Ethically stronger, weaker in stature

Once Sgt. Elor Azaria was sentenced on Tuesday, after family members, friends and reporters had all left the courtroom, he alone was left to face his punishment. The contingent of politicians, lawyers and cynical supporters who all exploited his case do not have to share an ounce of the consequences.

In this regard, and only in this regard, Azaria is a victim. Had he had better advisers, ones less prone to shouting and less hasty, they would have chosen a different, more successful line of defense for him, one that did not try to paint him as a hero, as a lone fighter taking on "an entire system of liars," from the chief of staff on down, all coming together to pin this case on him. Anyone who holds Azaria and the Israel Defense Forces dear should have advised him to bow his head and acknowledge his mistake, and not engage in a futile and unnecessary battle that has left a wake of hurt people and damaged the public trust in the military system.

Azaria, however, chose -- or rather, had chosen for him -- a different path, a wrong path, not just from a legal perspective but an ethical one. With all due respect, there is no way to justify the unnecessary shooting of a neutralized terrorist, which runs counter to the rules of engagement and purity of arms. Shootings of this sort are a recipe for anarchy, allowing people to take justice into their own hands. From this point, the path to armed militias acting on their own behalf is a short one.

Azaria erred, and for his error he has been sent to prison. He alone stood trial, not all IDF soldiers. The hundreds of soldiers who have killed Palestinians in the recent wave of terrorism are silent testaments to Azaria's guilt. Each was backed by the army's higher command when they acted properly and according to the protocols. None of them was put on trial for their actions. It is upsetting to see a combat soldier being sent to prison, but cooler heads will realize that Azaria's is a unique case of a soldier who erred and has now been punished.

The military courts normally lean toward sentencing soldiers leniently, so it was predictable that the judges would take the circumstances surrounding the incident and public sentiment into account, and give Azaria much less than the maximum 20-year sentence.

Other individuals involved in this affair would do well to engage in introspection and learn their own lessons. Those who came out against the soldier need to remember that while justice may have been done, there is no need to gloat over a combat soldier behind bars.

And those of his supporters who are encouraging people to dodge enlistment should remember that military service is a legal obligation that must be obeyed.

Once the dust settles on this affair, the IDF will emerge ethically and legally stronger, but weaker in the eyes of the public. The army will have to work hard to mend the dangerous erosion of the public's trust, as well as revamp certain operational-command protocols, chief among them the messy, blurred lines between military and civilian jurisdictions in Judea and Samaria -- which provide an almost certain formula for another incident of this sort.

טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו