A dangerous message

Editorial

A rally against illegal immigrants in Israel last week turned ugly and violent. Now Israel enters a new phase of recriminations and reflection, with few of its leaders coming out of it unsullied.

The most repugnant award certainly goes to the Likud MK Miri Regev, who is being accused of inciting the mob to violence.

“The infiltrators are a cancer in our body,” Regev said in a public speech at the rally, participants of which later attacked African immigrants and hurled rocks and bottles at police. Fifteen people were arrested for rioting and assault and two were arrested for looting.

A surge in violent crime is being blamed on African immigrants, primarily from Sudan, and high-profile incidents like the gang rape of a 15-year-old girl amplify fears for public safety.

But, while politicians like Regev exacerbate xenophobia, Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and President Shimon Peres also do a disservice by accepting the premise of the rioters, even as they condemn the violence.

In almost the same breath with which he condemned the rioters, Netanyahu said he would expedite construction of a fence along the Egyptian border through which most of the illegal immigrants enter the country.

“I say this to public officials as well as the residents of south Tel Aviv, whose pain I understand; we will solve the problem, and we will do so in a responsible manner,” Netanyahu said.

The president made a similar parallel that seemed to justify the motivation of the violence even as he condemned it.

“Xenophobia goes against the very foundations of Judaism,” Peres said. “I’m well aware of the difficulties encountered by the residents of south Tel Aviv and the harsh realities they must face – but violence is never the answer.”

When rampaging citizens attack members of a visible minority, the proper response of responsible leaders is to condemn the actions, full stop, and leave policy discussions to another day. The message the prime minister sent is that violence can indeed drive policy, which is an enormously dangerous message in a democracy.

It would appear that Israelis are in no mood for idealism on this front, but it must be said that Sudanese and other migrants travel a very dangerous path to seek, as most migrants do, a better life. That they chose Israel as a destination speaks articulately about the reputation for freedom and opportunity Israel projects, even amid the cacophony of global condemnation. This is what makes the issue especially sad: the rioters – and, to an extent, even the fair-minded leaders who condemn the violence – betray Israel’s reputation as a refuge of safety and a beacon of tolerance.

^TOP