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 -?
