(Ben Heine © Cartoons)
Israel’s own religious fanatics
By Seth Freedman
The problem with any country fashioned along religious lines is that moderates get buried under rocks and a stream of abuse
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When word of their attack spread around the Arab community, the response was swift, and as utterly unacceptable as the initial violence meted out by the Jewish attackers. Mobs of Arab locals went on a rampage, smashing cars and vandalising shops belonging to Jews, until police took control of the streets and forced them to a halt. As soon as the Israeli press got back to work after the Yom Kippur hiatus, the reaction was fast and furious, with both sides rushing to condemn the other via the media.
When I likened the wanton destruction I witnessed in Nil’in to a pogrom, I was hauled over the coals by my detractors for the language I employed. A few months on, and it appears that the word is enjoying something of a renaissance: Ehud Olmert using it to describe a wave of settler attacks on Arab villages, and – last night – at least three MKs calling the Yom Kippur war in Akko a pogrom, albeit from polar opposite sides of the spectrum.
Yuval Steinitz, a firebrand Likud politician took the view that “Israel has become the only country in the world where pogroms against Jews are taking place”; hot on his heels came Estherina Tartman’s racist outburst, in which she claimed “The pogrom in Akko is another proof that the Arabs of Israel are the real threat to the state”. Countering these claims was Ahmed Tibi, one of Israel’s few Arab parliamentarians, who called the events a “Jewish pogrom”, accusing the police of discriminating against Arab residents of the city during the disturbances.
Last night, a second round of clashes brought heavy police intervention, with the mixed city seemingly unwilling or unable to return to its pre-Yom Kippur state of calm and tolerance. While there is little doubt that what took place during the disturbances definitely walked and quacked like a pogrom, focusing on the symptoms rather than the disease is an unhelpful way of addressing the situation.
That anyone should feel so affronted by a non-Jewish citizen driving his car on Yom Kippur that they hurl rocks in response is as absurd a reaction as the recently-exposed ultra-orthodox vigilantes in Jerusalem, who take the law into their own hands to uphold religious law. For a country so determined to criticise – rightly – the Taliban-style behaviour of many Arab states, it is incredible that such practices are not clamped down upon when they occur closer to home.
Religious fervour has an alarming way of dragging its followers, and their unfortunate victims, back to Bible times. Stoning women in Iran is matched by stoning Arabs – or anyone else – daring to contravene Jewish law in Israel; the violators apparently deserving to be injured or killed for simply exercising the free will that the modern world extends to them.
I spent the entirety of Yom Kippur in synagogue, paying no attention whatsoever to what others might or might not be doing while I was fasting and praying. The only way I could have been offended by others’ actions would have been if it directly impeded on my ability to carry out my religious obligations: if anyone had played music beneath the synagogue’s windows, for example. However, catching sight of the hundreds of cyclists who come out of the woodwork every Yom Kippur wasn’t offensive in the slightest; their violations of the day being their look-out, and no one else’s.
The inherent problem with any country fashioned along religious lines is that the moderates get buried under a pile of rocks and a stream of abuse; a state of affairs to which both Israel and Gaza can attest. Jews attack other Jews for daring to contravene the seating arrangements on “modesty buses“; Palestinians do likewise to their non-believing brethren in similar acts of fundamentalist rage.
Sceptics will say that Akko was a tinderbox waiting to explode, and that religious sensibilities played little part in the initial outburst of violence, in the same way that Sharon’s infamous tour of al-Aqsa was dismissed by rightwingers as incidental to the outbreak of the second intifada. However, the fact remains that politicians and commentators alike have been only too quick to jump on the religious bandwagon, claiming to be mortally hurt by the Arab driver’s actions, as though Israel’s otherwise untainted religious purity was irredeemably stained by his decision to – quite legally – drive on Yom Kippur.
The local police chief described the incident as a “deliberate provocation” by the driver, while saying precious little about the decision by his assailants to resort to hurling rocks and bottles to express their displeasure. But in that case, why don’t the police end the nationwide tradition of bike-riding on Yom Kippur, if such acts are deemed to be a provocation to those adhering to religious law? The answer’s pretty clear, and gives the lie to any claim that Israel is any more tolerant than its peers in the Arab world.
There is much to be said for respecting others’ religions and customs, but at the same time “your freedom ends where my nose begins” cannot – and must not – be allowed to extend to a national scale. When that happens, and when the state apparatus fails to condemn such behaviour, then the game is well and truly up. And all the screams of “pogrom” in the world won’t cover up who the true Cossacks are in such a case.
Matt Giwer said,
October 11, 2008 at 11:46 pm
These Jews are imposing a theocracy on the non-Jews in Israel. Only non-Jews must observe jewish religious law. This being the most onerous imposition conceivable, it serves to justify “righteous violence” against non-Jews.
This is also happening in the US. Congress suspended operations for Yom Kippur, Wall Street did not. There are clearly more Jews working on Wall Street than in Congress.
If one is looking for a more general problem with this Israel speaks and acts for all the Jews in the world save for the few who say not in my name.
Dianne Foster said,
October 11, 2008 at 11:49 pm
Just a little quibble here: The root of the expression is “Your freedom (to swing your fist or hurl a rock) ends where my nose begins.” That is conceptually the basis. Therefore it is a good law, do you see? And that means that attacking a person for exercising his freedom to move his car on his own business on a holy day which he does not share is in violation of the higher law, the one which keeps the peace. After all, the sound of a car is not normally regarded as violent. The disproportionate response to it was the violation of the above law against tortious conduct. A country which puts up with that sort of the thing (or whitewashes it by forgetting that it happened) is spiraling into the sort of excesses deplored by those of us lucky enough not to live in places where such practices hold sway which are rightly regarded as primitive, atavistic and evil.
The fact that intolerant acts met with riot is, while not condonable, certainly not surprising.
Pani said,
October 12, 2008 at 2:42 pm
I read in another account that the driver was blaring music. That puts a slightly different light on it, although not an excuse for violence. The stone throwers were youth, and every group has its rowdies. It seems that articles like this are part of the problem. First we demonized Arabs, now we are demonizing Israelis. The truth lies in the middle and the world can not help them achieve peace by demonizing either side! This article clearly wants to find fault with Israel instead of looking at all the complex factors. Realizing that both sides have human faults goes further in promoting understanding and ultimately peace.