Defending the Rabbinic Letter on Israel’s Actions in Gaza
The rabbinic letter initiated by Rabbi Yosef Blau that I am (still) proud to have signed onto continues to provoke responses (that’s good) and hate (that’s less good, but that’s our world), including an email campaign in which over 1800 people (and counting) have proven that one indeed should never doubt the power of a small group of committed people to annoy and disturb another small group of committed people with whom they disagree for no discernible purpose other than to troll. They have also proven that, thank God, the spam filters work even on AI produced letters from websites promising that they can simulate individualization that overcomes them.
Despite the AI enhanced fakeness of the campaign, there is real backlash and real criticism that merit a real response, so here is mine:
First, two basic premises.
1- Any response or respondent that cannot understand this letter without assuming that those who signed it are either people who hate Israel, or are idiots (useful or otherwise), begins with a basic falsehood that prevents the possibility of any further useful dialogue.
I don’t know every single signatory personally. But I know enough, among them serious Torah scholars, leaders and builders of organizations, people who have a career of contributing to the Jewish community to their name (and I do not include myself in any of these descriptions), to know that anyone who needs to make either of the above assumptions in order to explain to themselves why someone would sign is stuck in a position that requires self-deception. Until a person gets past that, there is no use expending time or effort in engaging in conversation.
2- Words matter. This should be obvious, as anyone who was upset by this letter has clearly been affected by its words. But if you accept that words matter, then you should also accept that particular words have particular meanings, and that the choice of words is important and meaningful. If words matter, you need to pay attention to what they actually say and mean, and not misconstrue what they say because they sound reminiscent of some other, different things that other people say. This isn’t nitpicking, it is the very essence of the meaning of a statement. If words matter, it means you need to pay attention to what was said, and no less significantly, to what was not said.
If you’re willing to accept these two premises, and still have real qualms and criticism of the letter, you are invited to consider the following points. If you’re not, it’s probably not worth your time, and you are not my intended audience.
Let’s begin with what the letter does not say. The letter, very intentionally, does not accuse Israel of starving the population of Gaza, intentionally or otherwise. In fact, it does not even state that there is starvation in Gaza. It states: “Israel’s limiting of humanitarian aid, at times completely halting the entry of food and medical supplies, has raised the spectre of coming starvation” and affirms that “Hamas’s sins and crimes do not relieve the government of Israel of its obligations to make whatever efforts are necessary to prevent mass starvation.” When critics of the letter claim that this is a complete lie, that it is Hamas propaganda, and that really, Israel is providing aid, they seem to be suggesting that they actually agree regarding Israel’s fundamental responsibility. However, the fact that Israel has limited, and at times completely stopped the entry of humanitarian aid is an indisputable fact, just as it is a fact that of late, Israel has decided to again allow in greater amounts of aid, and not only through the distribution of the Gaza Humanitarian Fund.
If one should ask: if Israel is again allowing aid in, what is the purpose of the letter, the answer is twofold. First, the purpose of the letter is to make a fundamental statement of our beliefs about ethical and Torah values regarding Israel’s moral responsibility. Since the conflict in Gaza and the humanitarian crisis are tragically ongoing and constantly changing, this call is still relevant and important. Second, Israel’s decision to allow in aid is often justified in purely utilitarian terms, as a necessary capitulation to international pressures, and not as a fulfillment of fundamental moral responsibility, and that is a tragically missing voice this letter seeks to express.
Now let’s highlight what the letter does state, that its critics frequently deny. The letter does affirm the obvious, because in our crazy world, it is necessary to say it explicitly. Hamas bears responsibility for the horrific atrocities it committed on October 7th, and Israel was justified to respond with strong military action. At no point does the letter suggest any moral equivalency between Hamas’ actions and Israel’s actions, at no point does it suggest that Israel is committing war crimes. What it does insist is that “Hamas’ sins and crimes do not relieve Israel of its obligations” to act morally, out of the conviction that the “future of Israel depends not only on its military strength but on its moral clarity.”
Ultimately, I believe that this is the central point of criticism, and it is the point that is critical to debate. Do our enemies’ immoral actions suspend or change moral norms in order to enable us to defeat them? Is this what “this neighborhood” demands, what war demands, or perhaps what the Torah demands in order to defeat evil? Or do we maintain that upholding certain values even in the face of evil is precisely what defines us as a people, that this is our strength even while our enemies view it as a weakness, that this is the highest aspiration of the Jewish state. These are worthy questions, which have been heatedly debated since the very dawn of Zionism and the Jewish encounter with questions of the ethic of power. They should be discussed in a mutually respectful environment which recognizes the shared intelligence and shared commitment to the Jewish people of all voices, in which no one attempts to silence by accusing the other of being an enemy of Israel or of serving Hamas.