Terror Tunnels The Case for Israel's Just War Against Hamas (15 page)

It is worth remembering what the United States and Great Britain did during the Second World War. After German rockets were fired at London, Winston Churchill ordered the carpet bombing of Dresden, deliberately intending to kill as many civilians—men, women, and children—as possible in order to weaken the morale of his enemy. The United States firebombed Tokyo, killing one hundred thousand people, and then dropped two nuclear bombs, killing many more. The United States has also killed many civilians in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Kosovo, as have Great Britain and other members of NATO. In none of these wars did Western armies take the precautions and give the warnings that Israel has undertaken.

It is unseemly and hypocritical for the Western world to castigate Israel for doing exactly what it would do and has done when faced with comparable or even less serious threats.

In Israel, these moral issues are debated endlessly, among philosophers, in the media, within the military, by politicians, and by the general public. There are no easy answers, except to those sitting the safety of Washington DC, Turtle Bay, London, and Paris. For Israelis, the questions are real, involving life-and-death decisions. How should the democratic nation balance the lives of its own civilians and soldiers against risks to the lives of enemy civilians? Those who condemn Israel in simplistic terms should try to address some of these more nuanced questions. A reasonable moralist might answer these questions differently than Israel and other democracies have, but Israel’s answers are well within the rules of engagement employed by the United States, NATO, and even the United Nations.

President Obama has recognized the difficulties faced by Israel in protecting its citizens from rockets and terror tunnels that are deliberately placed in hospitals, United Nations facilities, mosques, and civilian homes. It is part of Hamas’s strategy to place these lethal weapons in densely populated areas, precisely in order to maximize Palestinian civilian casualties.

Israeli soldiers and civilians should not have to pay the price for this cruel, unlawful, and barbaric tactic.

33

The Empty Spaces in Gaza

August 6, 2014

How many times have you heard on television or read in the media that the Gaza Strip is “the most densely populated area in the world”? Repeating this statement, however, does not make it true. There are dense parts of Gaza, especially Gaza City, Beit Hanoun, and Khan Younis, but there are far less dense areas in Gaza between these cities. Just look at this
population density map
.
⁴²
Or look at Google Earth.

The fact that these sparsely populated areas exist in the Gaza Strip raise several important moral questions: First, why don’t the media show the relatively open areas of the Gaza Strip? Why do they only show the densely populated cities? There are several possible reasons. There is no fighting going on in the sparsely populated areas, so showing them would be boring. But that’s precisely the point—to show areas from which Hamas could be firing rockets and building tunnels but has chosen not to. Or perhaps the reason the media doesn’t show these areas is that Hamas won’t let them. That too would be a story worth reporting.

Second, why doesn’t Hamas use sparsely populated areas from which to launch its rockets and build its tunnels? Were it to do so, Palestinian civilian casualties would decrease dramatically, but the casualty rate among Hamas terrorists would increase dramatically.

That is precisely why Hamas selects the most densely populated areas from which to fire and dig. The difference between Israel and Hamas is that Israel uses its soldiers to protect its civilians, whereas Hamas uses its civilians to protect its terrorists. That is why most Israeli casualties have been soldiers and most of Hamas’s casualties have been civilians. The other reason is that Israel builds shelters for its civilians, whereas Hamas builds shelters only for its terrorists, intending that most of the casualties be among its civilian shields.

The law is clear: using civilians as human shields—which the Hamas battle manual mandates—is an absolute war crime. There are no exceptions or matters of degree, especially when there are alternatives. On the other hand, shooting at legitimate military targets, such as rockets and terror tunnels, is permitted, unless the number of anticipated civilian casualties is disproportionate to the military importance of the target. This is a matter of degree and judgment, often difficult to calculate in the fog of war. The law is also clear that when a criminal takes a hostage and uses that hostage as a shield from behind whom to fire at civilians or police, and if the police fire back and kill the hostage, it is the criminal and not the policeman who is guilty of murder. So too with Hamas: when it uses human shields and the Israeli army fires back and kills some of the shields, it is Hamas who is responsible for their deaths.

The third moral question is why does the United Nations try to shelter Palestinian civilians right in the middle of the areas from which Hamas is firing? Hamas has decided not to use the less densely populated areas for rocket firing and tunnel digging. For that reason, the United Nations should use these sparsely populated areas as places of refuge. Since the Gaza Strip is relatively small, it would not be difficult to move civilians to these safer areas. They should declare these areas battle free and build temporary shelters—tents if necessary—as places of asylum for the residents of the crowded cities. It should prevent any Hamas fighters, any rockets, and any tunnel builders from entering into these sanctuaries. In that way, Hamas would be denied the use of human shields and Israel would have no reason to fire its rockets anywhere near these United Nations sanctuaries. The net result would be a considerable saving of lives.

But instead the UN is playing right into the hands of Hamas by sheltering civilians right next to Hamas fighters, Hamas weapons, and Hamas tunnels. Then the United Nations and the international community accuses Israel of doing precisely what Hamas intended Israel to do: namely fire at its terrorists and kill United Nations–protected civilians in the process. It’s a cynical game being played by Hamas, but it wouldn’t succeed without the complicity of UN agencies.

The only way to assure that Hamas’s strategy of using human shields to maximize civilian casualties is not repeated over and over again is for the international community, and especially the United Nations, not to encourage and facilitate it, as it currently does. International law must be enforced against Hamas for its double war crime: using civilian human shields to fire at civilian Israeli targets. If this tactic were to be brought to a halt, then Israel would have no need to respond in self-defense. Applying the laws of war to Israel alone will do no good, because any country faced with rockets and tunnels targeting its civilians will fight back. When the fighters and tunnel builders hide behind human shields, there will inevitably be civilian casualties—unintended by Israel, intended by Hamas—regardless of how careful the defenders are. Israel has tried its hardest to minimize civilian casualties. Hamas has tried its hardest to maximize civilian casualties. Now the United Nations and the international community must try their hardest to become part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

34

Hamas Exaggerates Civilian Deaths

August 8, 2014

It’s a mystery why so many in the media accept as gospel Hamas-supplied figures on the number of civilians killed in the recent war.

Hamas claims that of the more than 1800 Palestinians killed, close to 90 percent were civilians. Israel, on the other hand, says that close to half of them were combatants.

The objective facts support a number much closer to Israel’s than to Hamas’s.

Even human rights groups antagonistic to Israel acknowledge, according to a
New York Times
report,
⁴³
that Hamas probably counts among the “civilians killed by Israel” the following groups: Palestinians killed by Hamas as collaborators; Palestinians killed through domestic violence; Palestinians killed by errant Hamas rockets or mortars; and Palestinians who died naturally during the conflict.

I wonder if Hamas also included the reported 162 children who died while performing child slave labor in building their terror tunnels. Hamas also defines combatants to include only armed fighters who were killed while fighting Israelis. They exclude Hamas supporters who build tunnels, who allow their homes to be used to store and fire rockets, Hamas policemen, members of the Hamas political wing, and others who work hand in hand with the armed terrorists.

Several years ago I came up with a concept which I call the “continuum of civilianality”—an inelegant phrase that is intended to convey the reality that who is a civilian and who is a combatant is often a matter of degree.

Clearly every child below the age in which he or she is capable of assisting Hamas is a civilian. Clearly every Hamas fighter who fires rockets, bears arms, or operates in the tunnels is a combatant. Between these extremes lies a wide range of people, some of whom are closer to the civilian end, many of whom are closer to the combatant end.

The law of war has not established a clear line between combatants and civilians, especially in the context of urban warfare where people carry guns at night and bake bread during the day, or fire rockets during the day and go back home to sleep with their families at night. (Interestingly, the Israeli Supreme Court has tried to devise a functional definition of combatants in the murky context of urban guerilla warfare.)

Data published by the
New York Times
⁴⁴
strongly suggests that a very large number—perhaps a majority—of those killed are closer to the combatant end of the continuum than to the civilian end. First of all, the vast majority of those killed have been male rather than female. In an Islamic society, males are far more likely to be combatants than females. Second, most of those killed who are within the age range of fifteen to forty are likely to be combatants. The vast majority of these are male as well. The number of people over sixty who have been killed is infinitesimal. The number of children below the age of fifteen is also relatively small, although their pictures have been shown more frequently than others.

In other words, the genders and ages of those killed are not representative of the general population of Gaza. It is far more representative of the genders and ages of combatants. These data strongly suggest that a very large percentage of Palestinians killed are on the combatant side of the continuum.

They also prove, as if any proof were necessary to unbiased eyes, that Israel did not target civilians randomly. If it had, the dead would be representative of the Gaza population in general, rather than of the subgroups most closely identified with combatants.

The media should immediately stop using Hamas-approved statistics, which in the past have proved to be extremely unreliable. Instead, they should try to document, independently, the nature of each person killed and describe their age, gender, occupation, affiliation with Hamas, and other objective factors relevant to their status as a combatant, noncombatant, or someone in the middle.

It is lazy and dangerous for the media to rely on Hamas-approved propaganda figures. In fact, when the infamous
Goldstone Report
falsely stated that the vast majority of people killed in Operation Cast Lead were civilians and not Hamas fighters, many in Gaza complained to Hamas. They accused Hamas of cowardice for allowing so many civilians to be killed while protecting their own fighters. As a result of these complaints, Hamas was forced to tell the truth, namely that many more of those killed were actually Hamas fighters or armed policemen.

It is likely that Hamas will make a similar correction with regard to this conflict. But that correction will not be covered by the media, as the prior correction was not.

The headline “Most of those killed by Israel were children, women, and the elderly” will continue to be the conventional wisdom, despite its factual falsity.

Unless it is corrected, Hamas will continue with its dead baby strategy and more people on both sides will die.

A
UTHOR’S
N
OTE

On September 2, 2014, an Israeli military intelligence spokesperson issued the following figures on Palestinian deaths:

The spokesperson also said 857 Hamas rockets landed inside Gaza, killing and wounding an undetermined number of people. The official said some of the Hamas rockets “were fired intentionally at the local Palestinian population.” This was based on what was seen “in the system.” Additional evidence was also presented of the deliberate use of schools as locations from which to fire rockets:

The intelligence official presented more evidence to bolster Israel’s assertions that Hamas waged its campaign largely by hiding behind its own civilians. An aerial photograph appeared to show a rocket firing site in the yard of a school in Shejaiya. In before and after pictures, a fabric canopy believed to be hiding the rockets appeared intact, then ripped. Another previously unpublished photograph showed a schoolyard in Beit Lahiya that was empty by day. By night, it was dotted with what looked like several rockets laid out on the ground and boxes that the official said contained more rockets.
⁴⁵