Israeli ethics in war Opinions

In the context of the war waged by Israel on the Gaza Strip, Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, invoked – in one of his speeches – a religious text, saying: “You must remember what Amalek did to you, as our Holy Book tells us. And we actually remember that, as we fight with our brave soldiers.” And our divisions who are now fighting in and around Gaza and in all other areas of Israel.

They join a line of Jewish heroes that began 3,000 years ago with Joshua in Lebanon, and has continued through the heroes of 1948, the Six-Day War, the Yom Kippur War of ’73, and all the other wars in this country. “Our valiant soldiers have one supreme goal: to completely defeat the deadly enemy and ensure our continued presence in this country.” This general biblical reference to “Amalek” is worth noting, because it serves as an entry point for explaining part of Israel’s current military behavior in Gaza. It reveals its religious foundations, and what some of them called: “Torah values” in war, despite the Israeli arrogance and arrogance shown by Israeli officials when it comes to the ethics of war, and Israel’s violations of international humanitarian law.

The word “Amalek” appears – in the Old Testament of the “Bible” – in different forms, including “Amalekite”, and refers to a nomadic people who inhabited the Sinai Peninsula and the south of the land of Canaan (today’s Palestine). It seems that these people were waging war with the Children of Israel, as is evident from some passages of the Old Testament. There are different interpretations of the Amalek war against the children of Israel, some of which believe that it was a war hostile to the Jewish religion and against Jehovah himself, while others see that the Amalek attack was against the Jews, God’s chosen people, and that it was an unjust war for two reasons:

• First: Its goal was to destroy the Jewish people
• The second: that the means used in the war were immoral.

But the meaning of “Amalek” – in the Jewish tradition – has become broader than simply referring to a specific incident that is itself problematic from a historical perspective. Amalek has come to symbolize “the other,” and Amalek and the Bedouin tribe have come to represent – in Jewish culture – “the pinnacle of physical and spiritual evil,” according to Gerald Cromer.

Perhaps this explains the widespread use of “Amalek” to describe the peoples who threaten the Jewish existence, whether by rabbis or politicians, perhaps the most recent of whom is Netanyahu, with whose words we opened this article. This summary quote of Amalek comes from Netanyahu; With the aim of revitalizing Israeli-Jewish memory on the one hand, and meaning that Amalek is alive in the Jewish religious and cultural tradition on the other hand. Had it not been fresh in memory, this reference – in a speech addressed by a prime minister to his people and in the context of war – would not have had any meaning. What also confirms this is that “Remember Amalek” has become a slogan for a Zionist organization whose mission is to search for Palestinian resistance fighters. Under the pretext of “monitoring the killer” and bringing him to trial.

“Remembering Amalek” – in Netanyahu’s words – sparked controversy among some Westerners on Twitter pages, but there are several questions that must be raised here, such as: Is what is meant merely to remember? What benefit is there in remembering in the context of a war declared by a prime minister who has just formed a war government that has been bombing Gaza – with its civilians – every day since October 7, 2023? This referral, in fact, achieves several religious and political purposes. Including reassuring the Israeli public with religious and political promises, and that they will crush their enemy and settle in their alleged land. Among them is that the Amalekites today are the Palestinians (and perhaps all the Arabs), especially since the first declared goal of the war on Gaza is to crush Hamas, which will not be achieved except by destroying Gaza and its people and displacing those who remain. Netanyahu thus provides a religious cover and moral justification for the annihilation of the Amalekites today, who embody “the height of evil,” which is something that Israeli and Zionist political and media discourse in general never tires of repeating.

If we read the passages that talk about Amalek in the Old Testament, we will find that they are not merely reminiscent; As “Amalek” has turned – as previously mentioned – into a symbol of evil on the one hand, and requires combat action from the children of Israel on the other hand. Mere remembrance is not compatible with these two matters, just as mere remembrance does not bring the reassurance that many Israelis who are worried about Israel’s future are now missing. Hence, “Remembering Amalek” was called, which promises their survival and stability and the crushing of their enemy.

The remembrance here is accompanied by a promise of empowerment and the annihilation of Amalek together. In the Book of Deuteronomy – for example – we read the following: “Remember what Amalek did to you on the road when you came out of Egypt. How he met you on the road and cut off from behind you all who were weak after you, and you were weary and weary and did not fear God. When the Lord your God gives you rest from all your enemies around you in the land Which the Lord your God is giving you for an inheritance to possess, you shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven. Do not forget” (25:17-19). In the Book of Exodus we read the following: “Then the Lord said to Moses: Write this as a memorial in a book and put it in the hearing of Joshua; for I will blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven” (17:14).

In the Book of Numbers we read: “Then he saw Amalek and spoke his parable, and said: Amalek is the first of the peoples, but his end is to destruction” (24:20). In the first book of Samuel we read: “Now go and smite Amalek and completely destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but kill man and woman, little and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey” (15:3). In it we also read: “And the Lord sent you on your way and said: Go and utterly destroy the sinners, the Amalekites, and fight against them until they are consumed” (15:18).

The previous passages speak – clearly – about “wiping out” the Amalekites, “destroying” them, and “prohibiting” them, that is, their annihilation. Indeed, paragraph (3) of the First Book of Samuel speaks – explicitly – about killing everyone, including men, women, children, infants, and animals, which we find Analogues also in the Book of Joshua; When Joshua invaded the land of Canaan with the children of Israel, he commanded, saying: “Perish all that is in the city – man and woman, young and old, even oxen, sheep, and donkeys – with the edge of the sword” (6:21).

This means – again – the permissibility of genocide that includes humans and animals. Some Jews had sensed the moral problem raised by the verse in the First Book of Samuel that permitted the complete annihilation of Amalek, so they tried to justify this by saying that extermination could be justified in the event of confronting “a group of gangs that do not understand the meaning of humanity,” and Amalekites who represented evil and “passed it on” to their children. Who, if they had lived, would have followed the path of their fathers! Rather, it is noteworthy here that some apologists have given the example of ISIS, which – from his point of view – provides the most prominent example of the Amalekites today, and the result is that the annihilation of the Amalekites – as stated in the previous paragraph – was a “human moral war”, and in this context, it becomes, understandably, a quest. Israel has been relentless in comparing Hamas to ISIS since the first day of the war. To deprive everything: humans, stones, and animals.

If the previous discussion seeks to find justifications that remove the problem from the text of genocide so that it appears understandable from today’s moral point of view, then the Zionist rabbi Manis Friedman spoke about what he called “the values ​​of the Torah” or “the Jewish way” in moral warfare. He rejected what he called “Western ethics” in war. This Jewish method is based on “destroying the holy places of the Palestinians, and killing their men, women, children, and livestock.” This method is – according to Friedman – “the only real deterrent to getting rid of the Palestinians’ persistence and continued resistance.” Living according to the “values ​​of the Torah” will make the Israelis the “light” that will shine on nations suffering from defeat. Because of the destructive ethics invented by man, which forbids the killing of civilians and children and calls for avoiding the bombing of specific places, such as holy places and others. He believes that the first Israeli prime minister who will declare that he follows the Old Testament will bring peace to the region.

It seems that this idea, or what is called here “Torah values,” resided in many Israeli officials and politicians. David Ben-Gurion, the first Israeli Prime Minister, said: “There must be continuity from Joshua bin Nun to the IDF.” Joshua – as previously mentioned – committed genocide according to the text of the Old Testament, and Netanyahu placed the war on Gaza in a historical context extending back 3,000 years!

Rather, he claims – in a statement he made in the context of the current war on Gaza – that the Israeli army “is the most moral army in the world.” He “does everything in his power to avoid harming those who are not involved in the war,” and accused “those who dare to accuse our soldiers of committing war crimes” of being “full of hypocrisy and lies, and do not possess a shred of morality.” It was noteworthy that Bruno Ritaio – presented As a former Israeli researcher and conscript, he has called for an end to the firing of warning rockets at Gaza residents; Because there are no “residents” in Gaza, but rather about 2.5 million terrorists, as he claims, and this has been repeated by more than one Israeli in video and audio!

Anyone who follows the behavior of Gilad Erdan, the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, will find it consistent with the moral image that the Israelis claim for themselves. For religious and moral motives that, in their view, represent “the values ​​of the Torah” or “the Jewish way.” When the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution calling for an “immediate humanitarian truce” in Gaza, the ambassador said: “The United Nations no longer enjoys even a shred of legitimacy or importance,” and that this text’s place is “in the dustbin of history,” considering that Israel is With a moral mission to “defend itself” and “rid the world of the evil of Hamas.”

In 2021, Erdan himself tore up the Human Rights Council report that condemned Israel for committing violations against the Palestinians, especially in the Gaza Strip. Erdan accused – at the time – the Human Rights Council of having an “obsession with Israel” that led him to blame and condemn it 95 times in its resolutions, and therefore “the only place this report deserves is in the trash.” Let us consider that we are here facing a “diplomatic” figure who acts with such arrogance and does not accept to be questioned according to any standard. Because she has complete certainty that her actions determine moral standards and not the other way around.

Thus, Israel presents – whether through its religious and political discourse, or through its actual practices in the war on Gaza – a crude model of brutality that claims – in the Jewish context – to restore “the values ​​of the Torah,” and claims – in the international context – that it does not violate international humanitarian law. Although moral judgments and evaluations always need explanation and justification, and the behavior of states and individuals is a subject of critical and evaluative accountability; The basic characteristic of Israeli discourse is that it is itself the standard, and is not subject to any standard. Rather, it presents itself as its morality being so clear that it does not accept discussion (self-evident). As of the writing of these lines, the death toll from the Israeli bombing of Gaza has exceeded 9,000, and the number of children among them has exceeded 3,000, to the point that UNICEF considered Gaza a “cemetery for children,” and the number of women approached 2,000, in addition to the bombing of hospitals and health facilities, which amounted to about 100, which prompted Some international bodies have begun to talk about “genocide” being carried out by Israel in Gaza, and God is the Helper.