Reflections on the Present Time
By Rabbi Peter J. Rubinstein

We are living during a difficult and unsettled time. For much of the past year we have experienced the possibility, then the expectation and probability (soon the reality) of war in Iraq. Some people have been clear and absolute in their position regarding this conflict from the beginning. Many more have felt ambivalent, even uninformed as to the reasons put forth by our administration as to why Iraq is a clear and present danger and whether it is necessary for us to attack in order to rid the world of Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction.

Recent news articles chronicle the uncertainty in the Jewish community regarding the pending war and the diversity of opinion throughout the American religious community.

With great certainty our president speaks of his religious faith and uses biblical language and content to frame America?s role in the world. Obviously, not all readers of Bible draw the same conclusions from the biblical text as does the president so let us consider our tradition.

The Bible uses two standards to determine whether a nation is justified in going to war and whether that nation might be victorious:

1. Is the war righteous?

The first requirement for determining the right of a nation to initiate a war depends on whether the mission is righteous. In other words, does the purpose of conflict make the war "just"?

Based on Biblical passages the Talmud makes a distinction between "obligatory" and "voluntary" wars. A michemet mitzvah (obligatory war) is in defense against attack from a foreign power, when the security of a people or nation is threatened. As an example the Bible refers to a war against Amalek as a milchemet mitzvah, an "obligatory" war. Amalek was an especially nefarious adversary who singled out the weak and stragglers for annihilation (Deut. 25:17-19). The Bible considered the destruction of Amalek an obligation and commands us to wipe out his name. Every citizen was called to engage in the battle against Amalek, the forerunner of villains throughout history. Despite our longing for peace, our rabbinic authorities supported, even encouraged wars fought in defense of our people or any people that could not defend itself..

The second category of war is a michemet rashut (voluntary war). "Voluntary" wars were not for self-defense or protection. They were not fought to destroy the destroyer but were fought to serve the desires of the aggressor, usually for territorial expansion or the growth of national hegemony. The rabbis pointed to "wars waged by the House of David for territorial expansion" (Sotah 44b) as the example of a "voluntary" war.

The Talmud makes it clear that while an "obligatory", self-defensive war could be initiated by the sovereign, a "voluntary" war could only be initiated by authority of the more than seventy members of the great Sanhedrin. Our tradition abhorred "voluntary" wars and did what they could to prohibit them. Our forebears were suspect of the inclinations and pretensions of a ruler to enlarge territory and influence.

So we must decide whether a military conflict it is being fought in pursuit of a righteous mission.

2. Is the warrior righteous?

The second standard that should be applied regards the righteousness, the moral standing of the warriors.

The book of Judges in the Bible chronicles the leadership of a series of military leaders called Shofetim (Judges). Deborah and Samson are best known among these military wizards. Contrary to intuition, the military success of the Israelites depended far less on military prowess and might than on the people?s moral behavior and commitment to moral values and adherence to the covenant with God. When the Israelites behavior was morally offensive to God, the people and their army ware delivered into the hands of their enemies. (See Judges 4:1 and 6:1 for instance.) When the people faithfully walked in God?s ways their army was successful in battle. Israel?s success depended on "whether or not they would faithfully walk in the ways of the Lord, as their fathers had done?." (Judges 2:22)

Military victory depended on the warriors being pure in heart and in purpose.

Thus the two Biblical standards for victory: the mission needed to be just and righteous and the army themselves needed to be righteous, devoid of selfish motive and self-interest.

These two Biblical and traditional standards pose challenges as we consider the present situation: Is our mission righteous? Are we righteous warriors?

Each of us has personal perspectives on these matters.

Yet, whatever our opinion of the past, we can hope and pray that as we go forth we will demonstrate the best values of American history both in battle and in policy: concern for the community of nations as well as for our own, support of those who suffer from natural or human causes, keeping our word, and the pursuit of justice as well as peace. Let us build our moral capital and keep what we have intact.

We arrive at this juncture about to unleash forces which will lead us to?well, only God knows where.

Let us join in a prayer for justice and peace for all people and nations of this world. May our soldiers and all innocent civilians both in our nation and around the world soon be able to be home in peace.