Once more, Israel/Palestine

I have posted on FB a number of reports from Israel and Palestine from people I know, in order to offer some ‘on-the-ground’ coverage of the current violence. The cycle of retribution continues on both sides, and the same voices are raised in the same litany of protest, and it is ‘Groundhog Day’ again. I have been a participant observer of Israel and Palestine since my first visit in 1988 in the midst of the first Intifada. I was there at the height of the second Intifada, and again during the ‘Knife’ Intifada. A lot—but by no means the majority—of anti-Israel anger is stained with antisemitism. A lot of anti-Palestinian rhetoric flows from Islamophobia. And, in the middle, a strong dose of Dispensationalist Christian Zionism. Like so many polarizing debates in these times, there is much shouting of the same arguments at the others, and little listening to the others; and virtually no reflection. In coming posts I will offer reflection.

Demolished home near Jericho. We will come back to this

Part One: 'An eye for an eye'

I have been reading the Sermon on the Mount in the Gospel of Matthew. This reading began as a project for Lent; I didn’t make it through the Sermon in those 40 days, so have carried on. This past Thursday I arrived at Matt 5:38: 

 You have heard it said “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth”, but I say to you, do not resist an evildoer…but turn the other cheek.

My reading consists of asking lots of questions: the meanings of words, including many I think I already know; how each part fits in with its context; any echoes of Scriptures, etc. And I question my expectations and conventional interpretations. Difficult, indeed, impossible, expectations like this are the reason it is taking me so long to make progress through the Sermon. It doesn’t matter how many times I read this—and I do frequently—it sends me back to examine what I think it means to be a disciple of Jesus. 

I can no longer read this passage without recalling the conference presentation by a Coptic Christian priest in late 2016—during the height of the ISIS offensive in Syria. He spoke of being asked by Syrian Christians, expecting a second ISIS attack on their village, if they must ‘turn the other cheek’. This priest argued that Mt 5 does not apply in such a situation. I raised a question about his hermeneutic, but I had to confess that, from the safety of my peaceful country, I was not in a position to question the conclusion. Even so, I cannot escape the ‘do not resist evil’ of Jesus. 

After this I turned to the the news of the day, and to another day of Israel/Palestine violence—more rockets over Israel, and heavy ‘reprisal’ attacks on Gaza. ‘An eye for an eye’. 

This brought to memory a news conference back when Yitzhak Shamir was prime minister of Israel in the 80s and early 90s. Following reprisals for a Palestinian attack of some sort (who can remember?) was asked by a Western TV reporter whether the response could be considered proportionate to the Palestinian attack. His answer (and I can see the TV screen in my memory) was, ‘We Jews are not Christians, we do not have to turn the other cheek.’ 

And so it is. 

The verse Jesus cited appears three times in the Torah—in Exodus, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. In academic terms it is called Lex Talionis—the ‘law of retaliation’. The like-for-like penalty text is so graphically brutal to the modern Western mind, that we shrink at violence. But, the purpose of the law is actually to wind down that cycle. The concept of the law is that punishment for a misdeed should be based upon equivalence—and proportionality—rather than simply unrestricted and escalating bouts of revenge’—you hit me, I kill you; I kill you, your family kills my family; you kill my family, my tribe wipes out your tribe. The purpose is to restrict bloodshed. 

The Qur’an teaches the same, even referring to the law of Moses, but it also makes room for compensation in the place of blood. Here is Sura 5:45: 

And We ordained therein for them: Life for life, eye for eye, nose for nose, ear for ear, tooth for tooth and wounds equal for equal. But if anyone remits the retaliation by way of charity, it shall be for him an expiation.

There is no command to turn the other cheek, but, in light of the respective scriptures of Hamas and of Israel, both should be playing by these same rules. But today’s BBC count (which has gone up even as I write) is: 

 Of the 227 people killed in Gaza at least 63 are children, according to its health ministry, while of the 12 people killed in Israel, two children are among the dead, the country's medical service says. 

Twelve dead in Israel. Twelve too many people. In retaliation, 227 dead in Gaza. 227 too many people. 

Where did this cycle of violence begin? Israel in self-defence, retaliates against Hamas’ massed rocket attacks with guided missiles; Hamas’ rockets are retaliation for the storming of the Haram (Temple Mount) on one of the holiest days of Ramadan; Israel’s raid on the mount was a response to escalating Palestinian protests against evictions in East Jerusalem that injured many police. And the evictions were…? 

Equivalence? Proportionality? How does lobbing a rocket randomly towards a populated area count as like-for-like? How does destroying a high-rise apartment building to kill two militants count as equivalence? Gandhi is reported to have said, ‘An eye for an eye will only make the whole world blind’. And no one is willing to say ‘Stop!’. 

End of Part One