Note: The translations of articles from the Hebrew press are prepared by the Government Press Office as a service to foreign journalists in Israel. They express the views of the authors.
A WISE KILL
(Commentary by Ron Ben-Yishai, "Yediot Ahronot", Sept 13, 1998, p. A18)
When discussing the killing of key leaders and activists of militant
Islam, the "how" is no less, and perhaps even more, important that the
"who" and "why." Experience has shown that the method and circumstances in
which the terrorist meets his death have a deciding influence on his
organization's motivation to avenge him and also on the extent of the
murderousness of the series of revenge attacks.
According to the principles of Islam, a sophisticated method of
elimination, relying on high-tech, is considered insulting and treacherous
and it is liable to necessitate a murderous response that will wash away
in blood both the mourning and the insult. Among other things, it
emphasizes the failure and powerlessness of the terrorist leader and of
the Islamic society from which he sprouted, in the face of the
technological superiority of those responsible for his death.
However, if the victim was permitted to die with honor, as befits a
martyr, there is no reason for an extraordinary act of revenge. The fight
against terrorism, as determined as it may be, must take into account
psychological and cultural subtleties, in order to spare innocent victims
in the future.
This, apparently, was the main reason why Israeli security forces chose to
kill the Awadallah brothers in what at least seemed to be a battle, and
not by remote control. At the same time, it is clear that this was an
liquidation. From the laconic report made to journalists, it appears that
the police anti- terrorist unit men did not give the Awadallah brothers an
opportunity to surrender. This leads to the conclusion that, from the
outset, there was no intention to arrest them and bring them to trial.
This fact again raises the question of whether the utility that the
killing of a key terrorist leader or activist brings is worth the
bloodshed that is caused by the revenge attacks which come in response.
There are also moral and legal question marks that cannot be ignored.
In this matter, there is no clear-cut answer There are instances in which
killing is a clear and efficient act of self- defense, and then it is
justified. In other cases, it is folly. Therefore, what is need is a
thorough consideration of the matter by an authorized forum of leaders,
before a decision is made to carry out the action.
There is no doubt that the Awadallah brothers were planning to carry out
attacks, and that there removal from the scene considerably damaged their
organization's military potential. If they had been arrested instead of
killed, it is reasonable to assume that Hamas would have embarked on a
series of attacks in order to effect their release, and that ultimately
the two men, with a great deal of blood on their hands, would have been
freed. Therefore, in this case, the decision to eliminate them and the
manner used to carry out that decision, were correct.
No doubt, Hamas will now try to carry out revenge attacks. However, the
Palestinian Authority, and especially Jibril Rajoub, have an account to
settle with the Awadallah family, and it is possible that this fact, added
to the General Security Service's intensive efforts to prevent attacks,
may limit the damage.