Human Rights or Human Life

Two summers ago, Camp Koby, the camp for children bereaved by Palestinian terror named after my 13-year-old son Koby Mandell, hosted then-foreign minister Tzipi Livni and the UN Special Rapporteur On The Situation of Human Rights in the Palestinian Territories Occupied Since 1967. The Special Reporteur had just returned from Sederot, where he had been introduced to the trauma of living under the reign of rocket terror perpetrated at that time and until Operation Cast Lead by the Hamas "government" in the Gaza Strip. The Foreign Ministry thought it would be appropriate to use Camp Koby as a backdrop for the meeting. In return, Livni and the UN representative addressed Camp Koby teens.

At dinner I was surprised to see Tzipi reading from a script when addressing the Reporteur. I was less surprised to hear the Special Reporteur, who worked for the notoriously anti-Israel "UN Commission on Human Rights" talk about the alleged violation of human rights perpetrated by the Israelis.

"But sir," I said, "The restrictions on the Palestinian population are a result of actions by the Palestinian terrorists who are trying to murder innocent Israelis like my 13-year-old son Koby. Sometimes it comes down to a choice between human rights and human life." 

Tzipi looked at me, a bit surprised. "Yes," she said  "human rights or human life, that is the question." She seemed to like the phrase, as did I, and repeated it several times. But the Special Reporteur was unmoved, and Tzipi continued to her next point.

I was reminded of this encounter when reading about an upcoming Rabbis for Human Rights conference that will, according to The Jerusalem Post, "scrutinize the moral, legal and religious dimensions of Operation Cast Lead." The Army quite rightly has decided not to participate in what will no doubt be an Israel Defense Force bashing festival of leftist de-legitimization by Breaking the Silence, B'Tzelem and others.

According to the Post article, one member of Rabbis for Human Rights, who defines himself as a Conservative Jew, will argue that  "According to Jewish law, every precaution should be taken to prevent the loss of civilian lives on the enemy side, even if it means that more of our soldiers get killed."

This argument is patently false.

According to the article, the source for this principle is a Talmudic text in the tractate Sanhedrin (7a). In the text, a Jew is being threatened with death if he does not agree to kill another Jew. The Amoraic sage Rava rules that it is forbidden to save one's own life by killing another Jew because "your blood is not redder than his." Thus, goes the argument, Jewish law forbids the army to risk the lives of noncombatants on the Palestinian side to protect the lives of IDF soldiers.

The problem with this argument is first, the Talmudic passage talks explicitly about two Jewish lives, and, rightly or wrongly by today's liberal standards, the Talmud consistently draws halachic distinctions between a Jew's obligations toward Gentiles and his or her obligations to other Jews. More importantly, the Talmud here refers to a case of cold-blooded murder, not "risking the lives of non-combatants." 

But Jewish law aside, we are left with the broader question of whether the Israeli government can restrict the human rights of the Palestinians in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (by closing their borders, invading their territory etc.) to protect human life, i.e. the lives of Israeli citizens. More narrowly, the question is whether Israel has an obligation or even the moral right to risk the lives of its sons and daughters in the military by conducting a war against an enemy sworn to its destruction in a way that does not minimize soldiers' risk of death or injury? 

The members of Rabbis For Human Rights and the other organizers of the upcoming conference seem to believe that the human rights of the Palestinians are more important than the lives of Israelis. They seem willing to risk the lives of our children and even (through territorial compromise) the existence of the State of Israel to protect the human rights of the Palestinians. Our enemies in the Arab world, of course, pretend to agree, despite the fact they have no commitment to human rights in their own societies. Our friends in the West agree - as long as it's not their lives put at risk - and the so-called neutral agents of the UN agree because human rights has become their highest value, at least when it concerns Israel.

But let it be clear that choosing Palestinian rights over Israeli lives endangers not only individual Israelis but the physical existence of the Jewish state. Those Jews who display their ignorance or deceit by misrepresenting the Talmud play into the hands of those who care about neither human life nor human rights.