# Israeli assassination policies **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 28, 2001, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590 "2001-08-28T19:54:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2001, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/1 "2001-08-28T19:54:19Z")
Disclaimer- I’m not a world history maven so the following observations may be at odds with real politik as it has been practiced this century and if this is the case I will be more than happy to stand (well sit actually) corrected. Re the latest assassination carried out by Israel, this is the first time (I can recall) of a democratically elected government more or less _overtly_ targeting and assassinating opposition leaders as a matter of course. I could possibly understand this if there was a formal state of war declared but in the current situation doesn’t Israel risk legitimizing assassinations as a political tool vs killing as a military objective. I know the distinction between the two may be a fine gray line in the real world where people are being bombed in marketplaces, but if you eliminate that distinction aren’t you endangering yourself in the long run by essential OKing such tactics to be used legitimately by other governments (even democratically elected ones) against you if they feel threatened by your policies. It just doesn’t seem like a wise thing to encourage the long run. As a side note I know the Bin Laden situation has many similarities but it always came across as more of a criminal gang pursuit than a political agenda. ---
**Author:** ![SuaSponte](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/67e7ee/32.png) [@SuaSponte](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SuaSponte)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2001, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/2 "2001-08-28T20:07:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by astro \* > Re the latest assassination carried out by Israel, this is the first time (I can recall) of a democratically elected government more or less _overtly_ targeting and assassinating opposition leaders as a matter of course. I could possibly understand this if there was a formal state of war declared but in the current situation doesn’t Israel risk legitimizing assassinations as a political tool vs killing as a military objective. > > I know the distinction between the two may be a fine gray line in the real world where people are being bombed in marketplaces, but if you eliminate that distinction aren’t you endangering yourself in the long run by essential OKing such tactics to be used legitimately by other governments (even democratically elected ones) against you if they feel threatened by your policies. By no means defending Israel’s policy, but I think your OP kinda lumps the Palestinian leadership in with opposition party leaders within a country. The Palestinians being assassinated are not citizens of Israel and are not leaders of a political opposition movements but instead military or paramilitary leaders in armed opposition to Israel. I don’t know what ethical/political standard should apply, but I’m pretty sure its not the same one Bush should apply in deciding whether to assassinate Gore. Sua ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2001, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/3 "2001-08-28T20:07:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by astro \* > I know the Bin Laden situation has many similarities but it always came across as more of a criminal gang pursuit than a political agenda. I guess one man’s criminal is another’s government leader. Though I’m not aware that the US actually targeted Bin Laden personally. In any event, you haven’t shown that Israel stands to lose much as a practical matter. Just who is there an increased danger from as a result of this policy? ---
**Author:** ![curwin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f05b48/32.png) [@curwin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curwin)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2001, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/4 "2001-08-28T20:19:44Z")
It’s a bit long, but I just happened to receive this in an email from somebody: > [@](#): > > Israelis Must Kill or Be Killed > > By Hillel Halkin. Mr. Halkin, a writer based in Israel, is a contributor to Commentary. > > JERUSALEM – I wish someone else had volunteered to write this piece. There are things I would rather do than defend killing people. But since the people in question are trying to kill me, I have no qualms about killing them first. To anyone who thinks I should have qualms, these words are addressed. > > When I say that certain Palestinians who do not know my name, and have never met me, are trying to kill me, I do not mean this metaphorically. Acts of terror by Palestinians – bus bombings, discotheque bombings, cafe bombings – are aimed at all Jews living in Israel, of whom I am one. Statistically, the chances of my being killed by such acts are low. But if by a flip of the dice I should be, those responsible would consider themselves successful. This is the definition of Terror. It does not care whom it kills and maims as long as it kills or maims. > > There is no great mystery about who the people trying to kill me are. Most belong to two organizations, Hamas and Islamic Jihad, which operate freely in those parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip controlled by the Palestinian Authority. Some, like Abu Ali Mustafa of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, hit by an Israeli rocket in Ramallah on Monday, are affiliated with other groups. > > These organizations have offices and political, social and religious programs, as well as publications and spokesmen that take credit for the bombings. They also have workshops in which bombs are made and transferred to operatives for detonation in Israel. Some of these are suicide bombers who blow themselves up with their victims; others use timing or remote-control devices. They have killed close to 60 Israelis since the current round of violence broke out a year ago. > > True, the Palestinian Authority does not always know who these operatives are. Many are first-timers, inducted and trained secretly. It knows very well, however, who their inductors and trainers are, just as it knows who are the “engineers” who make the bombs. Why shouldn’t it? Many are men with long terrorist records who have served time in Israeli and Palestinian jails; many were released from Palestinian jails when the violence began, with the full expectation that they would resume their former careers. Nearly all are known to the Palestinian intelligence services, and just in case any aren’t, Israeli intelligence has supplied the Palestinians with their names. > > Some are personally friendly with Palestinian Authority officials. Some, like Amin el-Hindi of Nablus or Mohammed Deif of Gaza, are Palestinian folk heroes about whom ballads are sung and worshipful stories told. None has been put out of action by the Palestinian Authority. A few have been placed under “administrative detention,” which generally means that they can go on planning their bombings while looking forward to a hot meal and clean bed at the end of the day. > > They are trying to kill me, so what should I do about it? Consider the alternatives: > > 1. I can ask the Palestinian Authority to arrest such men. This has been done without results so often that to suggest doing it again is a stale joke. > > 2. I can try to deter them by massive retaliation. For every Israeli they kill, I can kill 10 Palestinians; for every establishment they blow up, I can destroy a dozen Palestinian houses. This is not only cruel, however, it has proven highly unproductive, as it only leads to more suicide bombers clamoring for revenge. Besides, it is just what the Palestinian leadership wants me to do. This leadership may rejoice at the sight of dead Israelis, but it gets more mileage out of dead Palestinians, because it knows what the sight of them does to international opinion. > > 3. I can post a commando unit on every street corner in Israel to intercept the bombers when they reach their destinations. This is an excellent idea. There are tens of thousands of such street corners. Perhaps NATO would like to send a military expedition. > > 4. I can make careful use of the intelligence at Israel’s disposal to identify, locate and kill the bombers’ ringleaders with minimal loss of innocent life by such means as booby-trapping their telephones, rocketing their cars and offices, etc. In a word, assassinate them. > > Sounds good to me. > > But this is illegal, right? It violates the principle of due process? So it does. We’ll have to try something else then. Here’s what I propose. > > Each time Israel discovers the whereabouts of a terrorist leader in Palestinian territory, it should invade the area with a large force, cordon it off while exchanging gunfire with Palestinian forces, and comb it – house to house and cave to cave – until the suspect is apprehended. Then it should indict him in court and hold a trial with the help of witnesses similarly abducted from the Palestinian territories. > > If necessary it should apply physical pressure to these witnesses, since you can hardly expect Amin el-Hindi’s Nablus friends to spill the beans on him voluntarily in an Israeli court. Then it should repeat this procedure several dozen times until all the guilty parties are behind bars fair-and-square. The international community will, of course, approve of this. > > Let’s get back to assassinations. They’re ugly, they’re brutal – and they’re the most moral way of dealing with an ugly, brutal problem. In fact they’re the opposite of Terror. Terror kills indiscriminately. Assassinations of the right people are as discriminating as you can possibly get while fighting a war. > > Of course, they are not totally so. Mishaps occur. Mistakes are made. There have been cases of Israel targeting the wrong person. Innocent Palestinians in the vicinity of assassinated terrorists have been killed. There are difficult moral choices to be made. Do you fire a rocket at a past and future mass murderer who may not be targetable again for a long time if innocent people are nearby? > > But these are moral choices. Deciding between sending a suicide bomber to a discotheque or to a pizzeria is not. And assassinating terrorist leaders works. It throws them off-balance. It depletes their ranks at the top where they are hardest to refill. It forces them to spend energy on precautionary measures and hinders their freedom of movement and communication. (You stay off the phone and the roads when you know a helicopter may soon have you in its gun sights.) It makes them act hurriedly and unpreparedly. > > Although readers of this newspaper may be unaware of it – Palestinian bombs that never reach their target do not make American headlines – many Israeli lives have been saved as a result of inexperienced bomb-makers and their delivery men acting under pressure and even blowing themselves up in “work accidents.” The assassinations deserve much of the credit for this. If you have better advice for Israel, feel free to give it. Just don’t tell us it’s our duty to die. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2001, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/5 "2001-08-28T20:29:10Z")
I thought there were a variety of protocols, either written or merely ‘understood’ that spelled out a few things about how countries get on with each other in the world. Among these (if they in fact exist) was a protocol prohibiting the assassination of foreign leaders by other governments. The idea behind this is that in this day and age governments could have heads-of-state knocked off willy-nilly (certainly the Russians could probably have tagged every American President during the Cold War had they wished). That said it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen or that there aren’t ways around it. Certainly, the US did its level best to kill Castro in Cuba. American bumbling aside it is a wonder that man managed to survive as long as he has (IIRC Castro claims to have survived over 600 assassination attempts…what counts as an ‘attempt’ in his book I don’t know). Countries may also support insurgencies in another country so while it may not be one of their own trigger men involved in an assassination they certainly aid and abet others to do it for them all the time. Usually, however, the instigating country is at least a little bit circumspect in how it goes about these things. How does Israel get away with it? I would guess a few things play into it: [ul] [li] Palestine is not a country and is not recognized as such by anybody that I know of. As a result you cannot be targeting a ‘head-of-state’ when going after Palestinians.[/li][li] Israel has not targeted a head-of-state (for lack of a better term) in Palestine. They have left Arafat alone for ages. I don’t think the protocols I mentioned above go very far down the leadership ladder if they go down at all.[/li][li] Technically I think Israel still lays claim to the land the attacks are made on. While it might be a bit thin the Israelis might consider themselves as carrying out their own brand of justice on what they consider an internal issue. Everyone else and their opinions can just bugger-off as far as Israel is concerned.[/li][/ul] ---
**Author:** ![astro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9dc877/32.png) [@astro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astro)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2001, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/6 "2001-08-28T20:39:17Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by IzzyR \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by astro \* > > I know the Bin Laden situation has many similarities but it always came across as more of a criminal gang pursuit than a political agenda. > > I guess one man’s criminal is another’s government leader. > > Though I’m not aware that the US actually targeted Bin Laden personally. > > In any event, you haven’t shown that Israel stands to lose much as a practical matter. Just who is there an increased danger from as a result of this policy? \*\* An excellent point. As a naive American I suppose my view is that this overt assassination policy seemingly lowers the bar for what is considered to be an acceptable governmental response and possibly the extent to which it (and I know this may sound trite) _personalizes_ the armed response and legitimizes it’s use against a targeted _individual_. I suppose what it seems Israel stands to lost most in the near term is the ability to stand as a peer of equal status ethically/morally with other democratically elected governments who do not directly target individual enemies of the state for assassination when no war has been declared, although not many of these are getting their market places bombed weekly. In the long run I have no real idea. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2001, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/7 "2001-08-28T22:41:14Z")
The U.S. has employed assassination overtly for a long time. Admiral Yamamoto’s plane was shot down in WWII in an intentional act to target a military leader and execute him. And Saddamm Hussein was explicitly targeted in the Gulf war, and his palace was bombed, killing one of his children. Are we saying that it would be morally wrong to have a sniper target him, thereby preventing any innocent deaths, but morally correct to target him by bombing his residence in an attempt to kill him, while also killing innocents through collateral damage? Is there anyone here who doubts that the U.S. would have assassinated Hitler in a second if they had the opportunity, and that they would have been morally correct to do so? And don’t forget the Phoenix program in Vietnam, which was a CIA operation which sent operatives into the countryside to assassinate local officials, Viet Cong Leaders, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2001, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/8 "2001-08-28T22:43:27Z")
One more thing to think about - if world leaders knew that other countries would target them and shoot them in times of war, perhaps that would lead to a little more negotiation and a little less war. It seems a little odd that nations should agree to guarantee the safety of opposing leaders, who are actually making the decisions to fight, and then killing soldiers and civilians at will as a result of those decisions. Perhaps state-sanctioned assassination would help balance the cost-benefit equation a bit. ---
**Author:** ![edwino](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/35a633/32.png) [@edwino](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/edwino)\ **Post date:** [August 28, 2001, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/9 "2001-08-28T23:17:54Z")
I’d also like to add US implications in trying to assasinate Kaddafi. I honestly don’t like the Israeli policy, but I feel very close to what the article posted by **curwin** states. Decapitation of the terrorist infrastructure in the PA is the neatest way to incapacitate it. The greater occurence of bungled bombings and apprehended suspects since this policy began (I can’t give cites but I suspect it is true) speaks strongly for this. The Panama-type approach, with invasion, search, apprehension, and deportation to trial is cumbersome and provocative at this point and can’t be pursued. I think that the approach should be dual-pronged however, with more of an emphasis on negotiation. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Peyote\_Coyote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5f8ce5/32.png) [@The\_Peyote\_Coyote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Peyote_Coyote)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2001, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/10 "2001-08-29T15:32:37Z")
Thanx for pointing out Adm. Yamamoto’s assassination, Sam Stone. I have been reading Winston Churchill’s six-volume history of WW2 and he mentions how, at one point in the 1942 North African campaign, British commandos assaulted Rommel’s headquarters by surprise. One presumes the commandos did not intend to invite Rommel to tea. Fortunately for him, Rommel was absent at the time. During the early 1980s, the Reagan administration bombed Khaddafy’s headquarters in Libya. I suppose you could call this an assassination. Regardless of the terminology, Uncle Muammar has been relatively quiet since then. Personally, I think assassination is a justifiable policy. It is better in my view to pick off the one kingpin or king nut who directs policy rather than engaging in a war or police action that kills off a bunch of people. The leaders of countries or factions are the ones that start wars; let them pay the price for a change. ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2001, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/11 "2001-08-29T17:45:17Z")
The problem for me is that Israel is taking its war to other countries, does this mean that it will kill its enemies when they are in other countries, carrying its dispute to British or American cities ? This had happened already with the execution of a ballistics expert, murdered by Israeli operatives when the Iraq supergun affair came to light. Israel purports to have courts, law and legal procedure, these are not assassinations they are extra-judicial killings. When Spanish authorities systematically targeted and killed leaders of ETA during the 70’s and 80’s they were condemned by many governments yet they used the same arguments as are used in the Middle East. The UK has been accused of the same thing with IRA terrorists, the West German government was accused of the same against the Red Army Faction. All have been condemned for these activities and token legal investigations were carried out, although little was done to lock up the perpetrators, it still established the fact that extra-judicial killings are in fact murder and illegal. One of the main thrusts of condemnation is that UK, Spain and Germany are democratic, and civilised countries with a rule of law which is independant of the politicians. Quite honestly the actions of Israel resemble terrorism more and more each day, and saying words like self-defence and pre-emptive strike will not change it. If it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, walks like a duck then it probably is a duck, doesn’t matter what else you call it. In all of those cases the extra-judicial killings did not solve the problems and actually exarcerbated things, both in the short term in Germany and the longer term in UK and Spain. Why does Israel think it is a special case ? Human nature is what it is, you do not have to be a genius work out what the likely response is going to be from Arab supporters. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2001, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/12 "2001-08-29T18:35:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by casdave \* > Why does Israel think it is a special case ? Human nature is what it is, you do not have to be a genius work out what the likely response is going to be from Arab supporters. I believe Israel has calculated that risk very carefully. Israel’s immediate neighbours (i.e. Jordan, Lebanon, Seria, Egypt) are not willing to go to war over the Palestinians. They are quite happy to let them fight and die and even send them a little something to egg them on but they will not stick their necks out for them. More ardent supporters like Lybia, Iraq and Iran have enough to worry about at present without declaring war on anybody. US will not pull support from Israel. They may posture for benefit of world press and opinion but they have Israel’s back and Israel knows it. I’d say that things are going to turn out very badly for the Palestinians if they don’t start taking peace very very seriously (and mean it this time). ---
**Author:** ![IzzyR](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/2acd7d/32.png) [@IzzyR](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IzzyR)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2001, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/13 "2001-08-29T18:38:22Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by casdave \* > The problem for me is that Israel is taking its war to other countries, does this mean that it will kill its enemies when they are in other countries, carrying its dispute to British or American cities ? You mean like American attacks on the Sudan and Afghanistan? It is strange that you acknowledge that other countries in circumstances less difficult than Israel routinely conduct the same types of operations, but yet insist on holding Israel to this artificial standard. > [@](#): > > Quite honestly the actions of Israel resemble terrorism more and more each day, and saying words like self-defence and pre-emptive strike will not change it. Why not? Seems to me like it changes it a lot. Are you unable to distinguish between killing civilians and combatants? This seems to be a reasonable distinction between terrorism and combat. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [August 29, 2001, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israeli-assassination-policies/78590/14 "2001-08-29T18:57:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by casdave \* > **The UK has been accused of the same thing with IRA terrorists, the West German government was accused of the same against the Red Army Faction.** > _\_ > **In all of those cases the extra-judicial killings did not solve the problems and actually exarcerbated things, both in the short term in Germany and the longer term in UK and Spain.** How do you know they exacerbated things? My history isn’t very polished in this area so you may be right but I find it hard to accept such a categorical statement. Certainly terrorism has continued in these cases but perhaps it is a shadow of what it might have become had some of their earlier leaders been allowed to grow and prosper in their positions. As the letter **curwin** posted mentions depriving an organization of its leaders is destabilizing to those organizations. It may not destroy these groups but they have to expend energy getting new leaders into place…energy that might otherwise be spent carrying out terrorist attacks. On the flipside you run the risk of creating a martyr via assassination. Often the targeted organization will attempt to create a martyr out of their fallen but this is a fickle thing at best. Usually the dead are forgotten in relatively short order. However, if a true martyr is created it can make things much worse for the people who carried out the assassination in the first place.