Israel Projects Strength Abroad, But Struggles to Protect Citizens at Home
Translated from English, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
TLDR
- Israel projects significant military strength against external threats, capable of striking deep into enemy territory.
- However, a persistent gap exists in protecting its citizens from weekly terror attacks in Judea and Samaria, with inconsistent responses.
- The article argues this gap stems from a lack of clear enemy definition and historical policy decisions, including the Oslo Accords, which have emboldened hostile ideologies.
From the perspective of Avi Abelow, writing for The Jerusalem Post, Israel faces a troubling paradox: immense power projected outward, yet a perceived vulnerability at home, particularly in Judea and Samaria. While the nation's military prowess against distant enemies like Iran and Hezbollah is undeniable and a source of pride, the ongoing reality of terror attacks against Jewish families in these territories highlights a critical failure in domestic security.
The Palestinian Police will fight Hamas without BโTselem, without the High Court, and without Mothers Against Silence.
The core of the problem, as articulated, lies in a historical and ongoing confusion regarding the definition of the enemy and the strategic implications of past policies. The article references Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin's comments during the Oslo Accords era, suggesting a willingness to let the Palestinian Authority handle security without the constraints of Israeli human rights organizations and the Supreme Court. This, coupled with Yasser Arafat's alleged strategic view of Oslo as a temporary truce rather than a peace agreement, paints a picture of a long-standing Israeli policy that has, perhaps unintentionally, fostered an environment where hostility towards Jewish life is not only tolerated but supported.
I signed Oslo not as a peace agreement, but as a tactical move, invoking Muhammadโs Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, a temporary truce designed to lull an enemy before resuming war.
The recent incidents involving Yehuda Sherman's death, the stoning of Jewish residents near Efrat, and a rock attack on a teenager in Shomron serve as stark, contemporary examples of this persistent threat. The article criticizes the official Israeli policy that continues to treat the population in Judea and Samaria as a group with whom coexistence is possible, rather than one whose governing ideology is fundamentally opposed to Jewish existence. The removal of the Netzah Yehuda Battalion is presented as a clear signal of this ongoing struggle and the complex challenges faced by the IDF.
The Palestinian Police will fight Hamas without BโTselem, without the High Court, and without Mothers Against Silence.
This narrative resonates deeply within Israel, where the tension between national security and the protection of citizens is a constant concern. Unlike international coverage, which might focus on the geopolitical implications or the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict, an Israeli perspective emphasizes the immediate, visceral threat to its people and questions the strategic decisions that have allowed this situation to persist for decades. The article, through its critical tone and focus on specific incidents, reflects a segment of Israeli public opinion that demands a clearer, more decisive approach to security in these sensitive regions.
The Palestinian Police will fight Hamas without BโTselem, without the High Court, and without Mothers Against Silence.
Originally published by Jerusalem Post in English. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.