the soldiers there are from places like Elon Moreh, and see where that’s got us.
Is it any surprise that a country built on segregation, walls, and partition, and Herzl’s dream of a Jewish State as a rampart against Asia, should begin to fragment and turn against itself too?
If you’re ever picked up on the highway by a love-guru-hippie wearing a kippah playing Bob Dylan’s “Subterranean Homesick Blues” beware, it might just be your friendly neighborhood investigative reporter, Gershom.
Scary good piece, thank you.
Llet the internecinel wars start. There’s no way of stopping them now. The orthodox vs Intel, Tel Aviv against the orthodox, Israeli water hogs against the palestinians and bedouins on camels, the Russians against the middle easterners, the khazar jews of eastern europe against the berber jews of the northern meditarranean, men against women, vigilantes against miscegnation, the police against women daring to wear tefilim at the wall, the schools against ethiopians, the orthodox church (oops, I meant clan) against the reform upstart edomites, russian mafiosi against the law, the law against palestinian home owners, the banks against the people’s pocketbooks, the government against governance of common sense, and everyone against Obama.
The shministim may be tzadikim without knowing it, the right wing objectors may be ochrei Israel without seeing it.
One thing is for sure – it’ll all go down the drain, or at least leave a bad taste, kind of like the day after graduating from one of those super-cliquish american high scool with its boors, bores and scores, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Been reading my Jeremiah – does it show?
This is one reason why many Palestinians (and others) believe that settlements will not be removed.
The “funhouse mirror” story is about dangers that lurk within Israeli society. But too many divert their gaze to look anxiously at Iran or Hezbollah or Hamas.
Dana’s picture of internecine warfare is frightening, like the idea of Pakistan coming apart at the seams, perhaps because of the nuclear weapons issues, but mostly from the sadness of a world dividing against itself as many peoples react to the failure of the great nations (the US in particular) to treat peoples fairly and to support the rule of law.
Had the law been enforced (in regard to West Bank settlements), there would have been no settlements (they are all illegal) and Israel’s religious Jews would have had to wait for (and maybe work for!) peace with the Palestinians in order to have any chance at living in the West Bank. Now, instead, the law has been derogated, the settlements built and expanded, and Israel — it seems — is being pulled apart. What is happening at the same time to Palestinians is too well known to require comment.
Funhouse, indeed.
It’s nothing new for a person to join an army only to discover that there are orders he/she finds impossible to obey. Seems like a new twist to join an army of one’s countrymen with the deliberate intent of disabling it, maybe call it “own-side infiltration”?
Clif, own-side infiltration – is that like “own goal”?
As a former US Army enlisted soldier, I was taught by the US Army itself that I had the DUTY to NOT obey illegal orders and on an occasion I did have to defy orders. Attempts were made at punishment, but all were withdrawn. However, this was pre-Bush II / Obama…now I am not so sure that I wouldn’t be punished for either following illegal orders, or disobeying them. Recently, US enlisted Soldiers have gotten screwed on either count.
To my ears this sounds like chickenshit:
“He didn’t want to die because commanders were too concerned with Arabs’ lives.”
He’s not arguing higher law, he’s arguing for his sorry ass and some esthetically pleasing killing style.
This quotes morality:
“…it was the left that argued about selective disobedience — particularly about refusing to do reserve duty in the occupied territories.”
Depends on whether seizing the land is legal, if an international court says the occupation/expulsion of people in conquered lands is legal, then the leftniks are peeing up a rope.
My own view is, international law is pretty clear on this subject. Just as the US invasion of Iraq will eventually be held to a “war of aggression” so too do I believe Israel’s occupation/expulsion of people will be found to be illegal. So in that sense I do not see a moral similarity between the two situations, however, on a practical level they pose a similar problem for an Army.
As a combat veteran from the 50’s in Korea, I look at all the reasons not to go to war,but not serving in any capacity for religious or political ideals smacks more of cowardness .Opinions are like an anus ;everyone has one and the kooks mentioned in the article should be free to express theirs accept they should be called upon to serve.
Disagreement with your country’s military mission is one thing but not obeying a direct order is a time for courts marshall. I am a liberal and some think a radical in my own family but an Army without discipline will turn into a mindless mess.Everything the enemies of Israel would like to see.
“but not obeying a direct order is a time for courts marshall.”
But in Nuremberg we hung [rightly so] people [after a trial] for following orders. Did you mean to say?
“but not obeying a direct [legal] order is a time for courts marshall.”
You might be ordered to herd women & children into showers to be gassed [an illegal order], would you follow your order then?
I am going to assume you would disobey the order and face punishment. Or as I once put it, I swore an oath to the constitution…not the [deleted] mob.
George,
I should add, I agree with everything you said except the implied “all” orders, I would say all LEGAL orders.
And before you reply, consider a 2nd Lt. ordering an Army quartermaster to give him US Army goods to be sold on the black market.
There are exceptions…no matter what your politics…hence the word “legal”.
Everyone on the right or left has a free conscience. There is also military law. If your conscience is so strongly opposed to an order or military service, then you can refuse it. However, for both right and left, there is then the black letter legal penalties for doing so. By being a refusnik (whether that be a right wing Jewish soldier refusing to ethnically cleanse fellow Jews or a left wing one refusing to serve in the west bank) that person must then be willing to face the legal consequences.
“The Israel Defense Forces, he argued, hurts Jews”
It’s been 36 years since the IDF fought a conventional war against the army of an enemy state. Perhaps this fellow is right – perhaps it’s time to eliminate compulsory service, limit the role of the IDF to the defense of Israel proper against foreign invasion, and declare that the settlers are on their own. Why should secular Jews from Tel Aviv fight to protect people like him?