Israel's war on Gaza was planned five years ago
How do I begin? Well I can’t say “after the war on Gaza”… because the fighting is still going on despite the ceasefire. The ceasefire was simply used to silence the world’s anger and negativity towards Israel’s illegal actions. As always with Israel, it is easy to use the excessive and unnecessary force but never easy to admit to the wrong doings and crimes. When Israel officials are questioned about these issues you know what answers to expect. It’s always the same excuses and the same scripts used over and over again: you will almost certainly hear the words “Palestinians” or “mistake” which neither make sense as it isn’t Palestinians using white phosphorus on its’ own people and it’s not like the Israeli troops enter a war not knowing what they are to do. The more those excuses were used, the more people got fed up of them.
Ask senior Israel Defense Force officers about the mass killings of Palestinian civilians and they will give an almost identical answer: The use of massive force was designed to protect the lives of soldiers. Their responses to criticism come across with a calm tone and were well handled as if it was expected.
The large Israeli army entered the narrow strip of land to “plunge” Hamas. Taking high measures and extremes to put in to practice an ethical theory created five years ago to fight terrorism. Professor Asa Khasher explains that the theory justifies the actions committed in Gaza. The Professor of Tel Aviv University who was awarded The Israel Prize Laureate in Philosophy gave details to Israeli source, Hareetz that he gave a green light and claimed that the theory was possible to the IDF.
“The norms followed by the commanders in Gaza were generally appropriate…”
He also clarified that the IDF Chief of Staff, Gabi Ashkenazi, “has been very familiar with our principles from the time the first document was drafted in 2003 to the present.” Kasher goes on further to justify the actions of the IDF by stating that there is no reason for placing the lives of soldiers in danger to simply prevent the killing of civilians who live in the surrounding area of terrorists. His side of the argument simply evolves around that belief; the inability to control the densely populated strip makes it difficult for the soldiers to achieve the military goals but that does not mean that they will not be achieved. Soldiers must do their best. Then there is a priority in protecting the lives of fellow soldiers and after that is avoiding injury of enemy civilians.
“There is no army in the world that will endanger its soldiers in order to avoid hitting the neighbors of an enemy or terrorist.”
True, but actions speak louder than words. Some actions committed by the IDF were, categorically and without a question of doubt, war crimes.
“We in Israel are in a key position in the development of law in this field because we are on the front lines in the fight against terrorism. This is gradually being recognized both in the Israeli legal system and abroad. After the debate before the High Court of Justice on the issue of targeted killings there was no need to revise the document that Yadlin and I drafted even by one comma. What we are doing is becoming the law. These are concepts that are not purely legal, but also contain strong ethical elements.”
So Israel is aware of crimes committed but believes that they could get away with it. Why is that a surprise? How many years have they been at it and been able to change the laws set to allow their actions? Breaking the laws set down by the UN Partion in 1947 and changing the geography to what it is today. It shouldn’t be a suprise that Israel turned down UN orders several time. First in history, but they have been breaking laws for such a long time. They can justify as much “strong ethical elements” but human rights is something that cannot be dismissed.
“The Geneva Conventions are based on hundreds of years of tradition of the fair rules of combat. They were appropriate for classic warfare, where one army fought another. But in our time the whole business of rules of fair combat has been pushed aside. There are international efforts underway to revise the rules to accommodate the war against terrorism. According to the new provisions, there is still a distinction between who can and cannot be hit, but not in the blatant approach which existed in the past. The concept of proportionality has also changed. There is no logic in comparing the number of civilians and armed fighters killed on the Palestinian side, or comparing the number of Israelis killed by Qassam rockets to the number of Palestinians killed in Gaza.”
So knowing and being aware of the gaps in the Geneva Convention most of the crimes committed can be let free as they are not set down yet but may after they have been committed. One begins to wonder worryingly what the next attack by Israel will be like because even places under the not-new provisions that state where not to hit i.e. UN buildings Israel will not follow those rules.
“The soldiers’ lives are endangered by virtue of their very presence in Gaza, by virtue of the fact that we send them to an area where there are enemy snipers and explosives set to go off in areas where the IDF is present. Sending a soldier there to fight terrorists is justified, but why should I force him to endanger himself much more than that so that the terrorist’s neighbor isn’t killed? I don’t have an answer for that. From the standpoint of the state of Israel, the neighbor is much less important. I owe the soldier more. If it’s between the soldier and the terrorist’s neighbor, the priority is the soldier. Any country would do the same.”
Sending a soldier to fight against terrorism is a justification that all depends on the definition of the word. To many people it’s a simply equation Terrorism = Hamas! Going back to the true definition though: an individual, an organization or a state that uses violence against innocent civilians often for political purposes. Now to say that Israel has not committed atrocities against the Palestinians is a naïve and ignorant statement to make. Comparing the UN Partion of 1947 and compare it to the map of Israel and Palestine today it resonates the shocking truth.
Bottom line is neither side is free of guilt and both side will call the other “the Terrorist”
Join the Conversation
If Israel had the intent to kill civilians, they wouldn’t have performed a ground incursion… they would have simply carpet bombed Gaza, which they of course didn’t.
Lou Lou, I cannot agree. If Israel had intended to target civilians or disregarded their safety, they would have confined their military actions to air force operations. No other army in the world, now or at any point in history, has so diligently tried to avoid death to civilians. In history, You only have to look as far back as WWII and the bombing of Dresden. The ground temperature from the intensive bombing was nearly at the boiling point. The city was utterly destroyed. The current actions in Afghanistan (NOT covered by the mainstream media, btw) have killed many, many civilians. The IDF dropped warning leaflets, called private homes, and tried to avoid civilians. What other army in history has ever done that? Are you worried about what Amnesty International calls a campaign of terror by Hamas and the murder of the members of Fatah in Gaza? I notice that the mainstream media is not covering that either.
You are on shaky ground when you accuse Israel of war crimes. You had better take a closer look at Hamas!
Respectfully, I do agree with you that the best outcome of this situation would be a cessation of hostilities and a peaceful resolution.
Lynne,
Agree or not agree – I am not the one that came up with that theory. It was the Profesor, and I am just reporting on it.
I’m sorry to say but what were the purpose of the leaflets when there is no place for the people of Gaza to go to. I just thnk it was an act because even when families are moved to what an IDF would say is a safe place moments later it would be bombed… repeatively.
The leaflets were meaningless.
“You are on shaky ground when you accuse Israel of war crimes. You had better take a closer look at Hamas!”
The numbers of deaths speak for themselves.
Peace
LouLou, I agree. The numbers do speak for themselves, and if the IDF wanted to keep their troops safe and to really harm civilians, they would stick to an air campaign, not the ground operation in an urban area. Yes, the leaflets do help, when they inform the civilians that they are going to operate in that area. The people can move to other areas within Gaza. You do not mention the cowardice of Hamas to fight among civilians, which is against international law. I heard a general from the UK discussing the operation, and he said that war is chaos and unintended things happen.
Had the IDF not tried to avoid civilians the death toll would have been much, much higher.
Hamas targets Israeli civilians daily with their rockets. Is this ok? No warnings, no leaflets, no phone calls. The people in Sderot, Israel, have fifteen seconds to get to safety when a rocket is incoming from Hamas. You do mention the unfairness of that.
You blame Israel for this military action. Do you equally blame Hamas for their attacks on civilians?
War is always horrible, and if I had my way, it would never happen. People would respect each other and try to get along.
Lynne,
Neither side is free of guilt. And if you want to generalize every member of Hamas being a coward then so be it but don’t think for one second that every IDF is a hero.
I’m just happy that people of Israel can go back to a normal life and even attend fancy resturants… the Palestinians can’t and live under poverty.
Can’t some people take things for granted?
Lulu, you are right. I should not say that all members of Hamas are cowards. I assure you that I do not think that, though I think my statement gives that impression. I view as cowards though those who draw fire onto innocent citizens and hide among them, causing them to get into the line of fire. I love animals, and I spend a lot of time watching them in my yard here in Texas. There are many birds and animals that will pretend lameness or use other tactics to draw predators toward themselves and away from their young. It seems a basic instinct to protect those we care about, so I certainly fault Hamas for fighting among civilians. I am sure that many Hamas members do not do this. Those who do are cowards.
I have to commend Esra for creating this excellent forum which I feel also promotes dialogue and peace. Thank you for your reply to my comments. I reply in the spirit of making my thoughts clearer and not for the sake of arguing.
Not all Palestinians live in poverty, though I am sure that most in Gaza do. I have Palestinian friends who live quite comfortably in the West Bank. Many West Bankers were going to fancy restaurants and coffeehouses during the military operation recently, a fact that was reported in their own papers.
Lulu, you and I do injustice to the variety of people that live in that region and who are involved in this conflict when we make statements which are too general. I apologize for my part of that error. I assure you that there are many, many people in Israel who care about the people in Gaza. My daughter, for one. Even though she was sick, when the fighting stopped about two weeks ago, she gathered blankets from her home, bought baby supplies and food to take to a collection area to send to the people of Gaza. No one with even a degree of compassion could wish hardship on the people of Gaza. I think that peace would be better served if you and I both concentrated our efforts on ways to promote compromise and peace. On the Good Neighbors site (GNblog.com), a Syrian poster and an Israeli poster, worked together (with input from others) to create a remarkable document —a blueprint for peace between Syria and Israel. I wish efforts such as this one would start a trend