+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

There is no such thing as a 'good soldier' at a checkpoint

Those who believe it is possible to maintain an occupation without violence are wrong. The case of Ahed Tamimi illustrates why.

By Orly Noy

Palestinians cross Qalandiya checkpoint, outside of the West Bank city of Ramallah, June 9, 2017, on the second Friday of Ramadan. (Flash90)

Palestinians cross Qalandiya checkpoint, outside of the West Bank city of Ramallah, June 9, 2017, on the second Friday of Ramadan. (Flash90)

Israelis often claim that a soldier with the right moral education can operate a checkpoint without violating anyone’s rights. Many in Israeli media have made this claim with regard to the two soldiers filmed facing down Ahed Tamimi, the 16-year-old under arrest for shoving and kicking soldiers off the porch of her family’s home last week: that the soldiers demonstrated the good moral education they received, in the army or at home or both, by refraining from responding to Ahed Tamimi with violence.

I assume that there is some truth to these claims, especially in the reality of the occupied territories, where, in the eyes of the army, Palestinian lives are cheap. The fact that the two soldiers did not respond by beating Ahed Tamimi is indeed surprising in a reality in which soldiers shot and killed a wheelchair-bound protester in Gaza, and in which soldiers break into houses and arrest children in their beds in the West Bank. Without a doubt, it says something about those two soldiers. But it says something much bigger about this reality.

The case of Ahed Tamimi does away with the illusion of “the good soldier” at the checkpoint. It is possible that these soldiers acted the way they did because they feared being caught on camera, but it also very possible that these two soldiers came from good homes and believed in their hearts that they were “the good soldiers” at the checkpoint — the soldiers who act with humanity, who don’t beat, abuse, scream, or curse. It is absolutely possible that their morality is what prevented them from beating the girls who refused to accept the soldiers’ presence in their home.

Crowdfunding campaign banner

Nonetheless, with all the morality and humanity they demonstrated, they were still two soldiers who broke into the house of a family that has been attacked for years by the army whose uniform they wear — and in an occupied territory where Palestinians barely have the right to breathe without an official permit. The two young men may have had pure, uncorrupted hearts, but they were dressed in the uniform of an army that has turned cruelty towards the lives of millions of Palestinians into something so natural that their refusal to act cruelly is considered by the Israeli public as something unnatural.

The two soldiers may have acted according to their consciences in refusing to beat Ahed Tamimi, but the army in which they serve later broke into the Tamimi home in the middle of the night to arrest Ahed, and then arrested her mother when she accompanied her daughter to the police station. In other words, regardless of their best intentions, their encounter with the Tamimis began with violence and ended with violence. From the moment they put on their uniform, their ethical sensibilities ceased to be a factor.

Each and every Israeli young person preparing for the draft should take this into account. Participation in the occupation begins the moment you put on a uniform. You cannot — ever — be the good soldier at the checkpoint because the checkpoint was not supposed to be there in the first place. The very fact of your presence in someone’s house, who has the right to live without fear of being raided by the army at any hour of the day, strengthens the essence of the checkpoint and legitimizes it. When you wear the army uniform, your body becomes the checkpoint. There is no way to be the “good soldier.”

This article first appeared in Hebrew at Local Call. Read it here.

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article

    * Required


    1. Herbert Grossman

      Everyone knows that if the soldiers had been Arabs, from Fatah or Hamas or soldiers from any other Middle Eastern country, rape and/or murder would have been the girl’s outcome.
      These soldiers, forced to defend their country from jihadists who have attempted genocide as a community for over 80 years, are a great example of humanity that the drivel about “occupation” can’t obscure.

      Reply to Comment
      • israel is an apartheid state

        just a normal comment from a normal ethonastate.
        pay no mind to the peaceful protester in a wheelchair mentioned in this article that was intentionally murdered by israeli sniper fire.

        Reply to Comment
      • Ben

        Herbert Grossman, you are disgusting, an example of the “I will stop at nothing, there is no lie I will not tell, there is nothing I will not do no matter how low and dishonest” school of hasbara.

        Reply to Comment
      • Ben

        And, I’m gonna remind you, Herbert Grossman, that it was mainstream Israeli Jewish journalist Ben Caspit, who publicly, in writing, urged Israeli men to go and do bad things to Palestinian teenage girls in the dark when there are no witnesses and no cameras. Did Caspit lose his job? Did the Israeli public confront him? Were there consequences? Of course not. So whose society is it, Grossman, that winks at the rape and murder of girls? Whose society thinks rape and murder of girls is excusable if the ethnicity of the victim is that of the other side? Whose society has lots of people that accept sexual assault as a weapon? You want to explain yourself, Grossman?

        Reply to Comment