Combined forces from the Israeli Army, the Border Police, and Security Services today evacuated a house in Hebron that was, according to the Israeli Supreme Court, illegally occupied. Things did not go well. From the storming of the building by those serving the evacuation order to the rampage by both those within the building and other settlers in town which followed, it was quite ugly. And having once been a Hebron settler, I appreciate just how ugly it can get and even how both sides contribute to the ugliness.
But there is one very important difference between the two groups. The settlers were in violation of the law and have been told to leave for weeks. In that sense today was victory for democracy in Israel. It may not be a happy day or an easy day, but is an important day. No country can fight against the religious fanaticism which undermines the rule of law in other nations, if it fails to so in its own.
As Israeli Defense Minister, Ehud Barak said: “We will not allow extreme elements to undermine the authority of the state and its foundation.” K’nesset member, Avshalom Vilan added, “This was a test for the rule of law and it shows there is one law for everybody for people in Hebron, Tel Aviv and everywhere.”
Settler leader, Danny Dayan did make an important observation about the guilt that may be born by those who ordered the evacuation to be carried out in this way, saying “Barak chose violence; he threw a match in a pile of gun powder.”

Given that more of these evacuations are likely in the future, it bears thinking about whether sufficient efforts were made to resolve the situation with the kinds of empathic conversations between soldiers and settlers, which often avoided the need for violence when Gaza was evacuated a few years ago.
At the same time, settler leaders should ask themselves about their own responsibility for not only breaking the law, but for creating the stockpiles of gunpowder, both literal and figurative, to which Dayan refers. If they will not, then the guilt theirs for creating a situation in which any reasonable soldier can presume that he is a target for citizens of his own country, and responds accordingly.
I look back on my time in Hebron as both wonderful and terrible. I believe that staying there is impossible without violating the values of the tradition which brought me there to begin with. But I also know that as we leave, we should weep over the need to rid an area of all its Jews in order to maintain a Jewish commitment to peace.
The real challenge, especially if either side genuinely hopes to avoid a repeat performance of today’s violence (an open question in my mind), is twofold. We must help those who know we need to leave Hebron, actually weep over the necessity of doing so and help those who would cry about leaving, to do so without fomenting a civil war. Let’s hope for that conversation to begin before the next court-ordered evacuation.