Kondon Review of Books, Vol. 28 No. 16, 17 August 2006

You are terrorists, we are virtuous

Yitzhak Laor on the IDF

As soon as the facts of the Bint Jbeil ambush, which
ended with relatively high Israeli casualties (eight
soldiers died there), became public, the press and
television in Israel began marginalising any opinion
that was critical of the war. The media also fell back
on the kitsch to which Israelis grow accustomed from
childhood: the most menacing army in the region is
described here as if it is David against an Arab
Goliath. Yet the Jewish Goliath has sent Lebanon back
20 years, and Israelis themselves even further: we now
appear to be a lynch-mob culture, glued to our
televisions, incited by a premier whose ‘leadership’
is being launched and legitimised with rivers of fire
and destruction on both sides of the border. Mass
psychology works best when you can pinpoint an
institution or a phenomenon with which large numbers
of people identify. Israelis identify with the IDF,
and even after the deaths of many Lebanese children in
Qana, they think that stopping the war without scoring
a definitive victory would amount to defeat. This
logic reveals our national psychosis, and it derives
from our over-identification with Israeli military
thinking.

In the melodramatic barrage fired off by the press,
the army is assigned the dual role of hero and victim.
And the enemy? In Hebrew broadcasts the formulations
are always the same: on the one hand ‘we’, ‘ours’,
‘us’; on the other, Nasrallah and Hizbullah. There
aren’t, it seems, any Lebanese in this war. So who is
dying under Israeli fire? Hizbullah. And if we ask
about the Lebanese? The answer is always that Israel
has no quarrel with Lebanon. It’s yet another
illustration of our unilateralism, the thundering
Israeli battle-cry for years: no matter what happens
around us, we have the power and therefore we can
enforce the logic. If only Israelis could see the
damage that’s been done by all these years of
unilateral thinking. But we cannot, because the army –
which has always been the core of the state –
determines the shape of our lives and the nature of
our memories, and wars like this one erase everything
we thought we knew, creating a new version of history
with which we can only concur. If the army wins, its
success becomes part of ‘our heritage’. Israelis have
assimilated the logic and the language of the IDF –
and in the process, they have lost their memories. Is
there a better way to understand why we have never
learned from history? We have never been a match for
the army, whose memory – the official Israeli memory –
is hammered into place at the centre of our culture by
an intelligentsia in the service of the IDF and the
state.

The IDF is the most powerful institution in Israeli
society, and one which we are discouraged from
criticising. Few have studied the dominant role it
plays in the Israeli economy. Even while they are
still serving, our generals become friendly with the
US companies that sell arms to Israel; they then
retire, loaded with money, and become corporate
executives. The IDF is the biggest customer for
everything and anything in Israel. In addition, our
high-tech industries are staffed by a mixture of
military and ex-military who work closely with the
Western military complex. The current war is the first
to become a branding opportunity for one of our
largest mobile phone companies, which is using it to
run a huge promotional campaign. Israel’s second
biggest bank, Bank Leumi, used inserts in the three
largest newspapers to distribute bumper stickers
saying: ‘Israel is powerful.’ The military and the
universities are intimately linked too, with joint
research projects and an array of army scholarships.

There is no institution in Israel that can approach
the army’s ability to disseminate images and news or
to shape a national political class and an academic
elite or to produce memory, history, value, wealth,
desire. This is the way identification becomes
entrenched: not through dictatorship or draconian
legislation, but by virtue of the fact that the
country’s most powerful institution gets its hands on
every citizen at the age of 18. The majority of
Israelis identify with the army and the army
reciprocates by consolidating our identity, especially
when it is – or we are – waging war.

The IDF didn’t play any role in either of the Gulf
wars and may not play a part in Bush’s pending war in
Iran, but it is on permanent alert for the real war
that is always just round the corner. Meanwhile, it
harasses Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, to
very destructive effect. (In July it killed 176
Palestinians, most of them from the same area in Gaza,
in a ‘policing’ operation that included the
destruction of houses and infrastructure.) They shoot.
They abduct. They use F-16s against refugee camps,
tanks against shacks and huts. For years they have
operated in this way against gangs and groups of armed
youths and children, and they call it a war, a ‘just
war’, vital for our existence. The power of the army
to produce meanings, values, desire is perfectly
illustrated by its handling of the Palestinians, but
it would not be possible without the support of the
left in Israel.

The mainstream left has never seriously tried to
oppose the military. The notion that we had no
alternative but to attack Lebanon and that we cannot
stop until we have finished the job: these are
army-sponsored truths, decided by the military and
articulated by state intellectuals and commentators.
So are most other descriptions of the war, such as the
Tel Aviv academic Yossef Gorni’s statement in Haaretz,
that ‘this is our second war of independence.’ The
same sort of nonsense was written by the same kind of
people when the 2000 intifada began. That was also a
war about our right to exist, our ‘second 1948’. These
descriptions would not have stood a chance if Zionist
left intellectuals – solemn purveyors of the ‘morality
of war’ – hadn’t endorsed them.

Military thinking has become our only thinking. The
wish for superiority has become the need to have the
upper hand in every aspect of relations with our
neighbours. The Arabs must be crippled, socially and
economically, and smashed militarily, and of course
they must then appear to us in the degraded state to
which we’ve reduced them. Our usual way of looking at
them is borrowed from our intelligence corps, who
‘translate’ them and interpret them, but cannot
recognise them as human beings. Israelis long ago
ceased to be distressed by images of sobbing women in
white scarves, searching for the remains of their
homes in the rubble left by our soldiers. We think of
them much as we think of chickens or cats. We turn
away without much trouble and consider the real issue:
the enemy. The Katyusha missiles that have been
hitting the north of the country are launched without
‘discrimination’, and in this sense Hizbullah is
guilty of a war crime, but the recent volleys of
Katyushas were a response to the frenzied assault on
Lebanon. To the large majority of Israelis, however,
all the Katyushas prove is what a good and necessary
thing we have done by destroying our neighbours again:
the enemy is indeed dangerous, it’s just as well we
went to war. The thinking becomes circular and the
prophecies self-fulfilling. Israelis are fond of
saying: ‘The Middle East is a jungle, where only might
speaks.’ See Qana, and Gaza, or Beirut.

Defenders of Israel and its leaders can always argue
that the US and Britain behave similarly in Iraq. (It
is true that Olmert and his colleagues would not have
acted so shamelessly if the US had not been behind
them. Had Bush told them to hold their fire, they
wouldn’t have dared to move a single tank.) But there
is a major difference. The US and Britain went to war
in Iraq without public opinion behind them. Israel
went to war in Lebanon, after a border incident which
it exploited in order to destroy a country, with the
overwhelming support of Israelis, including the
members of what the European press calls the ‘peace
camp’.

Amos Oz, on 20 July, when the destruction of Lebanon
was already well underway, wrote in the Evening
Standard: ‘This time, Israel is not invading Lebanon.
It is defending itself from a daily harassment and
bombardment of dozens of our towns and villages by
attempting to smash Hizbullah wherever it lurks.’
Nothing here is distinguishable from Israeli state
pronouncements. David Grossman wrote in the Guardian,
again on 20 July, as if he were unaware of any
bombardment in Lebanon: ‘There is no justification for
the large-scale violence that Hizbullah unleashed this
week, from Lebanese territory, on dozens of peaceful
Israeli villages, towns and cities. No country in the
world could remain silent and abandon its citizens
when its neighbour strikes without any provocation.’
We can bomb, but if they respond they are responsible
for both their suffering and ours. And it’s important
to remember that ‘our suffering’ is that of poor
people in the north who cannot leave their homes
easily or quickly. ‘Our suffering’ is not that of the
decision-makers or their friends in the media. Oz also
wrote that ‘there can be no moral equation between
Hizbullah and Israel. Hizbullah is targeting Israeli
civilians wherever they are, while Israel is targeting
mostly Hizbullah.’ At that time more than 300 Lebanese
had been killed and 600 had been injured. Oz went on:
‘The Israeli peace movement should support Israel’s
attempt at self-defence, pure and simple, as long as
this operation targets mostly Hizbullah and spares, as
much as possible, the lives of Lebanese civilians
(this is not always an easy task, as Hizbullah
missile-launchers often use Lebanese civilians as
human sandbags).’

The truth behind this is that Israel must always be
allowed to do as it likes even if this involves
scorching its supremacy into Arab bodies. This
supremacy is beyond discussion and it is simple to the
point of madness. We have the right to abduct. You
don’t. We have the right to arrest. You don’t. You are
terrorists. We are virtuous. We have sovereignty. You
don’t. We can ruin you. You cannot ruin us, even when
you retaliate, because we are tied to the most
powerful nation on earth. We are angels of death.

The Lebanese will not remember everything about this
war. How many atrocities can a person keep in mind,
how much helplessness can he or she admit, how many
massacres can people tell their children about, how
many terrorised escapes from burning houses, without
becoming a slave to memory? Should a child keep a
leaflet written by the IDF in Arabic, in which he is
told to leave his home before it’s bombed? I cannot
urge my Lebanese friends to remember the crimes my
state and its army have committed in Lebanon.

Israelis, however, have no right to forget. Too many
people here supported the war. It wasn’t just the
nationalist religious settlers. It’s always easy to
blame the usual suspects for our misdemeanours: the
scapegoating of religious fanatics has allowed us to
ignore the role of the army and its advocates within
the Zionist left. This time we have seen just how
strongly the ‘moderates’ are wedded to immoderation,
even though they knew, before it even started, that
this would be a war against suburbs and crowded areas
of cities, small towns and defenceless villages. The
model was our army’s recent actions in Gaza: Israeli
moderates found these perfectly acceptable.

It was a mistake for those of us who are unhappy with
our country’s policies to breathe a sigh of relief
after the army withdrew from Lebanon in 2000. We
thought that the names of Sabra and Shatila would do
all the memorial work that needed to be done and that
they would stand, metonymically, for the crimes
committed in Lebanon by Israel. But, with the
withdrawal from Gaza, many Israelis who should be
opposing this war started to think of Ariel Sharon,
the genius of Sabra and Shatila, as a champion of
peace. The logic of unilateralism – of which Sharon
was the embodiment – had at last prevailed: Israelis
are the only people who count in the Middle East; we
are the only ones who deserve to live here.

This time we must try harder to remember. We must
remember the crimes of Olmert, and of our minister of
justice, Haim Ramon, who championed the destruction of
Lebanese villages after the ambush at Bint Jbeil, and
of the army chief of staff, Dan Halutz. Their names
should be submitted to The Hague so they can be held
accountable.

Elections are a wholly inadequate form of
accountability in Israel: the people we kill and maim
and ruin cannot vote here. If we let our memories
slacken now, the machine-memory will reassert control
and write history for us. It will glide into the
vacuum created by our negligence, with the civilised
voice of Amos Oz easing its path, and insert its own
version. And suddenly we will not be able to explain
what we know, even to our own children.

In Israel there is still no proper history of our acts
in Lebanon. Israelis in the peace camp used to carry
posters with the figure ‘680’ on them – the number of
Israelis who died during the 1982 invasion. Six
hundred and eighty Israeli soldiers. How many members
of that once sizeable peace camp protested about the
tens of thousands of Lebanese, Palestinian and Syrian
casualties? Isn’t the failure of the peace camp a
result of its inability to speak about the cheapness
of Arab blood? General Udi Adam, one of the architects
of the current war, has told Israelis that we
shouldn’t count the dead. He meant this very seriously
and Israelis should take him seriously. We should make
it our business to count the dead in Lebanon and in
Israel and, to the best of our abilities, to find out
their names, all of them.

3 August

Yitzhak Laor lives in Tel Aviv.

copyright © LRB Ltd, 1997-2006


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


***************************************************************************
Berdikusi dg Santun & Elegan, dg Semangat Persahabatan. Menuju Indonesia yg 
Lebih Baik, in Commonality & Shared Destiny. 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia
***************************************************************************
__________________________________________________________________________
Mohon Perhatian:

1. Harap tdk. memposting/reply yg menyinggung SARA (kecuali sbg otokritik)
2. Pesan yg akan direply harap dihapus, kecuali yg akan dikomentari.
3. Reading only, http://dear.to/ppi 
4. Satu email perhari: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
5. No-email/web only: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
6. kembali menerima email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ppiindia/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 


Kirim email ke