Thank you for clicking. Full disclosure: the title is clickbait. I want you to read this article, so I came up with a provocative title. 

Full disclosure 2: I am a “settler,” the pejorative term used to describe (or defame) Israelis who live in Jewish communities over the Green Line – the 1949 armistice between Israel and Jordan (there was no Palestine then) – which Jordan occupied and annexed, and then over which Israel restored control in the 1967 Six-Day War. You may have heard the term Judea and Samaria or, also pejoratively, the “West Bank.” That’s where I live. There are some 500,000 of us. Our presence here is not foreign colonialism or illegal. That’s for a separate conversation. 

The thing I want you to know is that while we are all “settlers” and branded together as a group, we are not all alike by any means.

This week, another “settler” and member of Israel’s Knesset, Zvi Sukkot, catapulted himself into global headlines by destroying a monument dedicated to local terrorist “martyrs” in a Palestinian Arab village, Madama. More on that shortly. But let me say categorically, Sukkot does not represent me, not in my way of thinking, behavior, and not in the Knesset.  

He does not represent most of the 500,000 Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria, not before the last election and certainly not now. 

The provocative title here is meant to depict two parallel and contradictory realities. When right-wing violence erupts in Israel during a political campaign, it can become a kind of “settler porn” because it plays to the base instincts of a demographic that is excited by such behavior. We are in the midst of a political campaign and rather than appealing to voters outside his base, he appealed to his voters’ base (or debased) instincts. 

The second kind of “settler porn” is the use of images and stories that allow outsiders to consume the most provocative, lurid, violent version of “settlers” as if it represents all of us, all Israel’s religious-nationalist community, or all of Israel. The danger is twofold: violence is rightly condemned, but sensationalizing it reinforces stereotypes, brushes over complex realities, and turns an individual action by a nutjob of a politician into voyeuristic anti-Israel spectacle.

People outside Israel may have seen the headline or 60-second news or social media clip about this but need to know the realities. First, Israelis are having a deep conversation about this, across political boundaries, throughout the media, and over the water cooler. 

Domestically, I hope this will contribute constructively. I also hope that it will contribute to considering who to vote for, or who not to vote for, in the coming election just two months away. 

At the same time, Israel’s detractors are using this as “proof” of repeated tropes and allegations of Israeli genocide, ethnic cleansing, and apartheid, none of which are true. I hope they will read this and realize most Israelis condemn Sukkot’s behavior for a variety of reasons, and that while it is proper to condemn specific actions and individuals, it is not proper to use this to define all of us in broad strokes, or make up claims using words whose meaning has been so watered down as to become meaningless. This is neither accurate, honest, nor constructive.

That most Israelis condemn this behavior and would never even think of doing something like this makes this case all the more glaring. It’s a one-off, a perversion, not the norm and not accepted. This is the reality.

Even if there were tens or hundreds of people who would actually do this, the problem is that there are so many such monuments, public parks, schools, etc. celebrating the terrorists and inciting violence that it would literally be a never-ending battle. But the reality is that we don’t do it. And the fact that there are hundreds of such locations celebrating and inciting terror is not the reason we don’t. 

The reasons we don’t do it are that it’s stupid and dangerous, not our place nationally, and certainly not our place personally to do so. Not any individual and not an elected official. It’s counterproductive for a host of reasons. Because it’s lawless, because it is not how we should behave, because it ties up military resources to enable it, because it’s terrible publicity, and because nothing in doing so changes the terror culture the PA embraces, glorifies, and celebrates. If anything, it makes that culture more strident. 

That’s the story: the reality of who our neighbors are and the fact that they glorify, celebrate, and incite violence and terror. That is the story that is lost here. It’s not a culture or theology that can be changed or rationalized. 

The names and crimes of the terrorists whose names were on the Madama “Martyrs Monument” should be the story. Three examples of the home-grown celebrated terrorists are: Yaman Tayeb Ali Faraj and Shadi Nassar, both affiliated with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), and Hamdan Hussein Mahmoud al-Najjar. Collectively, they are responsible for or perpetrated terror attacks against Israel that left several dead and dozens wounded. Other Madama “martyrs” were killed in the 1968 Battle of Karameh, where PLO/Fatah terrorists fought alongside Jordanian troops in a battle that left scores of Palestinian Arab terrorists and Jordanian troops dead. 

Yes, the terrorists glorified, and the acts they committed are vile. Sukkot claimed he acted after the IDF did not remove the monuments despite his demands to do so, arguing they glorified murderers of Jews and would inspire future terrorism among local children. Maybe that’s true. But he had no right or authority to take private action, and certainly not under IDF escort. Israel is a robust democracy. Sukkot and his party could have demanded the monument’s removal in the Knesset, through the IDF, or in court. 

The IDF said the visit was coordinated as a “tour of monuments” but that the destruction was done deceptively. 

Because Sukkot’s actions were so debased, the incident drew proper, immediate, and widespread condemnation, including from Prime Minister Netanyahu calling it “unacceptable,” from within his own Religious Zionist Party, as well as, of course, from the opposition. One fellow Religious Zionist Party Knesset member, Ohad Tal, questioned whether this was somehow a campaign event. “I want to understand. Was this move coordinated with the campaign? Is there some deep strategy behind it that I am completely missing, or have we simply decided to commit political suicide once and for all? I’m genuinely asking.”

There are other problems with not just what happened but how it went down. The army should not have allowed it to begin with. Once it was clear what was happening, it should have been stopped. Whoever approved it should be fired. Allowing a military escort diverted soldiers from the IDF’s core mission – defense. This was only an offensive operation. It put Israelis in danger. 

What if terrorists in Madama had opened fire, wounding or killing Sukkot and his entourage, or the soldiers protecting him? For what? By doing this and deploying troops to provide the necessary security, did he make anyone truly safer, or did he just put everyone at even greater risk? 

Sukkot should be removed from the party, but that probably won’t happen. Even though party leader Betzalel Smotrich disagreed with the actions and chided Sukkot, he will probably not have the nerve to shake his party’s base of support and risk losing votes even over a principled stand. However, as head of the Religious Zionist party, Smotrich should realize that what happened was not only not religious, but a hilul hashem, a public desecration of God’s name. 

Not only was Sukkot’s action not religious, but it was also not Zionist. The restoration of Jewish sovereignty for Jews to live as an independent nation in our ancestral land is not to sanction lawless behavior against others.

There are very good reasons for Israel to oppose the existence of monuments and other public spaces celebrating terrorists and inciting terror. The PA school across from my home has a mural of PLO terrorist leader Yasser Arafat. That’s child abuse. Rather than going in to destroy the monument, why did Sukkot not go in and make a video to go viral about who the terrorists were on the monument and make the case for its removal? Why don’t people come to my balcony to see the sick message Palestinian Arab children are taught by celebrating Arafat in any way? 

The PR damage and other mistakes that were made are irreversible, but that’s not the reason why it was bad. It was bad because it is wrong.