More like this
In defence of Eden Abergil, mistaken Facebook villain
Abergil was just doing what soldiers do - taking snaps of their short time in service - says a former IDF conscript
The worldwide furore over a former IDF soldier's Facebook photos, showing her posing innocuously near to Palestinian detainees, is refusing to die down. Yet it is based on an utterly distorted view of the accused's so-called crimes.
Eden Abergil's photographs (above) are light years away from those at the centre of the Abu Ghraib scandal. They show nothing other than a run-of-the-mill recruit taking souvenir photographs of her time in service, just as countless soldiers have done, serving in armies the world over.
Speculation over her alleged racism towards Palestinians or her apparent dehumanisation of the prisoners in her command is simply that: speculation based on others' innate prejudices towards Israeli soldiers, rather than a contextualised understanding of the mindset of teenaged conscripts.
Were explicit evidence to exist of Abergil abusing a prisoner, it would be a different story. But on the basis of the photos released, no such proof exists, despite outraged howls of protest to the contrary.
According to Abergil herself, speaking in the wake of the story breaking in the Israeli media: "There is no violence or intention to humiliate anyone in the pictures. I just had my picture taken with them in the background. I did it out of excitement, to remember the experience. It wasn't a political statement or any kind of statement. It was about remembering my experiences in the army and that's it."
Her words will strike a chord with many soldiers as I can attest from my own time in uniform. On several missions during our tour of duty in the West Bank with the IDF, my comrades and I took photos of various situations including both the detention of Palestinian prisoners during roadblocks (below) and the detention of settler protestors during the Disengagement of 2005.
In neither case were we acting on abusive or exploitative motives; rather we were capturing the experience of our army service in the same way that Reuters, PA and other press photographers routinely photograph exactly the same incidents and disseminate them for worldwide publication.
Likewise, the same media outlets currently involved in the vilification of Abergil had no problem publishing photos of - for example - American soldiers posing with a just-captured Saddam Hussein as he was dragged out of his ad-Dawr foxhole.
Abergil's naivete in publishing the photographs in public via Facebook can be condemned in its own right, but must not be conflated into an all-out attack on IDF troops for being allegedly bereft of basic morals or ethics.
Her only crime was to be too blasé with the forum in which she posted her pictures: her underlying motives for taking the photos in the first place are far more innocent than her detractors would have the world believe.
Distasteful as it may seem to those who have never been conscripted, exposure to violent and dangerous situations instils a far blunter outlook on life for those on both sides of the conflict than they would otherwise form in civilian life.
Abergil's attitude, like the attitude of myself and my fellow soldiers, was forged in the heat of hostility and tension, and that context cannot be easily discounted when trying to make sense of her actions.
Anti-military ire should be reserved for true cases of explicit abuse, not trotted out to order whenever an incident as trivial as this emerges from the ether. ·
Comments are now closed on this article
Comments
As much as I despise Israel's attempt to ethnically cleanse whole swathes of other people's land and their use of cluster munitions and white phosphorus (the pictures are unmistakable to those who have seen it used before), I can't blame this girl for taking pictures. Serving in the military during a conflict, you see things that your eyes almost refuse to believe and you take pictures to remind yourself that it wasn't just a bad dream. Or you take pictures that others wouldn't believe unless you had proof. Pam Walker's denigration of this picture (or any other) as a "souvenir" says volumes about the general public's wish to sanitize war and their desire to see their own troops as heroes (an outworn stereotype if ever there was one). Wars are very messy and nobody who engages in them comes away with clean hands because it's necessary to dehumanize your opponent if you're going to kill them with a reasonably clear conscience. If her images haunt or disturb you;...Good! At least she won't be alone in knowing what she saw. Besides, this is what our taxes are buying the world over. Don't you want to see how they're being spent?
Excuse me, but I don't see any specific faces with eyes unable to see, hands tied in plastic, unable to move in Mr. Freedman's photo. What I see is US paid-for, Israeli teenaged dominance over what are very likely poverty-stricken middle-aged men who are not guilty of gassing thousand of innocent Kurdish men, women and children, for one example. It isn't the same thing at all. It isn't Abu Ghraib but it's on the same slippery slope. If a daughter of mine had come home with a "souvenir" like this I would feel extremely disappointed in her and I would do something to ensure that she learned the difference.
Of all people, it seems to me that Israelis would be sensitive to dehumanizing behavior toward other human beings, (I know many are) but alas Mr. Freedman, Ms. Abergil's statements and your letter prove the point; criticisms of Israeli soldier's behavior are not always based on innate prejudice.
Why would anyone want a "souvenir" of this? This just shows the utter lack of any respect for human existence that BOTH sides of this conflict consistently display. Grow up and start thinking like civilised sentient beings for all our sakes!
Taking the photos was wrong, posting them on the web was worse. Just say you're sorry and people might respect you.
What can one expect from a former soldier in one of the most criminal of all armed forces in the world today? Chutzpah. And here it is, in this article.
How sad to see the First Post accepting hasbara.
What these gangsters forget, as they always do, are the Geneva Conventions which specifically prohibit this sort of gloating.
Article 13 of the Third Geneva Convention says "prisoners of war must at all times be protected, particularly against acts of violence or intimidation and against insults and public curiosity".
End of story.
Too many actions of the Israeli army have been open to criticism in recent years. This, however, is different and Seth Freedman's clear and concise article is to be commended. Ms Abergil's photographs were tasteless and ill advised but the very expression on her face should clear up any confusion over her motive. There is absolutely no sign of mockery, of arrogance or any of the other expressions that made the Abu Ghraib pictures so very different.
When in a hole don't keep digging.