Spring Break
A Defense of Israel
Addie Lerner '11 and Jeff Mensch '11
Issue date: 9/30/09 Section: Opinion
Israel, like any other country in the world, has its faults. But both the international media and many of Israel's opponents all too often decry these faults as evidence of Israel's immorality in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The majority of Israel's acts of aggression have, in fact, valid justifications. Although some will argue that the ends do not justify the means, such as in Israel's construction of the "wall" or its blockade of Gaza, it is vitally important to consider the context of such actions and the repercussions of not enacting them. This article attempts to explain the legitimacy and necessity of some of Israel's seemingly aggressive actions, as well as criticize certain policies the authors believe do not have a legitimate justification.
First off, the suffering of Palestinian Arabs is undeniable. The security wall, checkpoints, and roadblocks determine where they can and cannot go, even within their own towns, meaning that going to work can take several hours each way. One only need visit B'tselem's website documenting the state of human rights in the West Bank and Gaza to see the latest settler violence. Israel has imposed a severe blockade on Gaza, and last winter used overwhelming firepower to subdue Hamas. In light of these facts, why on Earth should anyone support Israel?
When judging issues like the previously mentioned impediments to freedom, it is important to keep them in context. Israel erected the checkpoints and security fence during the middle of the Second Intifada, a brutal campaign led by Palestinian nationalists that targeted Israeli civilians, and that at its peak involved weekly suicide bombings in places like night clubs, restaurants, and bus stops within the "Green Line" (the 1949 armistice line). To put an end to these terrorist attacks (which were, at least in part, funded by Fatah, the current ruling party of the Palestinian National Authority, and the likes of Saddam Hussein), Israel erected barriers to both prevent terrorists from entering Israel proper, and to disrupt the terror infrastructure in the territories. Critics may argue that this amounts to collective punishment, which is to a large extent true, but when the alternative is continued death of Israel's citizens, the responsibility of the Israeli government seems clear.
First off, the suffering of Palestinian Arabs is undeniable. The security wall, checkpoints, and roadblocks determine where they can and cannot go, even within their own towns, meaning that going to work can take several hours each way. One only need visit B'tselem's website documenting the state of human rights in the West Bank and Gaza to see the latest settler violence. Israel has imposed a severe blockade on Gaza, and last winter used overwhelming firepower to subdue Hamas. In light of these facts, why on Earth should anyone support Israel?
When judging issues like the previously mentioned impediments to freedom, it is important to keep them in context. Israel erected the checkpoints and security fence during the middle of the Second Intifada, a brutal campaign led by Palestinian nationalists that targeted Israeli civilians, and that at its peak involved weekly suicide bombings in places like night clubs, restaurants, and bus stops within the "Green Line" (the 1949 armistice line). To put an end to these terrorist attacks (which were, at least in part, funded by Fatah, the current ruling party of the Palestinian National Authority, and the likes of Saddam Hussein), Israel erected barriers to both prevent terrorists from entering Israel proper, and to disrupt the terror infrastructure in the territories. Critics may argue that this amounts to collective punishment, which is to a large extent true, but when the alternative is continued death of Israel's citizens, the responsibility of the Israeli government seems clear.
Be the first to comment on this story