In the LA Times, Henry Siegman (pictured) claims there’s a moral equivalence between Palestinian terror and IDF security operations:
The vast disproportion between Palestinian civilian casualties from Israeli “mistakes” and Israeli casualties from Palestinian terrorist assaults also brings into question the distinction between the two. It suggests that the killing of Palestinian civilians is, at the very least, more a matter of Israeli indifference than a mistake. Not a single Israeli has been killed by a Kassam rocket since Israel’s disengagement from Gaza last year, although during this period Palestinian civilians have been killed by Israeli artillery and airstrikes virtually on a daily basis. (According to B’Tselem, the Israeli human rights group, Israeli forces have killed about 3,400 Palestinians since the intifada started, and Palestinians have killed about 1,000 Israelis).
More important, judgments about the morality of Israeli military strikes that kill innocents cannot be made without reference to the political context within which the violence occurs. Even when Israeli attacks are carried out with care to avoid harm to civilians, “collateral damage,” in which innocent Palestinians are killed or maimed, only can be justified if Israel also is engaged in a serious and realistic attempt to reach a negotiated solution.
The fact that no Israelis have died as a result of Qassam rocket attacks doesn’t diminish the effort made by rocket crews to kill Israelis indiscriminately. Gunmen and rocket squads endanger the civilians they hide behind. And Siegman’s “context” doesn’t hold water. The current Hamas-led PA refuses to recognize Israel, renounce violence, or accept existing agreements.
Speaking of context, here’s a little context on Siegman.
