Justice is one of those words that gets thrown around a lot by activists. The word is often attached to whatever cause the activist is promoting. The environmental activists speak of earth justice, the abortion activist promote reproductive health justice, and activists for the poor will use the catch-all term-social justice. During the recent conflict between Israel and Hamas thousands of activists took to the streets to demand justice for Palestine. However when justice is defined through the canon of Western Civilization it is not justice for Palestine the activists should be chanting, it should be mercy for Palestine.
From Aristotle’s school in Athens to the Augustine’s courtyard in Hippo, from Averroes’ sharia courtroom in Cordoba to Aquinas’ quarters in Italy, justice came to be defined as giving each one their due. This is both positive and negative application. If a contractual agreement has been satisfied, both parties receive justice. When a person is punished for a crime they also receive justice. Injustice occurs when a crime is committed and that offender is celebrated as a hero. Such is the case in the Palestinian Territories.
The flare-up of violence between Israel and Hamas started with the kidnap and murder of three teenage boys from Hebron. Naftali, Gilad, and Eyal were kidnapped on their way home from school. The kidnappings startled and enraged Israel. Hashtags were started, prayer rallies were held, and the mother of one of the boys spoke passionately at the United Nations. Israeli soldiers went door to door in Hebron looking for the boys. At the same time the Palestinian authority told the shopkeepers to not cooperate with the Israeli government in locating the youths. The kidnappers were hidden and escaped. Sadly, the boys were found executed by a bullet to the head.
When the news hit that the boys had been found dead, rage filled the streets of Israel. A group of Israeli youth filled with revenge found a teenage Palestinian boy and set him on fire and killed him. In contrast to the Palestinian Authority, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu publicly stated, “There is no place for such murders in our society.” The Justice Minister Tzipi Livni referred to the murderers of the Palestinian youth as terrorists. Within 24 hours, three Israelis were arrested and charged with murder. The murderers of the three Israeli boys remain at large.
Justice worked in Israel, while in the Palestinian Territories justice is nowhere to be found. In fact, by telling shop keepers in Hebron to not cooperate with Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the shop keepers of Hebron become complicit in the kidnapping and murders.
Activist for the Palestinians demand the collective benefits of justice without the collective cost of justice. They demand collective rewards and denounce collective punishment.
Since the current ceasefire is holding, the discussion around the latest war in Gaza has shifted from combat to the analysis. The focus of the discussion by activists on both sides is the disproportionate death toll between Gaza and Israel and the tactics of Israel and Hamas. Hamas admitted that it uses human shields. They have also been seen launching rockets from schools and setting up sniper nests in hospitals.
Pro-Palestinian activist and professor at Wheaton College, Gary Burge, made the case in the Huffington Post that human shield argument breaks down as the body count of civilian soars.
“It is at this moment that I like to imagine myself leading a seminar in theological ethics. And using my best Socratic pedagogy, I’d present the class with a few scenarios: If a genuine terrorist were in the street, armed and lethal, and hiding behind two innocent civilians, would you consider shooting all three of them in order to save 25 bystanders? Would it be morally justified?
What if our terrorist were holding 15 people hostage and threatening to kill 25 bystanders? Do we kill all of them to save the 25? And on we go. I’m pressing the parameters of proportionality (a vital component in any just-war theory). But there is more: What if the terrorist were sleeping in bed with his wife, dreaming about whom he might kill tomorrow, and his 10 children were in his apartment with him? And what if there were 50 innocent neighbors on adjacent floors in his building? This is precisely the scenario that occurred in the Jebaliya refugee camp in northern Gaza on Tuesday evening. “We are targeting Hamas militants,” Israel argued. But wait. Is it morally acceptable to also kill his 10 family members who do not participate in his work? Are we justified if we demolish his entire building? Two buildings? Six? May we kill 1,200 people in Gaza to protect 50 Israelis? Why not kill 5,000? Why not all of them?”
Where Burge’s argument breaks down is that in many cases the neighbors had ample warning of impending attacks. Israel called the neighbors or dropped a dummy bomb. Many of those who are being used as human shields choose to be human shields. Death in this conflict is martyrdom and martyrdom is a guaranteed ticket to paradise.
During the war between Iran and Iraq, Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini (spiritual and moral ally of Hamas) used children to clear the minefields. The children were encouraged to give themselves for the cause and willfully marched to their death. For Hamas, the children are a means to an end. The more dead kids, the more Israel gets attacked by the world. It is a perverse incentive. Yet, if Israel is taking more than reasonable precaution to avoid civilian deaths then Israel has fulfilled it’s just obligation and the distinction criteria of just war has been met.
While proportionality matters, so does intent. For Hamas the use of human shields and the subsequent civilian deaths are a tactical benefit. A high civilian death toll erodes support for Israel’s war against Hamas, it also forces Israel to make tactical changes to ensure fewer civilian deaths, but those tactics also make Israeli soldiers more vulnerable to attack. The incentive to use human shields clearly out weighs the cost for Hamas as shown in the video below.
Hamas choosing to use human shields and Israel choosing to give ample warning to civilians about impending attacks places the blame for civilian deaths on Hamas. However, once again Hamas will not receive the justice it deserves. The absurd bias against Israel at the UN and most of the major human rights organizations, like Amnesty International and Oxfam, means that Hamas will continue to get away with the murder of its own citizens.
Properly defining justice should make it difficult to defend Hamas and its Palestinian supporters. However, the fact that so many so-called “social justice” organizations and activists are unwilling to affirm true justice for Hamas shows that it is not actually justice they are after. Perhaps it is something more sinister.
Comment by Pastor Harley Wheeler on August 23, 2014 at 11:37 am
I heard a Hamas representative say that all their population is part of the military resistance against Israel, women and children included. He seemed to think this settled the question about using civilians as shields. In Hamas’ view, there are no civilian Palestinians. He was given a pass on this comment by the NPR reporter. Interesting, so they have soldiers they haven’t trained. They have and advocate child soldiers, They have soldiers that they do not pay, feed or clothe. They have soldiers with no chain of command, with no rules of engagement, and who are sent into ‘battle’ without weapons. They have soldiers who can’t participate in the democratic process. The list could be expanded. These are clearly atrocities to their own people.