A sense of proportion

12 August 2006

The Israeli Defence Forces’ ethical standards are different from, and in some ways higher than, the British army’s, says Paul Robinson, but in the end the question is not whether IDF actions are moral, but whether they are wise

Let no one say, however, that Israel has failed to give much thought to the situation. The IDF is in many ways far more advanced in ethical training than the UK armed forces. The IDF operates according to a Code of Ethics entitled ‘The Spirit of the IDF’. This comes out very well when compared with similar documents produced by the British military, such as the booklet ‘Values and Standards of the British Army’. As I have pointed out in my latest book, Military Honour and the Conduct of War, the British pamphlet provides a list of military virtues which are meant to guide the honourable soldier but then ruins the effect by counselling actual recourse to a utilitarian ‘Service Test’: ‘Have the actions or behaviour of an individual adversely impacted or are they likely to impact on the efficiency or operational effectiveness of the Army?’ Thus, the message of the British army’s official ethics document is that, ultimately, what is moral is what works. There is no consideration of the rights of others, the value of human life, or in fact anything beyond achieving the mission.

In contrast, ‘The Spirit of the IDF’ specifically lists ‘the sanctity of life’ as an overriding principle. The IDF serviceman, it says, ‘will, above all, preserve human life, in the recognition of its supreme value and will place himself or others at risk solely to the extent required to carry out his mission. The sanctity of life in the eyes of the IDF servicemen will find expression in all of their actions.’ When, in the current campaign, some IDF pilots over Lebanon were reported by the Observer to be deliberately missing their targets or aborting their missions because of fears that innocents would be killed, the pilots specifically cited the terms of the IDF Code of Ethics as their reason.