With 24 civilians wounded, one of whom lingers near death, and the terrorist himself dead (no, I don’t think they are morally equivalent, and I don’t mourn his loss. But like all of us, he had parents who will, and ignoring that fact will not help anyone–so why not acknowledge it from the outset?), I feel a bit squeamish about offering such a quick analysis of today’s bulldozer attack in Jerusalem–the second in three weeks.
But I appreciate that the need for a quick response now can be balanced by a new response tomorrow. The awareness that the thoughts and feelings in the immediate aftermath of this vicious attack, or any other, can grow and change should not be forgotten. The rage of this moment may not be the best place from which to chart the course of this ongoing problem.
Jerusalem mayor Uri Lupoliansky already knows that and his comments today reflect that insight:

“This is another east Jerusalem resident from one of Jerusalem’s villages….You throw terrorists out the door, they climb through the window with all kinds of means and ideas. Every working tool becomes a means of terror and we must rethink how we employ those working here.”

The Jerusalem mayor’s response could be a call for the banning of all Palestinian workers from construction jobs in the city, but if it is, then virtually all construction will stop. Basic construction has been staffed almost exclusively by Palestinians for decades. It became thought of as “avodah Sh’chorah” – literally translated as black labor.
Among the many questions that will need to be addressed by any individual who imagines such a ban on Palestinian labor, will be how the Jewish citizens of Israel got themselves into a position of imagining that any labor, which builds up the nation, could be beneath them? In no way should this be construed as blaming the victims. But we do need to ask how Ben Gurion’s dreams were handed off to others because Jews had “outgrown” such “menial tasks.”
The alternative response involves admitting that our destinies, in Jerusalem at least, are inextricably linked and we will have to find some arrangement in which Israelis are safe walking down the street and Palestinians are not acting with such violence on a regular basis. The guy who was shot today, needed to be taken out. But anyone who thinks that killing individual terrorists is a long-term response to terror is kidding themselves.

Leaders as different as U.S. General Tommy Franks and Pakistan’s president, Pervez Musharraf, have remarked in almost the same words–both in my hearing–that of course terrorists must be killed, but the larger causes that make terror plausible must also be addressed if we want to end terrorism. In no way is that a closet condemnation of Israel, even though the “root causes” language is always brought out to explain away Palestinian terror.
It is a personal plea that all those who know that terrorists must be put down no matter what, also be willing to discuss what motivates those terrorists. It is also a demand that those who appreciate the existence of a context, which makes terror a plausible alternative, admit that not all those “root causes” are some other nation or community’s fault.
I am also curious, if after two such attacks with bulldozers, the same groups which called for a boycott of Caterpillar because Israel uses their machines to demolish the homes of terrorists, will call for a boycott of the company and all who do business with Palestinians because those same machines kill and maim civilians? But that discussion will have to wait for another day. As will my thoughts on Senator Obama’s response to this attack in particular and his visit to the Middle East in general.