Can Israel Really Deter Attackers by Demolishing Their Homes?
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Sissyk (a host of the Editorials & Other Articles forum).
Adam Chandler Nov 19 2014, 2:17 PM ET
Just hours after a grisly attack on a Jerusalem synagogue on Tuesday that left four Jewish worshippers and a police officer dead, Israeli forces razed the home of a Palestinian man who had carried out a deadly car attack last month.
The timing was both meaningful and coincidental. On Monday, before the synagogue massacre, Israel announced that it was stepping up its policy of destroying the homes of those the state suspects of committing terrorist attacks. Cited as a deterrent to Palestinian violence, the policy was a hallmark of the Second Intifada, the Palestinian uprising against Israel in the early 2000s in which thousands of Israelis and Palestinians died. The return of home demolitions comes amid a recent flurry of attacks across Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and the West Bank that have left nearly a dozen Israelis dead.
As the Israeli human rights group B'Tselem reports, more than 650 Palestinian homes were either sealed or demolished from 2001 until 2005, leaving the families of attackers homeless. The policy was discontinued after an army committee determined that razing homes not only failed to deter attacks, but also stoked Palestinian hatred of Israel. House demolitions, declared legal by Israeli courts, were also criticized internationally by the United Nations and others for smacking of collective punishment for family members who may have had no connection to the attacks.
As the Forward reported back in September, house demolitions "date back to a 1945 British Mandate emergency regulation in pre-state Palestine that allowed the British military to confiscate and destroy any home used to discharge a weapon, or any home used by a person who violated military law."
While the policy is meant to have a psychological effect for a would-be attacker whose family would be left homeless, some suggest house demolitions are also designed to offset the economic benefits of committing an attack. One example: During the first three years of the Second Intifada, the families of Palestinian suicide bombers, as well as the families of those killed in clashes with Israel, routinely received checks for up to $25,000 from former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.
more...
http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/11/can-israel-deter-attackers-by-demolishing-their-homes/382945/
Warpy
(114,672 posts)as brothers and sisters who might have been apolitical take up the cause.
BlueMTexpat
(15,700 posts)Rhiannon12866
(258,847 posts)there was an article in the Washington Post a few months ago that said Israel specifically stop doing this because paramilitary realized but it provided terrorists one of their best recruitment tools
JayhawkSD
(3,163 posts)They call it deterrence because punishment is forbidden by international law. Israel has no qualms about violating international law, they do it all the time in many ways, but they like to maintain a "plausible deniability" while doing so.
Bill USA
(6,436 posts)move to where they can be among friends - i.e. Palestine. Be a little accomodating.
quadrature
(2,049 posts)Sissyk
(12,665 posts)Please review SOP of this forum. Thank you.
Kick in to the DU tip jar?
This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.
As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.