The organization Breaking the Silence is in the headlines again, is getting on Israelis’ nerves again, and is making life difficult for Israel again. Breaking the Silence collects testimonies of Israeli soldiers who served in the West Bank or in Gaza during outbreaks of violence and publishes them in lengthy reports – all of them portraying Israel as a country whose morality in occupation and war is questionable. It is important to talk about this organization and its actions, it is important to understand the context in which it operates, and it is important to be able to do this calmly and understand the nature of the problem. Yes, Breaking the Silence is a problem for Israel, as are several other sister organizations that are battling for European and American funds and attention. Many of these organizations contributed to the UN Report on the Gaza war that was released last week.
Battling Breaking the Silence is not easy for Israelis who cherish their freedom to speak and express their opinions, as twisted as they might be. Such a battle raises some questions about tolerance. For example – should the IDF feature in its party for new draftees a popular singer that is also a supporter of Breaking the Silence? That is not a theoretical question. Singer Shaanan Street is a supporter of the organization, and he is slated to sing at a party for draftees. Activists are protesting his invitation, saying that for the IDF (it is actually an NGO supportive of the IDF that is organizing the party) to invite a singer who spreads messages that smear its soldiers is dumb. But I assume that the soon-to-be-soldiers at this party likely want to listen to him, as his music is popular with this age group. So, should he be invited or shunned?
Breaking the Silence is a political organization supported, abetted, financed, hyped, and guarded by Israelis and (mostly) non-Israelis that have a problem with Israel’s policies, governments, and, in many cases, core ethos. All its reports should be seen in such context. However, there should be no mistake: it is possible, even likely, that some of the devastating accounts published by Breaking the Silence are accurate or close to accurate. Israel – in peace and in war – is far from being a perfect country. The IDF, with all of its efforts to keep its actions moral, is not a perfect institution. There are soldiers that ignore instructions. There are commanders that lose their temper during battle. There are situations and incidents that should be investigated and behaviors that merit punishment. Breaking the Silence and its political agenda or its faulty deeds should not be used as an excuse for Israel not to better itself and its military.
But Breaking the Silence has several features that make it annoying to most Israelis.
It publishes anonymous testimonies that cannot be verified, investigated and, if necessary, prosecuted.
It does not work with the IDF, it does not work with Israel’s legal system, it makes it impossible for Israel to respond or act on any of the information the organization claims to have gathered. Breaking the Silence brings Israel before a court without giving it any chance to defend itself.
The organization also works more abroad than within Israel. Namely, its main strategy is not to make Israel better by convincing Israelis that morality at war is important, but rather to smear it and ruin its reputation among the nations.
And it works in a field that is very sensitive – abetting a campaign to portray Israel as an outlaw state and hence delegitimize it and delegitimize any act it takes to defend itself from its enemies.
The Israeli government busies itself with attempts to disrupt Breaking the Silence's activities abroad. It often succeeds, but it failed miserably when the organization secured a White House presentation of its merchandise a few weeks ago. Almost a year after the breakout of the 2014 Gaza operation, and just days prior to yet another damning report from the UN against Israel, such meetings give Israel a taste of what it’s like to have tense relations with a US administration.
The leaders of the organization and its defenders have responded on different occasions to allegations against them, claiming that their opponents come from a certain political camp. That is not exactly true. A vast majority of Israelis disprove of Breaking the Silence’s actions.
These Israelis feel that way not because they don’t care about the IDF being moral in battle. Most of them do want the IDF to be moral in battle. Most of them want Israel to retain its moral high ground. Of course, this does not mean that Israelis all agree on what constitutes “morality” in battle. They debate these issues, as they should. They struggle with them, as they should. And they are frustrated by them – because of organizations such as Breaking the Silence.
It is worthwhile to ask the question of whether organizations such as Breaking the Silence force Israel to be more thorough in making sure that the IDF behaves properly. On the one hand, Israel has to respond to outside pressure and investigations, and it has to make sure it has proper answers and can defend itself against moral accusations. On the other hand, Breaking the Silence and its supporters make the cause of morality in battle suspicious to Israelis. If morality is a code word for smearing Israel in the eyes of the world – Israelis will not want to associate themselves with such a cause.
The leaders of Breaking the Silence claim – recently on TV – that the discussion abroad “is already taking place” with or without the participation of Israeli organizations. That is true, but lacking in context. Israeli organizations that join the chorus of Israel bashing provide a cover of legitimacy to all those who bash Israel. They provide this cover to those who bash Israel because they love Israel and want to make it better, to those who bash Israel because it’s fashionable, to those who bash Israel because they are ignorant, and to those who bash Israel because they hate Israel, or Jews, or both. That is to say: the people of Breaking the Silence aren’t just joining a discussion that is “already taking place”. They contribute to it in a unique way.
Surely, blaming an Israeli organization of such deeds – abetting Israel’s enemies – is highly problematic. It can be a slippery slope. Suggesting that Israel should fight against Breaking the Silence is also problematic. Israel is proud of its many freedoms – among them the freedom to criticize and bash the country. But letting people speak – a sacred freedom – does not mean Israel has to let Breaking the Silence speak without responding. This organization creates a problem for Israel, and the government – carefully, using legitimate legal means – should treat it the way governments treat problems.
By refusing to work within the Israeli system, Breaking the Silence sends a message that it has given up on us, so there is no reason for Israel not to give up on them.
More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.