search
Sadie Hilf

In the Offense of the State of Israel Part 5

The author, Sadie Hilf, speaking to a pro-Israel student delegation (Hasbara Fellowships) in Alfei Menashe in May 2023. (courtesy)
The author, Sadie Hilf, speaking to a pro-Israel student delegation (Hasbara Fellowships) in Alfei Menashe in May 2023. (courtesy)

In the Defense…

Growing up, I attended numerous Christian schools and received a phenomenal education. One of the classes I took in high school was called “Apologetics”. If you are unfamiliar with what apologetics is, it comes from a verse in the Christian Bible, 1 Peter 3:15: “… Always be prepared to give a defense to everyone who asks you for the reason for the hope that you have. But respond with gentleness and respect”.

I have always been someone who has enjoyed debate and logic, so I was actually very excited to hear the logical arguments for why Christian religious scholars believed what they did. However, I was deeply dissatisfied by the answers that we were taught. They relied highly on circular reasoning; this is not due to a lack of understanding of logic but due to the subject matter. After all, we have no way to prove whether creationism, intelligent design, evolution, any other theory, or any combination of them are responsible for the beginning of the world. It comes down to an element of faith. However, what about the things in life that are not based on faith, but rather facts we can see with our own eyes?

I am heavily involved in the pro-Israel advocacy world and have been involved for about 5 years now. I have seen the different methods that we have attempted to use to demonstrate that Israel has the right to exist and is not an evil endeavor. I have been disappointed in all of the arguments and methods that have been presented and taught to me. Because at the end of the day, the goal of the Israel Advocacy and Education movement for the past 77 years has been to practice “hasbara”. For those unfamiliar with the term, “hasbara” comes from the root “lehasber” which means “to explain”. We have been attempting to explain away much of the anti-Israel hate that students have come face to face with on campus.

I recently led a delegation of 37 pro-Israel college students from over 30 American and Canadian college campuses who have been on the front lines of the campus battle. Our team surveyed the students on the accusations they are facing on college campuses of racism, apartheid, proportionality of war, terrorism, and more. Like how my high school had attempted to prepare the students to give a defense for their faith when they went out into the “real world”, I also wanted to prepare these students to have a defense for their Zionism. I heavily valued the attempt at gentleness and respect that had always been present in Christian apologetics because Christians are attempting to proselytize through apologetics to persuade others. So, I also wanted to provide them with communication tactics that would allow them to utilize the information I had shared with them so they could proselytize people to the pro-Israel cause. The following essay is an adaptation of the 2 hour long presentation I gave these students.

The students asked so many amazing questions that I cannot replicate here, however, something that they shared after the session struck me. Many students, like me, have spent years hearing the various formats of hasbara in the past. They were thrilled with the content of the session as they now felt more equipped. But not equipped to defend. No. They felt equipped to go “On the Offensive” on their campuses with the information.

So this is my attempt to be “In the Offense of the State of Israel”.

A Note on Structure

When our team surveyed the students on the information they needed to combat the awful things they were hearing on campus, we provided them with legal definitions for things such as apartheid, genocide, occupation, ethnic cleansing and more. We then asked students to explain a bit more about what they hear about these terms/arguments on their campuses. Finally, we asked students what information they felt they needed to learn more about in order to be confident in addressing the concerns being raised on campus.

Our team then spent over 20 hours compiling resources and information regarding the topics, and divided the concerns along the timeline of modern Israeli history in an attempt to give the session some structure. We were unable to answer every single question/argument, but did our best to combine/address concerns to be able to best empower students.

The major timeline points we decided to address were: The British Mandate, 1948, 1967, The Intifadas, 2005, and finally 2023. These are not entirely exact years, but more framing time reference points to major events in Israeli history that give rise to some of the more controversial claims made against Israel. If you have not read part 1, part 2, part 3 or part 4, you can do so here: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/in-the-offense-of-the-state-of-israel-part-1, https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/in-the-offense-of-the-state-of-israel-part-2/, https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/in-the-offense-of-the-state-of-israel-part-3/, and https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/in-the-offense-of-the-state-of-israel-part-4/.

2023

One of the main things that repeatedly comes up with the 2023 Israel-Hamas War/War of Iron Swords/Al-Aqsa Flood is that the war is “unjust”. But what does it mean for a war to be “just”? A Just War according to the UN Charter is defined in Article 51:

“Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defense shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.”

So a just war then, is a war being fought in self defense after the incident of an armed attack. Look, they may not like the fact that there is a war. But their dislike of the fighting does not inherently make it unjust. Attacking Gaza unprompted would be an unjust war. However, the October 7 attacks make the war a just war.

Proportionality

However, the follow up you will receive to this argument is that the war is not proportional therefore it is unjust/unfair. Unfortunately there is no numerical definition of proportionality, as impressive as the claimed 1.2 civilian to combatant ratio in the 2023 Israel-Hamas war is. So then what is proportionality?

Proportionality is defined in Additional Protocol 1 Article 51:

  1. The civilian population and individual civilians shall enjoy general protection against dangers arising from military operations. To give effect to this protection, the following rules, which are additional to other applicable rules of international law, shall be observed in all circumstances.
  2. The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited.
  3. Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Section, unless and for such time as they take a direct part in hostilities.
  4. Indiscriminate attacks are prohibited. Indiscriminate attacks are:

(a) those which are not directed at a specific military objective;
(b) those which employ a method or means of combat which cannot be directed at a specific military objective; or
(c) those which employ a method or means of combat the effects of which cannot be limited as required by this Protocol;

and consequently, in each such case, are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction.

  1. Among others, the following types of attacks are to be considered as indiscriminate:

(a) an attack by bombardment by any methods or means which treats as a single military objective a number of clearly separated and distinct military objectives located in a city, town, village or other area containing a similar concentration of civilians or civilian objects; and
(b) an attack which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

  1. Attacks against the civilian population or civilians by way of reprisals are prohibited.
  2. The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.
  3. Any violation of these prohibitions shall not release the Parties to the conflict from their legal obligations with respect to the civilian population and civilians, including the obligation to take the precautionary measures provided for in Article 57 .

It is quite easy to see that Israel’s actions are compliant with this.

War vs. Genocide

So then what is the difference then between war and genocide?

First let’s look at the definition of genocide put forth in the Rome Statute of the ICC:

“For the purpose of this Statute, “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

  1. Killing members of the group;
  2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
  4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
  5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”

The largest factor when it comes to genocide is the fact that there must be intent to commit it. As many people have rightly noted in analysis of the 2023 Israel-Hamas War and other past conflicts fueled in part by sectarianism, there is a disctinct difference between violence in war and genocide. This difference can be seen in historical examples such as the Bosnian Genocide which was both a war and a genocide.

From incidents such as the Bosnian Genocide, the United Nations decided that it must take a more active role to protect civilians. What evolved from this idea was the “Responsibility to Protect”. The Responsibility to Protect is defined in the 2005 world summit resolution UNGA resolution as follows:

  1. Each individual State has the responsibility to protect its populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. This responsibility entails the prevention of such crimes, including their incitement, through appropriate and necessary means. We accept that responsibility and will act in accordance with it. The international community should, as appropriate, encourage and help States to exercise this responsibility and support the United Nations in establishing an early warning capability. 
  2. The international community, through the United Nations, also has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter, to help protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. In this context, we are prepared to take collective action, in a timely and decisive manner, through the Security Council, in accordance with the Chartter, including Chapter VII, on a case-by-case basis and in cooperation with relevant regional organizations as appropriate, should peaceful means be inadequate and national authorities manifestly fail to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity and its implications bearing in mind the principles of the Charter and international law. We also intent to commit ourselves, as necessary and appropriate, to helping States build capacity to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity and to assisting those which are under stress before crises and conflicts break out.

As one can see, the Responsibility to Protect was much more geared towards conflicts in which the State was an aggressor in the conflict. However, the concept breaks down when one tries to apply it to a conflict such as the 2023 Israel-Hamas War. If your entire IHL concept can be brought down by a couple thousand men with kalashnikovs, then your system will fail to address the modern world’s issues. 

In the Offense

Thank you so much for choosing to read until this point. I hope to create more content on topics such as this and provide Israel advocacy advice and recommendations. If this is something that interests you, please engage with my content and feel free to reach out to discuss anything I have written here!

I will hopefully be going on the road soon to speak on this exact topic with American College and University students, and if that interests you, please send me a message. 

About the Author
Sadie Hilf is a graduate student at Johns Hopkins SAIS studying International Relations with a focus on Security and Governance in the Middle East. Originally hailing from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, she has lived in Bat Yam, Israel, and Bologna, Italy, before settling most recently in the Washington, D.C. area. She works as a Campus Advocacy Advisor at Hasbara Fellowships working to build pro-Israel student leaders into increasingly effective advocates for the Jewish People and the State of Israel. She was recently featured as a Contributing Author in "Young Zionist Voices"; a book comprised of essays from 31 rising leaders looking to shape the future of Medinat Israel in Eretz Israel for Am Israel.
Related Topics
Related Posts