Common sense. "US study: IDF didn't violate rules of war," by Yitzhak Benhorin from Israel National News, February 4:
WASHINGTON – Israel did not violate the rules of war during its recent Gaza operation, a new US study says, while praising the IDF's "impressive improvements" since the war against Hizbullah in 2006. Israel "deliberately used decisive force to enhance regional deterrence and demonstrate that it had restored its military edge," wrote Anthony H. Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "These, however, are legitimate military objectives in spite of their very real humanitarian costs."
The study notes that "political efforts to manipulate the "rules of war and humanitarian considerations have become a key weapon in asymmetric warfare, and are often used as a basis for propaganda and gaining political leverage in this type of conflict."
"Real suffering is translated into exaggerated charges and numbers that cannot be validated by reliable data or methodology," the study says. "In practice, even if Israel had agreed to all of the conventions involved, they are severely limited and often difficult or impossible to apply to the realities of war — even one fought with restraint and a focus on military targets."
'Noting new about such tactics'
Cordesman notes that "Some buildings like schools merit special consideration, but only require review to determine whether they are really military targets. Hospitals require warning but are not protected if used by an enemy."
"White phosphorous can be used against military but not civilian targets," he adds, noting that "such laws and conventions do not bind or restrain non-state actors like Hamas in any meaningful way."
Indeed not.
"The end result is a situation where one side can potentially be limited by international law where the other is not, and that effectively makes international law a potential weapon for the side that rejects and exploits it," the study says. "It is also a situation that empowers and incentivizes extremists to use civilians as the equivalent of human shields by embedding their forces in civilian populations and areas, and using sensitive buildings like mosques and schools or collocating near them. There is nothing new about such tactics."
4 comments:
Dear Dr. Morris, I read the Time megazine yesterday and there was this article: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1874850,00.html
So, in the article, it has been claimed (out of the mouths of Gazans) that Israeli troopers had deliberately shot civilians (these are little girls, who most probably don't hold weapons and fire at Israeli soldiers, but whose parents or grandparents might do).
Dr. Morris, I would like to understand the situation as well as your analysis. I stand with the Israelis as I believe that Israel is the victim rather than the aggressor, which many gullible and hypocritic people do.
So, with that Time megazine's report, the first impression many would get is that these Israeli soldiers obviously had committed inhumane acts. This is, at least, my personal view.
I would like to know your analysis on this issue. My personal opinion is that if the report is genuine, then it was probably the soldiers personal agenda to kill young little girls. The IDF, in [i]principle[\i] do not concur in killing civilians; this claim does not need further justification as it is obvious and proofs are easily presented whenever needed.
It will do me good to udnerstand the situation as I am strongly rooted in the fact that Israel is taking its defence against aggression that has been done on it. It will also help me defend my stand in the Moslem environment I live in.
Thank you, Dr. Morris!
Anonymous,
I initially am curious why you remain anonymous given your stated concern for the truth. It may be useful to understand how the "news" reaches you via mainstream media. Do you know the channels of communication that exist from news event to your printed media? This deserves reporting alone. please be advised media was not allowed "inside Gaza" during the actual operation-multiple opinions exist regarding this action. So, how did the news get out? Typically, not all the time, "stringers" inside the operational theater call their interpretation (often second hand information by the way)to a media source-often, but not always, the one paying the highest price. "Stringers" are not professional reporters-many and I offer most are residents needing to make a living who usually "call in" their "stories.
Can I say that this is how TIME received its information? I cannot verify this and they were not inside during the war-they have relied upon "Gazan" individuals. Draw your own conclusions. Does Hams and its supporters know the game of PR-yes! Do they know what resonates with the international press and its collective recipients of their "stories-yes? Is part of Hamas and its associated supporters tactic to misdirect, intentionally misrepresent "facts on the ground"-yes?!
Do I have access to IDF reports, IDF firing protocols and in theater video clips-yes. I also suggest that it is imperative that TIME and all others clearly provide the ages of "the children"-these numbers have been inflated and mainstream media does not appear interested in asking these kinds of questions.
Put this all together: IDF has the most stringent firing protocol of any military in the world-fact. Soldiers on multiple occasions terminated an operation when innocents were identified. They did this at great risk to themselves. TIME and other media chose to write stories, posts and/or pieces based upon unsubstantiated data.
As indicated in this post, the IDK was found innocent of war crimes. Finally, war is a dirty, dangerous business that should not be entered into without careful critical analysis. By its very nature and definition persons and property are destroyed. Were some children and other individuals killed-yes? By whom? TIME says by our soldiers, we know Hamas intentionally killed "its" people-they used human shields from Day One-they booby-trapped these children's homes and "accidents occurred"they forced at gun point Gazan populations to stand on rooftops of known arsenals and shooting/firing locations.Does the mainstream media present this story to you in as much detail and quantity as the one you reported to me? No! Ask yourself, why?
doc
Dear Dr. Morris,
thank you for your reply. It is good to hear what you have there.
No, I was not aware that TIME was not allowed in the area during the war. So, as I indicated in my post, I doubt that the report by the "victims" to the TIME guy reporting was authentic. My question was "if it was true, how would one respond to that?" I was seeking advice as I analyze the situation myself. It is hard living in an environment surrounded by Moslems, as you Israelites know too well!
The reason I remain anonymous is because I would just like to be unidentified for the time being. I am seizing this opportunity to bring to the attention to many people not directly related to the Middle-East crisis the threat posed by this certain institution if we all don't stand up against them and to undermine their effort and motives.
Please accept my moral support to you, Israelites, in your struggle to make your nation a safe place and your people accepted in the world.
P.S.: You mentioned "initially" at the beginning of your reply, is there any "later"? I am just curious myself...
Welcome back anonymous-I can understand your desire to remain unknown-you should see the hate mails I receive! I just returned from Israel, a quick 5 day trip for some work-elections today. I hope this blog does provide some useful information for you-thanks for reading it-doc
Post a Comment