A few days ago, the Swedish foreign secretary, Margot Wallström referred to the recent spate of stabbings of Israelis by Palestinians – which she called “terrible”, adding that “they must not happen” and that “Israel had the right to defend itself.” However, Wallström also said that the response can not be “extrajudicial executions.”
Israel reacted to the Swedish foreign secretary with fury: The Israeli press was soon filled by statements about anti-Semitism in Sweden and Netanyahu suggested that the Swedish foreign secretary in her “scandalous remarks…expects Israelis to bare their throats to those trying to stab them.”
Despite Sweden’s attempt to explain that it had not accused Israel of extrajudicial executions, it is clear that Wallström referred to the fact that since the stabbings had started, Israeli soldiers, policemen and civilians have shot to kill the attackers. Israeli politicians, who called on every Israeli with a gun license to carry a gun, have also called for a shoot to kill approach.
So, why is it ok for Israeli politicians to support shoot to kill and wrong for a foreign politician, to refer to it as “extrajudicial execution” - which shooting to kill rather than shooting to disable, in fact is -?