Posted on 08/21/2004 4:59:18 PM PDT by SJackson
Last week, the Palestinian "security prisoners" in Israeli jails launched a hunger strike. The Israel Prison Service decided to monitor any changes in the health of about 1,500 convicted terrorists. It plans to subject those participating in the hunger strike to medical examinations.
Physicians and paramedics were put on alert to offer medical service and, if needed, force-feed any prisoners whose lives might be in danger as a result of their hunger strike. The prison authorities also presented the incarcerated with a document, in Arabic, on the dangers involved in hunger striking.
This bureaucratic response went against the initial, intuitive reaction of Minister of Internal Security Tzahi Hanegbi to the strike, which was: "Let them starve."
His intuition may be right.
The term "security prisoners" is basically a euphemism for ideologically motivated murderers convicted of terrorist activities against Israelis. The purpose of their imprisonment is primarily to minimize their potential to harm Israelis.
No one really entertains any hope of seeing them repent or reform their murderous views as a result of their exposure to an Israeli prison facility. Jails rarely have this type of effect.
From what we know, the time spent in Israeli jails is used by the Palestinians for further indoctrination and improving the skills needed in terrorist activities.
Israeli prisons have been a breeding ground for the Palestinian national movement. Indeed, there have been any number of cases of released prisoners re-arrested for killing Jews.
Thus, if some of them decide to starve themselves to death while in prison, it would be foolish on Israel's part to prevent it. The alternative in many cases is the death of the prisoner after release, this time as a shaheed, after taking several Israeli lives besides his own.
Acts of suicide terror only prolong the conflict, while the early demise of such terrorists will serve to reduce the level of violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – a precondition for stabilizing the tense relationship. The calculus of utility in allowing the prisoners to make good on their hunger threats is thus brutally clear.
The ethical considerations are somewhat less clear. Israel is responsible for the prisoners' lives and basic healthcare. But this is assuming they want to be healthy. If they decide to use their health as a weapon in the struggle against the Jews, Israel's obligation is void.
Seeing that many of these terrorists were ready to sacrifice their lives in the course of their actions against Israel, it makes little sense to claim that Israel has a moral imperative to keep them alive against their will. While the process of eliminating terrorists is bound by moral considerations, their self-elimination is less of a constraint for Israel.
A probable consequence of such a nonchalant attitude toward the hunger strikers would, paradoxically, save prisoners lives. But the posture adopted by the prison service limits the risks to the strikers, as it promises prompt intervention to save their lives when their health deteriorates. This only encourages their recklessness.
Hanegbi's opposite formula increases the uncertainty surrounding the continuation of a hunger strike, and this may serve as an incentive for its discontinuation, at least for the more rational prisoners. The fanatics will be less dissuaded, but their death is not something to be regretted.
That, indeed, is how prime minister Margaret Thatcher decided to respond in 1981 to a hunger strike by jailed IRA members. After six months and 10 deaths by willful starvation with no British concession in sight, the strike lost momentum. Its failure was one reason why part of the Irish nationalists gradually shifted from violence to the negotiating table.
The current hunger strike in Israel is motivated by several specific demands intended to ease communication between prisoners and the outside world – partly to better orchestrate terrorist attacks.
Yet its significance is primarily political. It is designed to regenerate and mobilize a tired Palestinian society. As the campaign around the security fence peters out, a new issue is needed to galvanize the Palestinian masses for the continuing violent struggle against Israel.
As a political and humanitarian issue, the prisoners create great resonance in the Palestinian street. Palestinian propagandists also understand well that children carrying pictures of their jailed fathers or brothers are an excellent public relations ploy.
Thus Israel has an interest in winning this round. After all, the conflict with the Palestinians will not be surmounted with one decisive blow but through incremental triumphs over time.
A tough Israeli stance, one that shows the hunger strikers they will make no gains, would further discourage the Palestinians, reinforcing the growing feeling that the latest wave of Palestinian violence has been a colossal failure.
The writer is professor of political studies at Bar-Ilan University and heads the Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies.
OTOH, if the prisoners are truly shahids, IE they have publicly expressed their intent to be homicide bombers or gunmen, they know they will be dishonored if they do not die and in the process cause some harm to Israel. Better that they fulfill their commitment where they cannot take innocent lives with them. Maybe they'll get a couple of virgins for being poster boys. If they live and are later released, Islam and the PA will not allow them to renounce their former pledge to become shahids.
Don't lie awake at nights. They aren't really "fasting." They are drinking liquids (like "Slim Fast and "Ensure") and night time doesn't count. That's when they stuff their faces.
I found this letter in the "Jerusalem Post."
Veggie burgers for hunger strikers?
Sir, - I am deeply disturbed that Israel's Prison Service is planning on holding barbecues in hopes that the aroma of dead flesh will entice Palestinian prisoners to break their avowed hunger strike ("Prisoners' hunger strike picks up speed," August 19). I urge officials to consider alternative, nonviolent methods. Innocent animals raised for food are incarcerated their entire lives on factory farms in filthy, overcrowded conditions. They undergo debeaking, dehorning and castration without painkillers and are often skinned or dismembered at slaughterhouses while still conscious. One of the largest slaughterhouses in the US, which supplies chicken to KFC, was compared to Abu Ghraib in the Los Angeles Times. By tempting prisoners with the products of this bloody industry prison officials are encouraging a cruel indifference to all forms of pain and suffering, which can only incite more violence. On August 17, PETA wrote to Yaakov Ganot, Director of the National Prison Authority, offering an alternative: If prison officials feel they have exhausted all avenues for constructive negotiations and believe they have no recourse but to resort to tempting prisoners with food, PETA will supply the prisons, as a gift, with 3,800 kosher vegetarian burgers for a more humane barbecue - one veggie burger for every security prisoner - in hopes that this will inspire a more peaceful resolution to the current prison crisis.
PHILIP SCHEIN
PETA
Hampton, Virginia
I just learned something new. KFC puts panties on chickens heads.
Let's not forget the hunger strike among IRA prisoners...the death of Bobby Sands...in Northern Ireland. Hopefully, Britain will remain silent on this issue. If not, and they throw mud at Israel, they should receive some of the same.
The PA "hunger strike" is not even a real fast like the IRA's. They are sneaking food while claiming to be "fasting" kind of like "Ramadan."
Exactly so. Lady Thatcher meant what she said and that was that. This Palestinian charade doesn't compare to the horror of those times in Northern Ireland and Britain. I speak of the present hunger strike, not the violence, which is every bit as evil and deadly. Well, the ends justify the means. That's what it's all about, and in the meantime, Arafat gulls hapless followers into killing themselves while he squirrels billions away in Switzerland. The difference here, as you point out, is that with Muslims, they'll lie, cheat, and steal to achieve their ends. It's more of Falluhah and Najif and every other time we had them in our sights and they promised peace. Not going to happen, and GW needs to kick serious ass before Muslims get it worldwide.
ROFL! And I just participated in the cycle of violence by eating some tasty hot wings too.
LOL, ....a wit.
It's interesting that the names of the other ten men who starved along with Bobby Sands have largely been forgotten. The first shahid will be considered a "tragedy"; the rest will be statistics.
There won't be any starvation deaths on this "hunger strike." Maybe somebody will choke to death while trying to scarf a sandwich.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.