The Rule of Law

Analyzing the Sde Teiman situation

I have written a lot about the shortcomings of the charedi community. They are the most serious of Israel’s internal problems, because if no drastic change is made then then the country will simply economically and militarily collapse. But there are problems in other sectors of society too, including my own. And one very alarming problem was seen a few weeks ago.

The arrest of several soldiers in the Sdei Teiman base under suspicion of torturing and sexually abusing a prisoner was followed by a gang of people, including Members of Knesset from Likud, Otzma Yehudit and the Religious Zionist party, rioting and breaking into the base. This caused ferocious debate in Israel and revealed some deeply problematic aspects among certain sectors of society. But after some very upsetting discussions, I realized that much of the heated arguments could be reduced by clarifying that there are (at least) nine different aspects:

A) What the prisoner deserved

B) The alleged torture and abuse of the prisoner

C) The arrest of the soldiers

D) The way that the arrest was done

E) Protesting the notion that soldiers can be arrested

F) Protesting that the soldiers were innocent

G) Protesting that the victim deserved it

H) Protesting the manner of the arrest

I) Breaking into the base

Let’s take it as a given that nobody needs to feel sympathy for whatever happens to a Hamas terrorist. Thus, (A) does not need to be a point of disagreement. However, what some fail to realize is that it most certainly does not follow from this that it is legitimate for soldiers to abuse the prisoner.

We are blessed to have a country that has laws and rights and protections. As the Sages say, "Pray for the welfare of the government, for if not for its fear, people would swallow each other alive" (Avos 3:4). As it happens, the laws about how to treat prisoners were created for very good reasons, but even if you disagree with them, they are nevertheless the laws that exist in the State of Israel.

Yes, war is hell, and Hamas inflicted the most horrific massacre in the history of the state. And in every single war, there are abuses. And it’s terrible that much of the world is so ready to use double standards, and demonize and delegitimize Israel for things that happen everywhere. The Wokeipedia entry on Allied War Crimes during WWII is eye-opening. And perhaps there should be some leniency for soldiers, with the psychological pressures of war, and so as not to risk dissuading people from combat.

But that is for the court to decide. The court has its job, and soldiers have their job. It is not the place of soldiers to go against their orders, and if they do, there must be a system of accountability. You can’t break the law just because you disagree with it. And if you do, there must be accountability. The alternative is anarchy.

It thereby follows that (C), the arrest of the soldiers, was justified. Without deciding whether or not they were guilty, there was certainly reason to suspect that a crime had taken place - the video alone, where they were hiding what they were doing, is evidence of that. And thus (E), protesting the notion that soldiers can be arrested, is wrong. Likewise, (G), protesting that the victim deserved it, is also wrong. Punishment is for courts to decide.

What about (F), protesting that the soldiers were innocent of the charges? In theory, that’s legitimate. But it seems to me that many of the people claiming this did not actually have any such knowledge. (It should be noted that the physician touted as attesting that the victim was not abused is personally connected with the Netanyahus - both the leader of the country and her husband - and once signed a petition in favor of the controversial judicial reform.) It also seems that what some of them really felt was that even if the soldiers had done such a thing, they should still not be held accountable

Now, this does not mean that (D), the way that the arrest went down, was justified. I’ve seen conflicting reasons as to what exactly happened and why. But let’s suppose, for argument’s sake, that it was done the wrong way. How should people legitimately respond?

(F), protesting the way in which the arrest was done, is legitimate. It’s a free society and people can legitimately and morally protest all kinds of things. But just as they consider the way in which the arrest was done to be significant, the way in which the protest itself was done is also significant - even more so.

It’s perfectly legitimate to have a rally (with police permission), to wave placards, to politically campaign, and so on. But to break into an army base?! And for this to be done by Members of Knesset??!! The disrespect for the army and for the rule of law, by those who are supposed to represent the system of government, is absolutely appalling.

I was personally very upset to find people that I know and respect who were defending what happened. However, after their emotions had subsided, and after I broke the topic down into these components, I was relieved to find that they agreed that the rule of law is important and people should be held accountable for breaking it.

As for those Members of Knesset who disrespected the notion of law - they should be held fully accountable, both by the law and by their voters.