When is Enough Retribution Enough?
Retribution: isn’t that just a nice word for revenge?
Netanyahu’s campaign is being defended and rationalized as destruction of Hamas
and justifiable retribution for 7/10/’23. His campaign is being attacked as genocide of Arabs in Gaza and the West Bank, an unjustifiable retribution for 7/10/’23.
In 1943, the Nazi regime in Germany had instigated war and,
as some people knew, was committing war crimes against their Jewish citizens,
other minorities, and political opponents. “Bomber” Harris and General Spaatz
collaborated on “strategic bombing” of Germany, a campaign aimed at destruction
of war industries and, moreover, at demoralization of civilians -- a campaign
rationalized in part as retribution. The Russians felt it; the western allies
felt it – the satisfaction of revenge. Hamburg,
Dresden, Frankfort, Berlin, and other cities we obliterated; in all, 1,080,000
civilian casualties resulted, 300,000 killed and 780,000 wounded, in the
bombings of Germany.
After the war, a comprehensive US Government assessment, the
US Strategic Bombing Survey, concluded that strategic bombing “significantly
weakened Germany’s war economy” but “did not break civilian morale.” The
campaign against civilians was defended by some as a strategic necessity and
attacked by others as genocidal retribution.
Is there a difference between then and now? How do Netanyahu
and Major General Asor, head of Isreal’s Southern Command, which includes Gaza,
differ from Roosevelt and General Spaatz, head of Strategic Air Command in WWII?
Are they war heroes or war criminals?
When and how do you stop retribution; how much killing is
enough? The Israelis lost 1,195 citizens on October 7th; they have
killed 72,000 Gazans since invading to eliminate Hamas – and to exact
retribution?
How does one cease retribution, to declare it over and
enough? Especially in a democratic republic where leaders draw their legitimacy
from a majority of the electorate? If people want revenge, they must have it –
unless.
Unless there is a leader, a movement, a spiritual wave that
eschews hate and revenge. Jesus taught
love of enemy. The Buddha taught that hatred is never appeased by hatred. Muhammud
taught that forgiveness is superior to retaliation; that violence is only
justified against attackers and that violence against civilians and
non-combatants, especially women and children, is forbidden. Rabbinic law
replaces ayin tachat ayin, an eye for an eye, with compensation, measure
for measure.
The best way out of retribution is to never enter into it.
More easily said than done, obviously. Humans are wired for revenge – an eye
for an eye appears in the Code of Hammurabi, in the Torah, and later in the
Bible books of Exodes, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. But the bloodbaths of the
20thC should have taught us that vengeance, retaliation, revenge doesn’t work.
In the end, the vengeful are as wounded as their victims, if not more so, and
the victims will spawn multitudes seeking their vengeance in turn.
Ghandi said “an eye for an eye will make the whole world
blind.” Confucious said “before taking vengeance, dig two graves”. Netanyahu
isn’t listening. The new ayatollah isn’t listening. Trump isn’t hearing. What
other world leader will lead his people into vengeful victimhood, into the
dead-end of retaliation? Who will have the strength of character to say
“no, enough”?
