The heart goes out to the people who want the Knesset to pass the Nonprofit Associations Law, which would require groups like Breaking the Silence to report their sources of foreign funding and their members to wear ID tags while in the Knesset building, but the mind is hesitant about such a dramatic step. Being in favor of it and against it simultaneously? The Economist magazine quoted F. Scott Fitzgerald, who once said that "the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." A brilliant idea, but not implementable. Eliran Tal from Channel 1 reported, and presented documents backing up his report, that foreign governments and hostile entities were buying anti-Israel and anti-IDF testimonies. They pay for testimonies containing slanderous content, not to get a picture of what daily life is really like on the seam line in Jerusalem and in Hebron. If the groups were getting money from abroad but operating in Israel only, it would be possible to join the likes of Amiram Levin, Elik Ron, and Ami Ayalon, all of whom advocate for purity of arms among IDF soldiers. But if Breaking the Silence and its ilk limited their presentations to Israel, they wouldn't receive such generous funding from Europe. The people holding the purse strings want not only to control public opinion, but also steer the slander against Israel. In their polemic, the members of Breaking the Silence claim that they can't get the ear of anyone in Israel, and to reach their goal -- a full withdrawal from the territories -- they have no choice but to fight their battle abroad. That's a reasonable but incorrect argument, because the essence of the group itself is that not all tactics are "kosher," even in war. That's even truer when the confrontation is a political, moral, public one, and fought with words. It's not that giving their statements abroad isn't effective, it's that it's not legitimate toward IDF soldiers and officers. There are steps that should not be taken, even if avoiding them holds the group up from reaching its goal. Sniveling in an attempt to gain the support of foreign villains is repulsive and shouldn't happen, even if at the end of the day Breaking the Silence's gains are less than what it sees as optimal. They should be convinced of that without hurting their freedom to operate in Israel, and we should speak to their hearts, even if they don't lend us their ears. But don't force them to give up their weeping and bowing before foreigners. The benefits of the bill are much smaller than the harm it would do if passed. Because most of the sources of Breaking the Silence's funding are published anyway, even before any law has required it, and also because foreign interests are not embarrassed by being exposed and will continue to fund the group. And what's more, Israel's friends abroad will ask the government not to pass the Nonprofit Associations bill. So we should forget about it.
