Four months ago, on May 14, I wrote on this site about a case before Israel’s Supreme Court over a petition by the Yesh Gvul movement protesting the Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) use of white phosphorus shells during Operation Cast Lead in December 2008. During their deliberations, the IDF presented the justices with documents, which only they were allowed to see for security reasons. Actually, the approval of the highest ranks of the IDF was necessary for the Supreme Court justices to even see these documents. The documents concerned the mandatory procedures for the IDF's use of white phosphorus, which is banned by international laws of warfare. 

This was one of the debates that human rights organizations in Israel force on the IDF every so often, knowing full well that discussions of these matters cannot take place in any other forum besides the court. Although these discussions are of moral value and although the Israeli army is defined as a “people’s army,” the Israeli public does not engage in these discussions. Instead, the public attaches “cosmic importance” to the phrase “sensitive security matters.” Such matters are taboo and must never be violated. There is to be no arguing about it, because anything that affects the security of the state in any way whatsoever lies outside the boundaries of the public discourse.

Public exposure, civil dialogue and the legitimacy of debate over matters of principle are not seen by most Israelis as the obligations of those bodies charged with maintaining their safety and security. As far as Israelis are concerned, anyone who speaks openly about matters that would be better off kept confidential and discreet is actually helping the enemy. And so, there is no value or principle worth spending time debating.

This attitude of most of the Israeli public to matters of security does not sanctify a democratic worldview. This is the only issue on which Israelis would prefer to keep silent. They don’t want an open debate. They have absolutely no interest in other views or other opinions when it comes to the most sacred cow of Israeli society. In fact, this attitude is so entrenched that they accept it as a given that Israel’s approach to security requires the country to avoid any public discourse about matters of defense, because security and defense override any moral values in the state of Israel.