Page 50 - HaMizrachi Chanukah 5784 North America

Halachic Perspectives on

Civilian Casualties

Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Brody

s a matter of policy, the IDF of death. The Maharal, however, says the classification to them. This entire line of
only targets enemy combatants brothers justified their actions by assert- thinking was rejected by Rabbi Hayyim
and prohibits aiming at enemy ing that in war, the entire nation is treated David Halevi, who contended that the
Anon-combatants. Some sources as a collective, combatants and non-com- rodef classification could not be applied
indicate that this was already the pathway batants alike. Yet as Rabbi Ya’akov Ariel to anyone who was not actively involved
of our Avot. The Torah states that Avra- has noted, this comment may only justify in attacking someone.
ham was fearful before going to war to why the brothers were not punished for
redeem Lot from captivity. One midrash killing civilians amongst the combatants. In any case, Rabbi Yisraeli asserted that
asserts that he feared killing righteous Tragically, civilians are inevitably harmed Jewish law recognizes international
people amongst the enemy population, in war. Maharal does not justify, however, norms of warfare, provided that they
only to be reassured by G-d that in this directly targeting non-combatants. Indeed, are universally adopted and practiced.
specific case all of his victims would be as Rabbi Asher Weiss notes, Maharal him- Accordingly, Geneva Convention proto-
guilty (Bereishit Rabbah 44:4). A similar mid- self argues that Ya’akov feared he would be cols adopted by Israel would be binding,
rash asserts that Ya’akov was distressed punished for killing Eisav’s reluctant war- including the general requirements to
by the prospect of killing the 400 men riors, even though they would certainly only aim at military targets and to mea-
accompanying his vengeful brother Eisav, be more culpable than non-combatant sure the proportionality and necessity
even though it was self-defense (Rashi, bystanders. of strikes that might cause unintended
Bereishit 32:8). While violence is justifi- In any case, any precedent from Shimon harm to non-belligerents. Such criteria, of
able in such circumstances, Rabbi Eliyahu course, lend themselves to broad interpre-
Mizrachi speculates that Ya’akov feared and Levi was rejected by Rabbi Shlomo tation. Moreover, as Rabbis Ido Rechnitz
Goren, who argued that the end of the
killing those who could be neutralized and Elazar Goldschmidt have argued,
with non-lethal means. Alternatively, the Biblical narrative – in which Ya’akov soldiers must not excessively endanger
censures his sons while on his deathbed
Maharal suggests that Ya’akov was con- themselves to prevent non-combatant col-
cerned about killing coerced combatants – proves that the brothers acted wrongly. lateral damage, particularly when battling
As he writes, “We are commanded… even
who did not truly intend to fight. These in asymmetric battles in which terrorists
homiletic comments are not clear legal in times of war… not to harm the non-com- use non-combatants as human shields.
batant population, and certainly one is
statements but reflect a general ethos of Jewish law desires to minimize civilian
seeking to minimize casualties. not allowed to harm women and children
who do not participate.” Similarly, Rabbi casualties yet recognizes that when push
More bona fide halachic support might Aharon Lichtenstein asserted that strat- comes to shove, priority must be given to
stem from the Biblical commandment egists should consider expected enemy one’s own soldiers. The successful balance
to leave the fourth side of a besieged city collateral damage before making deci- of these values is a kiddush Hashem as we
open to allow civilians to escape. Ramban sions. Moral constraints remain relevant try to uproot evil while remembering that
asserted that this provision teaches us in wartime. all humans were created in G-d’s image.
to act with mercy towards our enemies,
even during war time. Together, these One difficult ethical question relates to
defining who is a non-combatant. Fol-
passages might indicate that Jewish law
demands attempting to minimize civil- lowing an IDF raid in Kibiya in 1953 that
resulted in the deaths of women and
ian harm during warfare. Indeed, while
the Torah tells us to put “all men to the children, Rabbi Shaul Yisraeli initially
suggested that a civilian who actively
sword” (Devarim 20:13) in war, Rav Sa’adia
Gaon, Netziv, and Rabbi David Tzvi Hoff- encourages or supports terror activity may
be deemed a “pursuer” (rodef) who may be
man explicitly assert that this means to
kill combatants. Non-combatants are not killed. This would be especially true if they Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Brody
were given an opportunity to flee, as King
our targets. is the executive director of Ematai and the
Shaul provided for the Kenites (Shmuel author of Ethics of our Fighters: A Jewish
Following the rape of Dina, Shimon and I 15). Rabbi Yisraeli tempered this novel View on War and Morality (Maggid).
Levi wiped out the city of Shechem. and far-reaching conclusion by noting
Many commentators assert that the citi- that much civilian support for terrorists
zens were themselves guilty of misdeeds stems from social pressure and compul- A member of the Mizrachi Speakers Bureau
mizrachi.org/speakers
related to Dina’s rape and therefore worthy sion; as such, one cannot apply the rodef

50 |