BETTINA PRATOterms, based on claims that ‘‘they started it first’’ and that acts of terror violate the human
rights of Israelis. Such arguments are linked to themes of security and survival in addition
to (and sometimes more than) that ofEretz Israel. The popularity of the ‘‘defensive’’
argument may be in part a result of Israelis’ constant exposure to narratives of Jewish
history marked by reference to collective trauma. It seems reasonable to assume, however,
that the persistent insecurity of life in what was once supposed to be the ‘‘safe-haven’’ of
world Jewry significantly contributes to making present-day violence amenable to inter-
pretations that obscure Israeli responsibilities in the conflict.
In religious terms, the argument that Jewish Israelis have no alternatives to self-
defense at all costs, even when that requires violating human rights, finds support in the
notion that Jewish survival is not just a matter of self-interest but also a divine prescrip-
tion, since the existence of the Jewish people is a precondition for the realization of God’s
law, and their presence in Israel is an expression of the Abrahamic covenant. The power
of such argument may explain why, though concern with Jewish and Israeli survival (and
the continued dependence of the former on the latter) spans the religious-secular divide,
public-opinion surveys indicate that it is religious Israelis who most often express the
belief thatJewishsurvival is at stake in the conflict, and all necessary measures are there-
fore legitimate to preserve state security.
This opinion is recognized by members of RHR. In fact, the organization was born
from a need on the part of founding rabbis to dissociate themselves from the political
and moral consequences of what they refer to as an ‘‘intolerant and uncompromising’’
understanding of Judaism and Israeliness. It is a bitter confirmation of the validity of
their claim to represent the ‘‘prophetic conscience’’ of Israeli Judaism that religious Jewish
Israelis generally regard its members as ‘‘radicals’’ and even anti-Zionists. Few of the
Orthodox majority even know the group, but RHR workers often encounter religious
settlers ‘‘in the field,’’ as they assist Palestinians tending their farms in areas occupied by
settlers. Government institutions, notably judicial courts and the military, tend to be
similarly unsympathetic toward the group, despite regular efforts by RHR fieldworkers to
coordinate with the Israeli army. This unsympathetic view is fueled by frequent confron-
tations between the army and members or sympathizers of the group, which have led to
several arrests of RHR’s executive director, Pennsylvania-born Arik Ascherman, and to
his recently concluded trial for ‘‘obstructing the work of government officials’’ by acts of
solidarity with Palestinians.^41
Although the group counts among its members representatives from all three main
strands of Judaism in Israel,^42 including a small number of Orthodox rabbis, its under-
standing of the concrete implications of a Jewish embracing of human rights seems to
place it beyond the Israeli consensus and at times openly against the institutions and laws
of the state. RHR ethics and practices take a position against the merging of religious
discourse with a political culture of ‘‘security at all costs,’’ demanding endless sacrifice of
Israeli and Palestinian lives. This places members (often against their will) on a collision
PAGE 570570.................16224$ CH28 10-13-06 12:37:04 PS