Building Bridges: House demolitions play into the hands of terrorists

The blood boils, the stomach clenches at the sight of Efrat Onterman, the baby who in an instant became an orphan on Wednesday. The images of the bulldozer attack in Jerusalem last week were as shocking and terrifying as the ones that emerged from the Mercaz Harav shooting attack in March 2008 and likewise, lit the fire for revenge and the basic desire to deliver a response that would hurt twice as much. These sentiments gripped the public almost completely. Even before the final death count was announced, right-wing spokespersons began to call for the demolition of the terrorist's house in east Jerusalem, so as to make an example of.

Leaders' roles involve being attentive to the public's sentiments but to make decisions based on the interests of the State of Israel. In their support for the demolition of the terrorist's family house, Prime Minister [Ehud] Olmert and [Defense Minister Ehud] Barak were drawn into the mass rage with little difficulty.

In 2005, it was then-defense minister Shaul Mofaz and then-chief of staff Moshe (Bogie) Ya'alon who made the right decision in accepting the recommendations of the special committee headed by Udi Shani which asserted that home demolitions for deterrent purposes were ineffective.

The IDF then ruled that destroying a terrorist's home and punishing his family does not create an effective deterrent against someone who is deadset on attacking Jews and prepared to do so while paying for it with his life.

According to the committee's findings, demolishing the family home leads to a dramatic change in world public opinion in which the terrorist and his family are then portrayed as victims of the Israeli occupation. However, it is not just shifting international opinion and denouncements of Israel that should concern us, the demolitions also lead to the unification of the Arab world around the terrorist and his family who are then supported publicly and financially.

If members of the terrorist's family were to have prior knowledge of his intentions and if someone was there to aid him in carrying out his act, such persons should stand trial and be judged according to the rule of law. Alternatively, the state should not be drawn into the revenge cycle and should not punish innocents who have no ties to such horrid acts. Punishing innocents, even if their relatives committed terrorist activities, does not contribute to the war on terror and in fact weakens Israel's political and moral stance in the face of its enemies.

Nevertheless, if the political and legal systems choose to remain captives of the likes of Ben Gvir and Marzel and order terrorists' homes demolished, the list must include the houses of Jewish terrorists as well. If this rationale is to be followed, the homes of Yigal Amir, Ami Poper, Baruch Goldstein, Eden Natan-Zada and Yanai Lalaze and their families' must also be destroyed.

The latter was a Border policeman convicted of the murder of a 17-year-old Palestinian whom he had picked up in his jeep outside Hebron, beaten severely and thrown out of the vehicle at top speed. In this case, where a Jew committed the murder of a Palestinian, the proper "deterrent", as decided by the court, was a total of 6 and a half years imprisonment.