As tension mounted in Jerusalem in recent days because of Ramadan, the cancellation of Palestinian Authority elections, slated evictions from Sheikh Jarrah and Jerusalem Day celebrations, some called on Israel to be smart, not right.
What did it mean to be smart in these circumstances? Postponing the Sheikh Jarrah evictions, temporarily barring Jews from the Temple Mount and diverting the traditional Jerusalem Day march away from both Damascus Gate and the Muslim Quarter in Jerusalem’s Old City so as not inflame an already combustible situation.
And Israel was smart: It did all of the above. The Supreme Court hearing on the Sheikh Jarrah evictions was postponed until June 8, Jews were kept from the Temple Mount on Jerusalem Day on Tuesday, and on that same day the traditional flag procession to the Western Wall through Damascus Gate was diverted elsewhere.
But it helped not a whit. Rockets were still fired on Jerusalem, and then they pounded the South. Riots broke out in the mixed Jewish-Arab cities of Haifa, Ramle and Lod, as well as in Arab cities in the Galilee. Arabs blocked roads in the South, and passing motorists were threatened and pelted with rocks.
Israel could be as smart as Einstein, but if the other side wants to escalate, it will escalate – independent of what Israel may or may not do.
This doesn’t mean Israel should not play it smart and try to defuse tense situations where possible. Playing things smart can make a difference in shaping the narrative and getting legitimacy for action: It is one thing for Israel to strike Gaza hard after Hamas fires rockets on Jerusalem; another if a riot at Damascus Gate would have left numerous Palestinians dead, leading to a Hamas strike and Israeli counterstrike.
But at the same time, Israel should harbor no illusions and realize that oftentimes “being smart, not right” will make absolutely no difference on the ground.
This is one of those times.
IT IS too early to tell whether this round of fighting in Gaza will be short – two or three days – or a longer more intense military campaign. Hamas, by firing rockets onto Jerusalem, is trying to create a new equation, to set new “ground rules,” whereby whenever there is trouble in Jerusalem, they will get involved: If there is fire in Jerusalem, there will be fire in Gaza, or fire from Gaza onto Jerusalem.
Israel must disabuse Hamas of this notion and convince its leaders that this is not a new line of action worth pursuing; that it is simply not worth their while.
And the only way to do that is to hit Hamas very hard – not cosmetic targets, but strikes that will convince them that they have too much to lose. Otherwise, Hamas will present itself as the guardian of al-Aqsa and fire rockets toward Jerusalem each time there is trouble in the capital – and there often is trouble in the capital.
That is one of the key takeaways from the current round of violence.
Another is that someone quickly needs to step up among the Arab-Israeli leaders and condemn the random violence and rioting among Arab-Israelis over the last two days and work to tamp it down, or relations between Israeli Arabs and Jews could be set back two decades to where it was at the outset of the Second Intifada.
What would make this especially frustrating is that the rioting and violence – throngs throwing firebombs and rocks at Jews, smashing Jewish-owned storefront windows and torching synagogues – is that it took place just as the country seemed on the verge of a breakthrough in ties between its Jewish and Arab communities.
The coronavirus crisis showed Jewish and Arab medical personnel working shoulder to shoulder, creating a certain sense of “we are all in this together.”
And then Ra’am (United Arab List) leader Mansour Abbas appeared on the scene, gave speeches in Hebrew about coexistence without the usual rhetoric about the evils of Israel and Israeli society, and for the first time ever, an Arab party was seen by much of the public as a legitimate government partner.
Even the Likud of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and parties to his right – Yamina and New Hope – were willing to cooperate with Ra’am. Only the Religious Zionist Party, a party dismissed by many as an extremist, racist party, was opposed – and many saw their opposition as anachronistic.
The recent rioting of Arab-Israelis will likely set all of that back. Following images and videos of Arabs marching on a Jewish neighborhood in Lod, an incident that left one Arab man killed; of synagogues vandalized in Ramle; of violent protests in Haifa, it will be increasingly difficult for part of the public to see Ra’am, let alone the Joint List – a less conciliatory Arab party – as legitimate coalition partners, especially since they have not come out strongly against the violence and demonstrated that they were trying to stop it.
These images will undoubtedly lead many to reassess whether Ra’am is indeed interested in peaceful coexistence. If it is, why not roundly condemn the violence?
When Jewish extremists act outrageously, they are widely condemned by the government and the country’s leaders – as they should be.
An entire community cannot and should not be judged by the actions of a radical and violent minority. But it can be judged by how it responds to those elements within it.
So far – despite the hope that Abbas inspired that he may be a refreshing Arab-Israeli leader cut from somewhat different cloth who can act as a unifier, not a divider – the national Arab political leadership has not stepped up.
Perhaps they are frightened. Perhaps they don’t want to alienate their base. Perhaps they actually see some benefits in the violence. Whatever the reason, their silence is being noted not only by their constituents but by the Jewish public as well – and it is a silence likely to have political consequences.