Tsahal is not a private militia

Zvi Sukkot, an Israeli MP from the Religious Zionism party, knocked down a memorial stone in Kafr Madama, near Nablus, during an authorised tour of the West Bank. When an MP travels to certain areas of the West Bank, they require an armed escort provided by the army; indeed, Sukkot and his aides were accompanied by soldiers when they produced sledgehammers and began demolishing the “Martyrs’ Monument”, dedicated to Palestinians who died during the Intifada, including terrorists. Sukkot wrote on X: “Every child who sees a gigantic monument glorifying the murderers of Jews every day will dream of becoming a terrorist.” Sukkot said he acted after calling on the army to remove monuments that glorify terrorism, an activity that falls within the army’s remit, subject to authorisation. The incident has been the subject of much debate in Israel, not because of the monument itself, but because of the way some MPs are using the army.

In fact, the first to react was the IDF, which reported: “Contrary to what had been agreed, the participants acted in a deceptive and manipulative manner, without authorisation and in complete violation of the regulatory framework.” The army considers “the MP’s conduct, his serious lack of coordination, as well as an abuse of the protection provided by the security forces to act entirely outside his authority”. The monument glorified terrorism, but Sukkot exploited and endangered the soldiers for a personal stunt, and this behaviour is part of an increasingly widespread habit of abusing the protection afforded by soldiers. After three years of war, a government that has done everything in its power to oppose the law on compulsory conscription for yeshiva students – fostering the idea that only a section of the population should die for Israel – is also one in which many do not hesitate to exploit soldiers for their own ends. The role of the army, its future and its wars are at the heart of the election campaign ahead of the vote on 27 October.