31 aug 2010
The Goldstone effect
For taking a picture with a bound man suspected of terrorism, my son, suspected of insensitivity, was paraded in handcuffs before a lineup of TV cameras for the evening news.
My son and two of his friends from the Nahal Haredi unit stand accused of abusing an arrested member of Hamas. While the IDF pursued its investigation, they sat in jail for 14 days.
The three were accused of taking a picture of themselves standing next to the blindfolded Hamas terror suspect in Jenin eight months ago.
This event occurred after a vigorous year of training and active duty, when they were on their first mission to successfully arrest a terror suspect whose actions, if left unheeded, could have resulted in the loss of innocent life. Like many fresh recruits on their first successful mission, they were excited and wanted to memorialize this first arrest.
I would like to state unequivocally that what they did was morally incorrect. It was childish, insensitive to the prisoner and potentially damaging to Israel. They fully deserve to be reprimanded.
However, the arrest and subsequent accusations seems to have lost all sense of proportion. This is not Abu Ghraib, where prisoners were humiliated and tortured in shocking ways as part of an established pattern of abuse. This is not even Eden Abergil, who posted her photos on Facebook for all to see and reveled in her notoriety.
These photos were never intended to be publicized and were merely in the cellphone memory, largely forgotten by my son and his comrades.
The soldiers have admitted that their actions were inappropriate and immature, but it is also vital to note that they never abused the prisoner in any way, shape or form. The photos themselves do not reflect any abuse, and although the IDF prosecutor claims that a couple of pictures appear to show the soldiers rifles pointed at the prisoner, the photos are entirely ambiguous. The rifles appear to be hanging from their shoulders in the manner typical of IDF soldiers, and certainly not in a threatening way.
As part of the investigation, the IDF prosecutor interviewed the Hamas member in the pictures. He was asked if the soldiers actions were humiliating, and although it must have been very tempting to do otherwise, he replied in the negative. He unequivocally stated that he suffered no threats or ill-treatment other than the embarrassment of the arrest itself.
The IDF prosecutor's written statement to the court states that the importance of the case... is in the context which we live in. After the Goldstone report and the Mavi Marmara [flotilla], in a period when we as a military and a state are under a so-called moral siege, we... are being examined under a magnifying glass. The severity of the actions is beyond the specific incident.
LET ME reiterate. What the boys did was wrong and the army cannot tolerate such conduct. They deserve reproof for their insensitivity. In a state of law we must extend respect even to terrorists, and even when the prisoner is not aware of the disrespect being shown him. Nevertheless, insensitivity is not a crime. To subject them to the humiliation of arrest, hold them in jail for 14 days with barely any contact with their family and to accuse them of serious felonies reflects an absurd lack of perspective.
There is something cruelly ironic in this: For taking a picture of a handcuffed person suspected of terrorism, my son, suspected of insensitivity, was paraded in handcuffs before a lineup of TV cameras for the evening news. Unlike the Hamas member, however, my son was painfully aware of his degradation. And now, he may spend up to a year in jail.
However, the prosecutor's statement indicates that these soldiers were not being punished for their crimes, but for Israel's current international image. Consider that before the Facebook fiasco, the IDF soldier who was videotaped shooting at a manacled prisoner a much more heinous crime served only two days in jail before his trial. It is unconscionable that these imprudent boys should bear the brunt of the distorted view of Israel that is currently spread around the world.
BY PUNISHING our soldiers for perceived crimes, minor errors of judgment, or to avoid the world's hypocrisy is handing a victory to our enemies, and to those, like Justice Richard Goldstone, who have denied our right to self-defense.
Secondly, we will undoubtedly once again need our soldiers to fight be prepared to lay down their lives in our defense. This type of overreaction and punishment will be massively damaging for morale.
They need to know that the authorities will show them empathy and understanding.
Anyone who has served in the army understands the challenges. These are good kids from good homes with parents who encouraged them to serve their country. They literally risk their lives to enter places like Jenin and arrest terrorists. They pass countless sleepless nights so we can sleep comfortably in our beds.
This episode has had a demoralizing effect on the Nahal Haredi, a unit meant to serve as an example for others. In fact, the effect has passed far beyond their unit, to the larger IDF where many are incensed at this overreaction.
Our government refused to cooperate with the Goldstone Commission, and our best legal minds have proven that the Goldstone Report is flawed, distorted and, as the US Congress overwhelmingly voted, irredeemably biased. However, by applying the Goldstone Report as a measure for our soldiers, we give our delegitimizers success.
As lawyer Shlomo Tzipori said, It is not right to take pictures next to a Palestinian with handcuffs, but these soldiers do not need to be hung out to dry. They are paying the price for the Goldstone report and the Mavi Marmara. By indicting the soldiers and handcuffing them, the IDF is the one causing the real damage.
We cannot permit the Goldstone effect to take root in our army's culture. Giving our enemies the power to influence how we judge our soldiers is a very dangerous precedent. While we must always prosecute real criminal activity in the IDF and educate to the highest moral standards, when our fighting men feel the system will offer them up on the altar of Goldstone, we will all pay the price.
The writer is the father of one of the arrested soldiers. His name has been changed to protect his identity.
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=186629
The Goldstone effect
For taking a picture with a bound man suspected of terrorism, my son, suspected of insensitivity, was paraded in handcuffs before a lineup of TV cameras for the evening news.
My son and two of his friends from the Nahal Haredi unit stand accused of abusing an arrested member of Hamas. While the IDF pursued its investigation, they sat in jail for 14 days.
The three were accused of taking a picture of themselves standing next to the blindfolded Hamas terror suspect in Jenin eight months ago.
This event occurred after a vigorous year of training and active duty, when they were on their first mission to successfully arrest a terror suspect whose actions, if left unheeded, could have resulted in the loss of innocent life. Like many fresh recruits on their first successful mission, they were excited and wanted to memorialize this first arrest.
I would like to state unequivocally that what they did was morally incorrect. It was childish, insensitive to the prisoner and potentially damaging to Israel. They fully deserve to be reprimanded.
However, the arrest and subsequent accusations seems to have lost all sense of proportion. This is not Abu Ghraib, where prisoners were humiliated and tortured in shocking ways as part of an established pattern of abuse. This is not even Eden Abergil, who posted her photos on Facebook for all to see and reveled in her notoriety.
These photos were never intended to be publicized and were merely in the cellphone memory, largely forgotten by my son and his comrades.
The soldiers have admitted that their actions were inappropriate and immature, but it is also vital to note that they never abused the prisoner in any way, shape or form. The photos themselves do not reflect any abuse, and although the IDF prosecutor claims that a couple of pictures appear to show the soldiers rifles pointed at the prisoner, the photos are entirely ambiguous. The rifles appear to be hanging from their shoulders in the manner typical of IDF soldiers, and certainly not in a threatening way.
As part of the investigation, the IDF prosecutor interviewed the Hamas member in the pictures. He was asked if the soldiers actions were humiliating, and although it must have been very tempting to do otherwise, he replied in the negative. He unequivocally stated that he suffered no threats or ill-treatment other than the embarrassment of the arrest itself.
The IDF prosecutor's written statement to the court states that the importance of the case... is in the context which we live in. After the Goldstone report and the Mavi Marmara [flotilla], in a period when we as a military and a state are under a so-called moral siege, we... are being examined under a magnifying glass. The severity of the actions is beyond the specific incident.
LET ME reiterate. What the boys did was wrong and the army cannot tolerate such conduct. They deserve reproof for their insensitivity. In a state of law we must extend respect even to terrorists, and even when the prisoner is not aware of the disrespect being shown him. Nevertheless, insensitivity is not a crime. To subject them to the humiliation of arrest, hold them in jail for 14 days with barely any contact with their family and to accuse them of serious felonies reflects an absurd lack of perspective.
There is something cruelly ironic in this: For taking a picture of a handcuffed person suspected of terrorism, my son, suspected of insensitivity, was paraded in handcuffs before a lineup of TV cameras for the evening news. Unlike the Hamas member, however, my son was painfully aware of his degradation. And now, he may spend up to a year in jail.
However, the prosecutor's statement indicates that these soldiers were not being punished for their crimes, but for Israel's current international image. Consider that before the Facebook fiasco, the IDF soldier who was videotaped shooting at a manacled prisoner a much more heinous crime served only two days in jail before his trial. It is unconscionable that these imprudent boys should bear the brunt of the distorted view of Israel that is currently spread around the world.
BY PUNISHING our soldiers for perceived crimes, minor errors of judgment, or to avoid the world's hypocrisy is handing a victory to our enemies, and to those, like Justice Richard Goldstone, who have denied our right to self-defense.
Secondly, we will undoubtedly once again need our soldiers to fight be prepared to lay down their lives in our defense. This type of overreaction and punishment will be massively damaging for morale.
They need to know that the authorities will show them empathy and understanding.
Anyone who has served in the army understands the challenges. These are good kids from good homes with parents who encouraged them to serve their country. They literally risk their lives to enter places like Jenin and arrest terrorists. They pass countless sleepless nights so we can sleep comfortably in our beds.
This episode has had a demoralizing effect on the Nahal Haredi, a unit meant to serve as an example for others. In fact, the effect has passed far beyond their unit, to the larger IDF where many are incensed at this overreaction.
Our government refused to cooperate with the Goldstone Commission, and our best legal minds have proven that the Goldstone Report is flawed, distorted and, as the US Congress overwhelmingly voted, irredeemably biased. However, by applying the Goldstone Report as a measure for our soldiers, we give our delegitimizers success.
As lawyer Shlomo Tzipori said, It is not right to take pictures next to a Palestinian with handcuffs, but these soldiers do not need to be hung out to dry. They are paying the price for the Goldstone report and the Mavi Marmara. By indicting the soldiers and handcuffing them, the IDF is the one causing the real damage.
We cannot permit the Goldstone effect to take root in our army's culture. Giving our enemies the power to influence how we judge our soldiers is a very dangerous precedent. While we must always prosecute real criminal activity in the IDF and educate to the highest moral standards, when our fighting men feel the system will offer them up on the altar of Goldstone, we will all pay the price.
The writer is the father of one of the arrested soldiers. His name has been changed to protect his identity.
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContributors/Article.aspx?id=186629
19 aug 2010
UN silence on Goldstone sends report to obscurity
With the decision by the United Nations chief to offer no comment on the official Palestinian and Israeli responses to the Goldstone Report, the inquiry's findings on possible war crimes during Israel's attack on Gaza in 2008-2009 risk passing into obscurity, Palestinian and Israeli commentators said yesterday.
Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, late Wednesday released the Palestinian and Israeli replies to the Report with no specific recommendations for further action, indicating a desire to let the issue fade, according to George Giacaman, a Palestinian analyst.
The lack of comment [by Mr Ban] is a political move. As far as the Security Council is concerned, a majority wants to put the Goldstone Report behind them. This is a step in that direction.
A spokesman for Mr Ban said comment was not required of the secretary-general. Mr Ban had instead limited his presentation to the UN's General Assembly to broad comments about the importance of adhering to international law and human rights principles and expressed his hope that steps would be taken wherever there were allegations of violations.
However, Mr Giacaman suggested that the decision not to comment was informed more by political, rather than any legal, considerations.
It is very unfortunate. The fact that there is no comment about whether the [Israeli and Palestinian] responses fulfilled the requirements of being independent and impartial is significant, and indicates that absent serious pressure from outside groups, there will be no follow-up to the Goldstone Report.
The 575-page Goldstone report concluded that both sides committed war crimes and possible crimes against humanity during the Gaza war, in which 13 Israelis and almost 1,400 Palestinians, the vast majority civilians, were killed.
The release of the responses was accompanied by criticism from the UN's Human Rights Council as well as the independent Human Rights Watch, a US-based human rights group.
Both were critical of the lack of response from Hamas, the Islamist group that rules Gaza, which apparently conducted no investigation into allegations in the Goldstone Report that its fighters, along with those of other Palestinian groups in Gaza, had indiscriminately targeted Israeli civilians with rocket fire on southern Israel.
No Hamas official was available for comment yesterday, but Hamas officials have previously rejected the allegations. Palestinians, they say, have a legal right to resist occupation and that while Israeli civilians might have been in the firing line of rockets from Gaza, those weapons are not sophisticated enough to have guidance mechanisms and that the intention was always to strike at military targets.
The Palestinian response instead came from the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, which stated that while Hamas had violated human rights in Gaza there could be no moral equivalence with Israel's actions, for which the numbers spoke for themselves. Israel, the PA concluded, had acted with total impunity and disregard for international law.
The Goldstone Report, named after its head, the South African jurist Richard Goldstone, found that Israel used disproportionate force, deliberately targeted civilians, used Palestinians as human shields and destroyed civilian infrastructure during its three-week invasion of Gaza.
Israel's response to those allegations was also criticised by human rights organisations on Wednesday. In its response, Israel said it had conducted 150 investigations into specific allegations of war crimes. These inquiries, however, fell far short of being thorough and impartial, said Human Rights Watch, a criticism echoed by the Human Rights Council.
Such criticism is likely to be shrugged off in Israel, where both bodies are seen as anti-Israel, in the words of Gerald Steinberg, an Israeli commentator.
This is a familiar game. The Goldstone Report was based on political claims by organisations that have an anti-Israel agenda, such as the Human Rights Council, which is dominated by the Organisation of Islamic Conference.
Mr Steinberg rejected any suggestion that Israel had committed war crimes in Gaza, saying the Goldstone Report conclusions were baseless. He accused the Human Rights Council of double standards for overlooking human rights violations in Arab countries, while he dismissed the Middle East division of Human Rights Watch as ideologues.
Mr Steinberg also suggested that the Goldstone Report would now be set aside, with the US and most European countries now able to claim that Israel has fulfilled its obligations.
It is not clear yet what next for the Goldstone Report. With a US veto at the ready, the UN's Security Council is unlikely to refer the matter to the International Criminal Court in The Hague, where it may only end up after a vote in the UN's General Assembly.
Even then it is not clear where such a step could lead, since Israel is not a signatory to the 2002 Rome Treaty that established the court.
http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100820/FOREIGN/708199868/1002/rss
Ban delivers update on Goldstone follow-up
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon made no comment Tuesday, on submissions by Israeli and Palestinian commissions tasked with follow-up on recommendations made by the Goldstone report.
Following a request by the UN General Assembly, Ban submitted to the body a 247-page report on progress and updates, which was described by news wires as having "brief observations" about progress being made, but little else.
The report is the second submitted to the UNGA by Ban, and like the first made no demands or requests of parties charged with following up on allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity found to be credible by a UN-mandated commission lead by Justice Richard Goldstone in 2009.
The Goldstone report said that during Israel's Operation Cast Lead - which saw more than 1,400 Palestinians in the Gaza Strip killed, more than 5,000 injured, 6,000 homes destroyed or damaged beyond use, and government infrastructure in tatters in the space of three weeks - war crimes and crimes against humanity may have been committed by Israeli forces and Gaza militant groups.
Goldstone called for investigations into the incidents outlined in his report, and suggested that the infrastructure to properly internally investigate the claims may not exist in either Israel or Palestine. If internal investigations were not possible, the report said, the issue should be referred to the International Criminal Court.
In November 2009, Ban gave parties three months to launch credible investigations. In February, the UN gave both sides an additional five months to conduct their inquiries.
A team of experts from a UN follow-up committee was in Gaza the week before Ban addressed the UNGA, and his report included their findings.
I reiterate that international human rights and humanitarian law need to be fully respected in all situations and circumstances, Ban wrote in his report.
Accordingly, on several occasions, I have called upon all of the parties to carry out credible, independent domestic investigations into the conduct and consequences of the Gaza conflict. I hope that such steps will be taken wherever there are credible allegations of violations of international human rights and humanitarian law.
The issue of the Goldstone report follow-up is expected to be raised at the 15th session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, which is scheduled to run from 13 September to 1 October.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=309106
UN releases rival reports on Gaza conflict Cast Lead war crimes
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon introduces results of Israeli, Palestinians investigations into alleged war crimes committed during Operation Cast Lead, with no input from Hamas.
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Wednesday released the results of Israeli and Palestinian investigations into alleged war crimes during the conflict in Gaza in the winter of 2008-2009 which did not appear to include any input from Gaza's Hamas rulers.
The UN chief introduced the 247-page report with brief observations that made no comment on the submissions by Israel or the Palestinians, which were requested by the General Assembly. He said it was important to respect international human rights and humanitarian law and expressed hope that "steps will be taken wherever there are credible allegations of violations."
Bombing in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead
Last November, the 192-member world body gave Israel and the Palestinians three months to undertake "independent, credible investigations" into the findings of a UN-appointed expert panel chaired by South African Judge Richard Goldstone. In February, it gave both sides an additional five months to conduct their inquiries.
The 575-page Goldstone report concluded that both sides committed war crimes and possible crimes against humanity during the Gaza war, in which 13 Israelis and almost 1,400 Palestinians were killed, including many civilians.
It said Israel used disproportionate force, deliberately targeted civilians, used Palestinians as human shields, and destroyed civilian infrastructure during its three-week incursion into the Gaza Strip from December 27, 2008 to January 18, 2009 to root out Palestinian rocket squads. It accused Palestinian armed groups including Hamas of deliberately targeting civilians and trying to spread terror through rocket attacks on southern Israel.
Rocket fired at Israel during Operation Cast Lead
Both sides rejected the charges when the Goldstone report was issued, and their positions remained unchanged in the newly released reports.
The General Assembly resolution warned of possible "further action" by UN bodies, including the Security Council, if both sides didn't conduct independent and credible investigations. Whether the assembly plans any follow-up to Wednesday's report remains to be seen.
'Israeli investigations still fall short'
Human Rights Watch called on governments and the UN to maintain pressure on Israel and Hamas to conduct thorough and impartial investigations, and to provide justice to the victims of abuses.
"Israeli investigations still fall far short of being thorough and impartial, while Hamas appears to have done nothing at all to investigate alleged violations," the rights group's program director Iain Levine said in a statement. "We regret that the secretary-general merely passed on the reports he received from Israel and the Palestinian side instead of making the failings of these investigations clear."
UN spokesman Martin Nesirky said Ban was asked by the General Assembly to solicit investigation reports from both sides but was not requested "to express his views on the responses received."
The Israeli military submitted its report on July 21 and said it has made "numerous changes to its operational procedures and policies in order to further enhance the protection of civilians from the hazards of battle and the protection of private property during military operations."
The report said Israel has launched more than 150 investigations in allegations of misconduct or violations of international law during the Gaza conflict. It said the military has opened 47 criminal investigations and initiated criminal prosecutions of four soldiers in separate incidents.
The Palestinian report was submitted by the Independent Investigation Commission established by the Palestinian Authority, which controls the West Bank but lost control of Gaza to Hamas in 2007.
It said "the numbers and the facts speak for themselves" and accused Israel of acting with impunity, disregarding international law, and justifying "its indiscriminate, disproportionate and collective punishment measures against the Palestinian people, as if no limitations applied to Israel."
The Palestinian commission said that since Hamas took over Gaza "legal institutions are being undermined and this has resulted in a high number of violations of international human rights law, negatively impacting the situation of human rights in Gaza."
But the commission emphasized "that there is no moral equivalency" between Israel's violations of international humanitarian and human rights law during the Gaza conflict "and the situation concerning observance and respect for human rights in Gaza by Hamas."
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3939619,00.html
UN silence on Goldstone sends report to obscurity
With the decision by the United Nations chief to offer no comment on the official Palestinian and Israeli responses to the Goldstone Report, the inquiry's findings on possible war crimes during Israel's attack on Gaza in 2008-2009 risk passing into obscurity, Palestinian and Israeli commentators said yesterday.
Ban Ki-moon, the UN secretary-general, late Wednesday released the Palestinian and Israeli replies to the Report with no specific recommendations for further action, indicating a desire to let the issue fade, according to George Giacaman, a Palestinian analyst.
The lack of comment [by Mr Ban] is a political move. As far as the Security Council is concerned, a majority wants to put the Goldstone Report behind them. This is a step in that direction.
A spokesman for Mr Ban said comment was not required of the secretary-general. Mr Ban had instead limited his presentation to the UN's General Assembly to broad comments about the importance of adhering to international law and human rights principles and expressed his hope that steps would be taken wherever there were allegations of violations.
However, Mr Giacaman suggested that the decision not to comment was informed more by political, rather than any legal, considerations.
It is very unfortunate. The fact that there is no comment about whether the [Israeli and Palestinian] responses fulfilled the requirements of being independent and impartial is significant, and indicates that absent serious pressure from outside groups, there will be no follow-up to the Goldstone Report.
The 575-page Goldstone report concluded that both sides committed war crimes and possible crimes against humanity during the Gaza war, in which 13 Israelis and almost 1,400 Palestinians, the vast majority civilians, were killed.
The release of the responses was accompanied by criticism from the UN's Human Rights Council as well as the independent Human Rights Watch, a US-based human rights group.
Both were critical of the lack of response from Hamas, the Islamist group that rules Gaza, which apparently conducted no investigation into allegations in the Goldstone Report that its fighters, along with those of other Palestinian groups in Gaza, had indiscriminately targeted Israeli civilians with rocket fire on southern Israel.
No Hamas official was available for comment yesterday, but Hamas officials have previously rejected the allegations. Palestinians, they say, have a legal right to resist occupation and that while Israeli civilians might have been in the firing line of rockets from Gaza, those weapons are not sophisticated enough to have guidance mechanisms and that the intention was always to strike at military targets.
The Palestinian response instead came from the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, which stated that while Hamas had violated human rights in Gaza there could be no moral equivalence with Israel's actions, for which the numbers spoke for themselves. Israel, the PA concluded, had acted with total impunity and disregard for international law.
The Goldstone Report, named after its head, the South African jurist Richard Goldstone, found that Israel used disproportionate force, deliberately targeted civilians, used Palestinians as human shields and destroyed civilian infrastructure during its three-week invasion of Gaza.
Israel's response to those allegations was also criticised by human rights organisations on Wednesday. In its response, Israel said it had conducted 150 investigations into specific allegations of war crimes. These inquiries, however, fell far short of being thorough and impartial, said Human Rights Watch, a criticism echoed by the Human Rights Council.
Such criticism is likely to be shrugged off in Israel, where both bodies are seen as anti-Israel, in the words of Gerald Steinberg, an Israeli commentator.
This is a familiar game. The Goldstone Report was based on political claims by organisations that have an anti-Israel agenda, such as the Human Rights Council, which is dominated by the Organisation of Islamic Conference.
Mr Steinberg rejected any suggestion that Israel had committed war crimes in Gaza, saying the Goldstone Report conclusions were baseless. He accused the Human Rights Council of double standards for overlooking human rights violations in Arab countries, while he dismissed the Middle East division of Human Rights Watch as ideologues.
Mr Steinberg also suggested that the Goldstone Report would now be set aside, with the US and most European countries now able to claim that Israel has fulfilled its obligations.
It is not clear yet what next for the Goldstone Report. With a US veto at the ready, the UN's Security Council is unlikely to refer the matter to the International Criminal Court in The Hague, where it may only end up after a vote in the UN's General Assembly.
Even then it is not clear where such a step could lead, since Israel is not a signatory to the 2002 Rome Treaty that established the court.
http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100820/FOREIGN/708199868/1002/rss
Ban delivers update on Goldstone follow-up
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon made no comment Tuesday, on submissions by Israeli and Palestinian commissions tasked with follow-up on recommendations made by the Goldstone report.
Following a request by the UN General Assembly, Ban submitted to the body a 247-page report on progress and updates, which was described by news wires as having "brief observations" about progress being made, but little else.
The report is the second submitted to the UNGA by Ban, and like the first made no demands or requests of parties charged with following up on allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity found to be credible by a UN-mandated commission lead by Justice Richard Goldstone in 2009.
The Goldstone report said that during Israel's Operation Cast Lead - which saw more than 1,400 Palestinians in the Gaza Strip killed, more than 5,000 injured, 6,000 homes destroyed or damaged beyond use, and government infrastructure in tatters in the space of three weeks - war crimes and crimes against humanity may have been committed by Israeli forces and Gaza militant groups.
Goldstone called for investigations into the incidents outlined in his report, and suggested that the infrastructure to properly internally investigate the claims may not exist in either Israel or Palestine. If internal investigations were not possible, the report said, the issue should be referred to the International Criminal Court.
In November 2009, Ban gave parties three months to launch credible investigations. In February, the UN gave both sides an additional five months to conduct their inquiries.
A team of experts from a UN follow-up committee was in Gaza the week before Ban addressed the UNGA, and his report included their findings.
I reiterate that international human rights and humanitarian law need to be fully respected in all situations and circumstances, Ban wrote in his report.
Accordingly, on several occasions, I have called upon all of the parties to carry out credible, independent domestic investigations into the conduct and consequences of the Gaza conflict. I hope that such steps will be taken wherever there are credible allegations of violations of international human rights and humanitarian law.
The issue of the Goldstone report follow-up is expected to be raised at the 15th session of the Human Rights Council in Geneva, which is scheduled to run from 13 September to 1 October.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=309106
UN releases rival reports on Gaza conflict Cast Lead war crimes
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon introduces results of Israeli, Palestinians investigations into alleged war crimes committed during Operation Cast Lead, with no input from Hamas.
United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Wednesday released the results of Israeli and Palestinian investigations into alleged war crimes during the conflict in Gaza in the winter of 2008-2009 which did not appear to include any input from Gaza's Hamas rulers.
The UN chief introduced the 247-page report with brief observations that made no comment on the submissions by Israel or the Palestinians, which were requested by the General Assembly. He said it was important to respect international human rights and humanitarian law and expressed hope that "steps will be taken wherever there are credible allegations of violations."
Bombing in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead
Last November, the 192-member world body gave Israel and the Palestinians three months to undertake "independent, credible investigations" into the findings of a UN-appointed expert panel chaired by South African Judge Richard Goldstone. In February, it gave both sides an additional five months to conduct their inquiries.
The 575-page Goldstone report concluded that both sides committed war crimes and possible crimes against humanity during the Gaza war, in which 13 Israelis and almost 1,400 Palestinians were killed, including many civilians.
It said Israel used disproportionate force, deliberately targeted civilians, used Palestinians as human shields, and destroyed civilian infrastructure during its three-week incursion into the Gaza Strip from December 27, 2008 to January 18, 2009 to root out Palestinian rocket squads. It accused Palestinian armed groups including Hamas of deliberately targeting civilians and trying to spread terror through rocket attacks on southern Israel.
Rocket fired at Israel during Operation Cast Lead
Both sides rejected the charges when the Goldstone report was issued, and their positions remained unchanged in the newly released reports.
The General Assembly resolution warned of possible "further action" by UN bodies, including the Security Council, if both sides didn't conduct independent and credible investigations. Whether the assembly plans any follow-up to Wednesday's report remains to be seen.
'Israeli investigations still fall short'
Human Rights Watch called on governments and the UN to maintain pressure on Israel and Hamas to conduct thorough and impartial investigations, and to provide justice to the victims of abuses.
"Israeli investigations still fall far short of being thorough and impartial, while Hamas appears to have done nothing at all to investigate alleged violations," the rights group's program director Iain Levine said in a statement. "We regret that the secretary-general merely passed on the reports he received from Israel and the Palestinian side instead of making the failings of these investigations clear."
UN spokesman Martin Nesirky said Ban was asked by the General Assembly to solicit investigation reports from both sides but was not requested "to express his views on the responses received."
The Israeli military submitted its report on July 21 and said it has made "numerous changes to its operational procedures and policies in order to further enhance the protection of civilians from the hazards of battle and the protection of private property during military operations."
The report said Israel has launched more than 150 investigations in allegations of misconduct or violations of international law during the Gaza conflict. It said the military has opened 47 criminal investigations and initiated criminal prosecutions of four soldiers in separate incidents.
The Palestinian report was submitted by the Independent Investigation Commission established by the Palestinian Authority, which controls the West Bank but lost control of Gaza to Hamas in 2007.
It said "the numbers and the facts speak for themselves" and accused Israel of acting with impunity, disregarding international law, and justifying "its indiscriminate, disproportionate and collective punishment measures against the Palestinian people, as if no limitations applied to Israel."
The Palestinian commission said that since Hamas took over Gaza "legal institutions are being undermined and this has resulted in a high number of violations of international human rights law, negatively impacting the situation of human rights in Gaza."
But the commission emphasized "that there is no moral equivalency" between Israel's violations of international humanitarian and human rights law during the Gaza conflict "and the situation concerning observance and respect for human rights in Gaza by Hamas."
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3939619,00.html
18 aug 2010
Goldstone follow-up committee hears criticism
The credibility of internal Palestinian investigations into allegations of human rights violations by the Gaza government remains questionable, local rights group Al-Mezan told UN officials on Sunday.
The Gaza City human rights organization, which has submitted several reports to the UN on Israeli rights violations, and was recently given consultative status at the UNGC, met with UN representatives from the Committee of Experts appointed to follow-up on the progress of internal reports in to allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity outlined in the Goldstone report.
The group said that the little information produced by Palestinian commissions charged with investigating the allegations of war crimes committed by militant groups in Gaza made it "difficult to assess their credibility at this stage."
During the meeting, Al-Mezan outlined what it believed to be "the structural problems which the Palestinian justice system suffers," and part of what impedes internal investigations. The "complex situation of government under occupation and guerilla activity; especially with the destruction of prison and forensic investigation facility in the Gaza Strip by Israel," also contribute to the undetermined success of the Palestinian probes, a statement explained.
Al-Mezan: Peace from justice
According to its report of the meeting with the UN officials, the Al-Mezan delegation criticized what it called the "prevalent attitude of the international community," saying that in demands like those of the United States which called on Palestinians to drop the issue of the Goldstone report in the Human Rights Council was a request to "sacrifice human rights" in order to give peace a chance.
"Peace must be built on a solid foundation of respecting, rather than violating, human rights and international law," the rights group said.
The group expressed concern over several complaints filed by partner organizations in Israel and the West Bank Adalah and Al Haq - including cases of killing of civilians, destruction of civilian property, and using civilians as human shields - had mostly been closed without indictment, "even in cases where the accounts of the victims and witnesses matched those of the Israeli soldiers who served in the units that committed the violations."
The UN Committee of Experts assigned to follow-up with the progress of the Goldstone allegation investigations included Professor Christian Tomuschat from Germany (chairperson), Param Cumaraswamy from Malaysia and Justice Mary McGowan Davis from the USA. The Committee was appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, pursuant to Resolution A/HRC/Res/13/9. It will report to the Council in its fifteenth session in September 2010.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=308638
Goldstone follow-up committee hears criticism
The credibility of internal Palestinian investigations into allegations of human rights violations by the Gaza government remains questionable, local rights group Al-Mezan told UN officials on Sunday.
The Gaza City human rights organization, which has submitted several reports to the UN on Israeli rights violations, and was recently given consultative status at the UNGC, met with UN representatives from the Committee of Experts appointed to follow-up on the progress of internal reports in to allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity outlined in the Goldstone report.
The group said that the little information produced by Palestinian commissions charged with investigating the allegations of war crimes committed by militant groups in Gaza made it "difficult to assess their credibility at this stage."
During the meeting, Al-Mezan outlined what it believed to be "the structural problems which the Palestinian justice system suffers," and part of what impedes internal investigations. The "complex situation of government under occupation and guerilla activity; especially with the destruction of prison and forensic investigation facility in the Gaza Strip by Israel," also contribute to the undetermined success of the Palestinian probes, a statement explained.
Al-Mezan: Peace from justice
According to its report of the meeting with the UN officials, the Al-Mezan delegation criticized what it called the "prevalent attitude of the international community," saying that in demands like those of the United States which called on Palestinians to drop the issue of the Goldstone report in the Human Rights Council was a request to "sacrifice human rights" in order to give peace a chance.
"Peace must be built on a solid foundation of respecting, rather than violating, human rights and international law," the rights group said.
The group expressed concern over several complaints filed by partner organizations in Israel and the West Bank Adalah and Al Haq - including cases of killing of civilians, destruction of civilian property, and using civilians as human shields - had mostly been closed without indictment, "even in cases where the accounts of the victims and witnesses matched those of the Israeli soldiers who served in the units that committed the violations."
The UN Committee of Experts assigned to follow-up with the progress of the Goldstone allegation investigations included Professor Christian Tomuschat from Germany (chairperson), Param Cumaraswamy from Malaysia and Justice Mary McGowan Davis from the USA. The Committee was appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, pursuant to Resolution A/HRC/Res/13/9. It will report to the Council in its fifteenth session in September 2010.
http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=308638
15 aug 2010
UN experts in Gaza to oversee war probes
The UN commission of independent experts appointed to monitor Israeli and Palestinian probes into allegations of war crimes during Operation Cast Lead arrived in Gaza on Saturday.
Gaza's Foreign Affairs Ministry under-secretary Ahmad Yousef said the delegation arrived through the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt to follow up on recommendations made in justice Richard Goldstone's report.
"The commission will come to monitor and evaluate the legal procedures on both the Israeli and Palestinian side on the Goldstone report, to ensure credibility and transparency during these investigations," he told Ma'an.
The committee, which includes jurists Christian Tomuschat, Mary McGowan and Davis Param Cumaraswamy, will meet with civil society representatives and UN organizations and groups as well as victims and witnesses who testified before the UN's independent fact-finding committee shortly after the winter 2008-09 war.
Members will also meet with the Hamas-run government's commission established to follow up with the recommendations of the report, Yousef added.
The committee was created in June 2010, specifically tasked with monitoring Israeli and Palestinian investigations into the deadly conflict in Gaza that left more than 1,400 people dead and injured 5,000 others.
Its roots were in a March 2010 UN Human Rights Council call for the committee's establishment to supervise "the independence, effective and genuineness of the investigations and their conformity with international standards," the UN reported at the time.
“The committee will focus on the need to ensure accountability for all violations of international humanitarian and international human rights laws during the Gaza conflict, in order to prevent impunity, assure justice, deter further violations and promote peace,” High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said when the committee was established.
On 28 July 2010, the Gaza government delivered the second part of its follow-up report to the UN, responding to allegations brought forward by justice Goldstone, officials said.
UN experts in Gaza to oversee war probes
The UN commission of independent experts appointed to monitor Israeli and Palestinian probes into allegations of war crimes during Operation Cast Lead arrived in Gaza on Saturday.
Gaza's Foreign Affairs Ministry under-secretary Ahmad Yousef said the delegation arrived through the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt to follow up on recommendations made in justice Richard Goldstone's report.
"The commission will come to monitor and evaluate the legal procedures on both the Israeli and Palestinian side on the Goldstone report, to ensure credibility and transparency during these investigations," he told Ma'an.
The committee, which includes jurists Christian Tomuschat, Mary McGowan and Davis Param Cumaraswamy, will meet with civil society representatives and UN organizations and groups as well as victims and witnesses who testified before the UN's independent fact-finding committee shortly after the winter 2008-09 war.
Members will also meet with the Hamas-run government's commission established to follow up with the recommendations of the report, Yousef added.
The committee was created in June 2010, specifically tasked with monitoring Israeli and Palestinian investigations into the deadly conflict in Gaza that left more than 1,400 people dead and injured 5,000 others.
Its roots were in a March 2010 UN Human Rights Council call for the committee's establishment to supervise "the independence, effective and genuineness of the investigations and their conformity with international standards," the UN reported at the time.
“The committee will focus on the need to ensure accountability for all violations of international humanitarian and international human rights laws during the Gaza conflict, in order to prevent impunity, assure justice, deter further violations and promote peace,” High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay said when the committee was established.
On 28 July 2010, the Gaza government delivered the second part of its follow-up report to the UN, responding to allegations brought forward by justice Goldstone, officials said.
25 july 2010
IDF Report Confirming Goldstone’s Key Findings Is Suppressed Inside Israel
An IDF report quietly submitted to the UN two weeks ago acknowledges the IDF's shelling of a UN compound with white phosphorous shells. Previous Israeli reports denied such instances occurred.
A report quietly submitted by IDF Military Advocate General Avichai Mandelblit to the United Nations two weeks ago regarding Israel’s conduct during Operation Cast Lead confirms the key findings of the Goldstone Report. The report (full version here),[PDF] which documents 150 ongoing investigations, has outraged the Israeli Army. “It looks as though they were frightened by Goldstone,” remarked an IDF officer.
Mandelblit’s confirmation of the IDF’s use of white phosphorous in Gaza against a UN compound is one of his report’s most remarkable admissions. He has directly contradicted a lie told over and over again to the Israeli public in the immediate aftermath of Cast Lead, and repeated in an April 2009 IDF report, that “no phosphorous munitions were used on built-up areas.”
IDF Report Confirming Goldstone’s Key Findings Is Suppressed Inside Israel
An IDF report quietly submitted to the UN two weeks ago acknowledges the IDF's shelling of a UN compound with white phosphorous shells. Previous Israeli reports denied such instances occurred.
A report quietly submitted by IDF Military Advocate General Avichai Mandelblit to the United Nations two weeks ago regarding Israel’s conduct during Operation Cast Lead confirms the key findings of the Goldstone Report. The report (full version here),[PDF] which documents 150 ongoing investigations, has outraged the Israeli Army. “It looks as though they were frightened by Goldstone,” remarked an IDF officer.
Mandelblit’s confirmation of the IDF’s use of white phosphorous in Gaza against a UN compound is one of his report’s most remarkable admissions. He has directly contradicted a lie told over and over again to the Israeli public in the immediate aftermath of Cast Lead, and repeated in an April 2009 IDF report, that “no phosphorous munitions were used on built-up areas.”
|
|
Discussion of white phosphorous use is buried in the body of the report, on page 21 in a section on the UNRWA Field Office Compound:
One of the most widely reported incidents during the Gaza Operation involved the UNRWA field office compound, where three individuals were injured and significant property damage resulted from the use of smoke-screen munitions containing white phosphorous. Additional damage occurred due to the use of high explosive shells in the vicinity of the compound. * the deployment of white phosphorous munitions, the Mandelblit Report acknowledges that the IDF Military Advocate General has launched a criminal investigation into the: * killing of 26 members of the Al-Samouni family (p. 6); |
* that the army may have used human shields (pp. 9-11);
* knowingly shelled a UNRWA school filled with children in order to neutralize a single enemy mortar launcher, causing large-scale civilian deaths in the process;
* knowingly attacked a mosque with “powerful” missiles in order to kill two unknown terrorist “operatives” (p. 17);
* bombed a police graduation ceremony (p. 19), killing four civilians in the process (according to Goldstone the IDF killed 9 civilians and 99 cops);
* killed a civilian raising a white flag (p. 22);
fired on a horse-drawn carriage carrying wounded civilians, killing a number of people in the process (p. 24);
* fired flechette-filled tank shells in the immediate vicinity of a “condolence tent,” killing civilians in the process (p. 25);
* bulldozed the Sawafeary Chicken Coops (pp. 27-28) in order to obtain “a clear line of sight” for soldiers in the area;
* destroyed a cement packaging plant in a vain search for tunnels (p. 29);
* destroyed a series of factories, claiming it “did not know the structures were used to produce food products” (p. 30);
* and implicitly acknowledged that it destroyed private property (p. 33).
Although Mandelblit lays the blame for many killings at the feet of IDF commanders, he invokes the army’s firing policy to justify the killings. So long as soldiers claimed in their testimonies that they may have seen enemy operatives in the area (Mandelblit acknowledges extreme difficulty gathering testimony from Palestinian victims), he was able to claim that the soldiers followed the “Law of Armed Conflict.”
What is the Law of Armed Conflict? It is a set of combat guidelines specially refined for IDF army operations by Israeli military philosopher Asa Kasher In defining his version of the law, Kasher wrote, “the responsibility for distinguishing between terrorists and noncombatants is not placed upon [Israel’s] shoulders.” He added, “Sending a soldier [to Gaza] 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? 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.” In other words, the killing of civilians is justified according to Israeli military regulations if a soldier is able to establish having felt a sense of danger.
It is unclear whether Mandelblit’s report will lead to a roll-back of Kasher’s rules of engagement. The report’s recommendations have already been met with fierce resentment from the IDF’s officer corps, so it might be unrealistic to expect that they will ever be put into practice, especially since Israel seems to be gearing up for a potentially bloody campaign in urban areas in Southern Lebanon. The report’s real value, then, is as a confirmation of Goldstone’s key findings. Even as the most conservative investigation of IDF conduct during Cast Lead, Mandelblit exposed a consistent pattern of destruction of Palestinian civilian infrastructure and disregard for civilian life.
Unfortunately, the devastating findings contained in the report have not reached the Israeli mainstream. Articles about the report are buried deep in Israeli newspapers while according to Yedioth Aharonoth, the Israeli Foreign Ministry has refused to make it available on its Hebrew website (it’s only on the English site).
Maariv columnist Ofer Shelakh was one of the few Israeli public figures to address the official silence following Mandeblit’s release. He wrote in a July 23 column about both the IDF’s Mandelblit report and Eiland report on the Gaza flotilla (no link; from a Hebrew only translation from p. 23 of the Maariv weekend supplement):
What is the truth and why suddenly do we reply to the UN in terms different from those offered to Israel’s citizens? The same applies to the legal procedures taken against IDF officers, the trial of the Commander of the Gaza brigade, the investigation of former Giv’ati brigade commander Ylan Malka, of which we hear only from Israeli replies to foreign authorities.
It seems that according to the decision-makers in Israel’s Defense system we don’t want to know, we don’t have to know {re the Mandelblit Report) or we agree that all this is merely for foreign consumption, to repel anti-Israel criticism. Israelis prefer to think that the IDF operates brilliantly, that its commanders make no mistakes, and that its firing policy is considerate and moral, and that the problem in “Cast Lead” was the firing policy rather than the decisions of the local commanders.
Maybe this cynical approach to the Israeli public is justified. It is a fact that no public outcry arose after the black picture emerging from [the Mandelblit Report], but in the IDF, certainly among its medium ranks, many understand the damage this causes to the standards of telling the truth, and of telling the whole truth.
http://fwd4.me/0ASu
* knowingly shelled a UNRWA school filled with children in order to neutralize a single enemy mortar launcher, causing large-scale civilian deaths in the process;
* knowingly attacked a mosque with “powerful” missiles in order to kill two unknown terrorist “operatives” (p. 17);
* bombed a police graduation ceremony (p. 19), killing four civilians in the process (according to Goldstone the IDF killed 9 civilians and 99 cops);
* killed a civilian raising a white flag (p. 22);
fired on a horse-drawn carriage carrying wounded civilians, killing a number of people in the process (p. 24);
* fired flechette-filled tank shells in the immediate vicinity of a “condolence tent,” killing civilians in the process (p. 25);
* bulldozed the Sawafeary Chicken Coops (pp. 27-28) in order to obtain “a clear line of sight” for soldiers in the area;
* destroyed a cement packaging plant in a vain search for tunnels (p. 29);
* destroyed a series of factories, claiming it “did not know the structures were used to produce food products” (p. 30);
* and implicitly acknowledged that it destroyed private property (p. 33).
Although Mandelblit lays the blame for many killings at the feet of IDF commanders, he invokes the army’s firing policy to justify the killings. So long as soldiers claimed in their testimonies that they may have seen enemy operatives in the area (Mandelblit acknowledges extreme difficulty gathering testimony from Palestinian victims), he was able to claim that the soldiers followed the “Law of Armed Conflict.”
What is the Law of Armed Conflict? It is a set of combat guidelines specially refined for IDF army operations by Israeli military philosopher Asa Kasher In defining his version of the law, Kasher wrote, “the responsibility for distinguishing between terrorists and noncombatants is not placed upon [Israel’s] shoulders.” He added, “Sending a soldier [to Gaza] 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? 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.” In other words, the killing of civilians is justified according to Israeli military regulations if a soldier is able to establish having felt a sense of danger.
It is unclear whether Mandelblit’s report will lead to a roll-back of Kasher’s rules of engagement. The report’s recommendations have already been met with fierce resentment from the IDF’s officer corps, so it might be unrealistic to expect that they will ever be put into practice, especially since Israel seems to be gearing up for a potentially bloody campaign in urban areas in Southern Lebanon. The report’s real value, then, is as a confirmation of Goldstone’s key findings. Even as the most conservative investigation of IDF conduct during Cast Lead, Mandelblit exposed a consistent pattern of destruction of Palestinian civilian infrastructure and disregard for civilian life.
Unfortunately, the devastating findings contained in the report have not reached the Israeli mainstream. Articles about the report are buried deep in Israeli newspapers while according to Yedioth Aharonoth, the Israeli Foreign Ministry has refused to make it available on its Hebrew website (it’s only on the English site).
Maariv columnist Ofer Shelakh was one of the few Israeli public figures to address the official silence following Mandeblit’s release. He wrote in a July 23 column about both the IDF’s Mandelblit report and Eiland report on the Gaza flotilla (no link; from a Hebrew only translation from p. 23 of the Maariv weekend supplement):
What is the truth and why suddenly do we reply to the UN in terms different from those offered to Israel’s citizens? The same applies to the legal procedures taken against IDF officers, the trial of the Commander of the Gaza brigade, the investigation of former Giv’ati brigade commander Ylan Malka, of which we hear only from Israeli replies to foreign authorities.
It seems that according to the decision-makers in Israel’s Defense system we don’t want to know, we don’t have to know {re the Mandelblit Report) or we agree that all this is merely for foreign consumption, to repel anti-Israel criticism. Israelis prefer to think that the IDF operates brilliantly, that its commanders make no mistakes, and that its firing policy is considerate and moral, and that the problem in “Cast Lead” was the firing policy rather than the decisions of the local commanders.
Maybe this cynical approach to the Israeli public is justified. It is a fact that no public outcry arose after the black picture emerging from [the Mandelblit Report], but in the IDF, certainly among its medium ranks, many understand the damage this causes to the standards of telling the truth, and of telling the whole truth.
http://fwd4.me/0ASu
22 july 2010
MESS Report / Gaza war probes are changing Israel's defiant ways
Israel's approach to dealing with violations of the laws of war during Operation Cast Lead has shifted radically since the fighting ended a year and a half ago.
Israel's policy on how to deal with violations of the laws of war during Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip has undergone a radical change during the year and half since the fighting ended. In the meantime, it seems, Israel has paid the full price for its original position without managing to reap any significant profits from its turnabout.
Right after the fighting ended, the Israel Defense Forces' approach was that everything done in Gaza was completely proper. Violations by individual soldiers, if they occurred at all, were very rare, and in any case, things like that happen in wartime.
The IDF's internal probes were also begun with a feeling there was no need for haste. The message that trickled down from the top, even if never stated explicitly, was that it was better to keep the probes low profile and avoid legal action whenever possible. If we don't say anything, the theory went, it will all blow over.
Testimony that contradicted the official line (such as that given by graduates of the Rabin premilitary academy and soldiers who spoke to the Breaking the Silence organization ) was publicly denounced as lies that aid the enemy. The United Nation's Goldstone Commission - which Israelis, with considerable justice, suspected from the start of blatant bias in the Palestinians' favor - received no official cooperation from Israel.
But international criticism of the Gaza operation just kept growing, reaching its crescendo with publication of the Goldstone report. In response, Israel changed its tune.
Many of the army's operational probes, which had been completed in the interim, were followed by criminal legal proceedings or at least disciplinary action against officers and soldiers involved in problematic incidents. The Foreign Ministry and the IDF were also careful to send periodic reports to the UN that detailed the steps Israel had taken since the last report. The latest of these bulletins was sent off on Tuesday.
Now, the time has come for the next, predictable, episode of this saga. Just as happened during the first intifada (and, to a lesser degree, during the second as well ), officers are growing increasingly frustrated with the intensive legal scrutiny of their actions. The military prosecution and the military police are just doing their assigned job, but many field officers feel as if the job is being done with excessive diligence, with no concern for the toll it takes on them.
A few weeks ago, Army Radio reported some astonishing statistics: The Military Police have thus far questioned more than 500 officers and soldiers who took part in the Gaza operation. Those questioned included almost every battalion commander involved in the fighting, and some of these commanders have been questioned around 10 times already. One division commander and one brigade commander have already been reprimanded, and another brigade commander is still under investigation for the accidental killing of 21 civilians in an aerial attack on Gaza City.
In conversations with battalion and brigade commanders in recent weeks, the following allegations have been heard repeatedly: Officers are being harassed by a plethora of interrogations that have no justification. Reports on the steps that have been taken, including indictments or the opening of investigations against senior officers, have been given to the UN and the media even before the army itself is informed. And the changes now being ordered in the IDF's combat doctrine have not been sufficiently explained to the troops.
These are all serious allegations. The IDF's high command must address them thoroughly if it wants to prevent a crisis of motivation among the troops on the front lines.
MESS Report / Gaza war probes are changing Israel's defiant ways
Israel's approach to dealing with violations of the laws of war during Operation Cast Lead has shifted radically since the fighting ended a year and a half ago.
Israel's policy on how to deal with violations of the laws of war during Operation Cast Lead in the Gaza Strip has undergone a radical change during the year and half since the fighting ended. In the meantime, it seems, Israel has paid the full price for its original position without managing to reap any significant profits from its turnabout.
Right after the fighting ended, the Israel Defense Forces' approach was that everything done in Gaza was completely proper. Violations by individual soldiers, if they occurred at all, were very rare, and in any case, things like that happen in wartime.
The IDF's internal probes were also begun with a feeling there was no need for haste. The message that trickled down from the top, even if never stated explicitly, was that it was better to keep the probes low profile and avoid legal action whenever possible. If we don't say anything, the theory went, it will all blow over.
Testimony that contradicted the official line (such as that given by graduates of the Rabin premilitary academy and soldiers who spoke to the Breaking the Silence organization ) was publicly denounced as lies that aid the enemy. The United Nation's Goldstone Commission - which Israelis, with considerable justice, suspected from the start of blatant bias in the Palestinians' favor - received no official cooperation from Israel.
But international criticism of the Gaza operation just kept growing, reaching its crescendo with publication of the Goldstone report. In response, Israel changed its tune.
Many of the army's operational probes, which had been completed in the interim, were followed by criminal legal proceedings or at least disciplinary action against officers and soldiers involved in problematic incidents. The Foreign Ministry and the IDF were also careful to send periodic reports to the UN that detailed the steps Israel had taken since the last report. The latest of these bulletins was sent off on Tuesday.
Now, the time has come for the next, predictable, episode of this saga. Just as happened during the first intifada (and, to a lesser degree, during the second as well ), officers are growing increasingly frustrated with the intensive legal scrutiny of their actions. The military prosecution and the military police are just doing their assigned job, but many field officers feel as if the job is being done with excessive diligence, with no concern for the toll it takes on them.
A few weeks ago, Army Radio reported some astonishing statistics: The Military Police have thus far questioned more than 500 officers and soldiers who took part in the Gaza operation. Those questioned included almost every battalion commander involved in the fighting, and some of these commanders have been questioned around 10 times already. One division commander and one brigade commander have already been reprimanded, and another brigade commander is still under investigation for the accidental killing of 21 civilians in an aerial attack on Gaza City.
In conversations with battalion and brigade commanders in recent weeks, the following allegations have been heard repeatedly: Officers are being harassed by a plethora of interrogations that have no justification. Reports on the steps that have been taken, including indictments or the opening of investigations against senior officers, have been given to the UN and the media even before the army itself is informed. And the changes now being ordered in the IDF's combat doctrine have not been sufficiently explained to the troops.
These are all serious allegations. The IDF's high command must address them thoroughly if it wants to prevent a crisis of motivation among the troops on the front lines.
New Israeli report on Operation Cast Lead confirms Goldstone report’s main findings
Defense Minister Ehud Barak described it as “false, distorted, and irresponsible“.
Information Minister Yuli Edelstein called it “anti-Semitic“.
Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren said it “insidiously… portrayed the Jews as the deliberate murderers of innocents“.
Foreign Minister Lieberman argued that its true purpose “was to destroy Israel’s image, in service of countries where the terms ‘human rights’ and ‘combat ethics’ do not even appear in their dictionaries“.
And the US House of Representatives banded together in bipartisan harmony to pass a resolution (344–36) that called “on the President and the Secretary of State to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration” of it.
For nearly a year now, vicious attacks on the Goldstone report and on Judge Goldstone himself have been the thing for Israel’s numerous apologists to do.
There is just one not-so-minor problem with this knee-jerk criticism of the report and infinite stream of ad hominem libel against its main author. A majority of the most damning—and damaging—war crimes that are alleged to have taken place have now been confirmed by the IDF’s own investigations into the matter, themselves only conducted in an effort to derail the Goldstone report’s referral to the International Criminal Court.
IDF confirms over 20 gravest findings of the Goldstone Report Several of the most dramatic instances of war crimes, which previously stirred Israel’s defenders into fits, are now publicly admitted by the IDF in the recent update to its official response (which can be found here).[PDF]
Some examples of war crimes include:
Israel admits it did not minimize civilian casualties The IDF report states: “IDF orders include the obligation to take all feasible precautions in order to minimize the incidental loss of civilian life or property” [emphasis added]. Israelis accept this statement as an article of faith and become unglued at the suggestion that “everything possible” wasn’t done to ensure the safety of innocent people. This expression of faith is often followed by the questions: “What? Do you think Israel wants to kill civilians?” These questions are of course answered far more accurately with data on casualties than with ideological blindness.
They are also answered, however, through inadvertent slips in the public relations machine that shapes international media coverage of Israel/Palestine. Today, we are treated to a spate of articles across the English and Hebrew-language press (e.g. here and here) about how Israel “promises” to do a better job of not killing innocent human beings next time around.
“The IDF has … implemented operational changes in its orders and combat doctrine designed to further minimise civilian casualties and damage to civilian property in the future,” it said.
“In particular, the IDF has adopted important new procedures designed to enhance the protection of civilians in urban warfare, for instance by further emphasising that the protection of civilians is an integral part of an IDF commander’s mission.”
Perhaps in a future “update” the IDF can enlighten the world as to how it was previously taking “all feasible precautions” and yet finds only now new tactics to protect civilians. Perhaps the IDF spokesperson can further explain how emphasizing to its soldiers that “protection of civilians is an integral part” of the mission is considered an “operational change” from earlier practice. One must presume that protection of civilians has not been given sufficient attention until now, and only Goldstone’s courageous and now confirmed report has forced Israel to reconsider the meaning of “all feasible precautions” and “minimize civilian casualties”. As Magnes Zionist has pointed out, Israel seems to think it can get away with a “I didn’t do it but will try harder next time” approach.
Or perhaps the IDF’s commanders and soldiers got a bit confused by all this talk of “protecting civilians” and that talk of the “Dahiya Doctrine.”
But all of this gives the IDF a bit too much credit, too much benefit of the doubt. This new report is nothing more than a desperate tactic to try and avoid criminal prosecution for war crimes and possible crimes against humanity in the ICC. Most of the IDF’s “investigations” have already been dismissed as part of this whitewash, notwithstanding all the irate IDF officers unaccustomed to the pretense of accountability.
All it teaches us is four concrete things:
(1) the Goldstone report did a stunningly good job in identifying possible war crimes despite Israel’s concerted non-cooperation with the commission,
(2) Israel has by its own admission failed to adequately protect civilians in war,
(3) many people owe Judge Goldstone a sincere, begging apology for the disgraceful manner in which he has been treated, and
(4) justice for the Palestinian victims of Israeli terrorism is still far away.
http://fwd4.me/yuK
Defense Minister Ehud Barak described it as “false, distorted, and irresponsible“.
Information Minister Yuli Edelstein called it “anti-Semitic“.
Israeli Ambassador to the US Michael Oren said it “insidiously… portrayed the Jews as the deliberate murderers of innocents“.
Foreign Minister Lieberman argued that its true purpose “was to destroy Israel’s image, in service of countries where the terms ‘human rights’ and ‘combat ethics’ do not even appear in their dictionaries“.
And the US House of Representatives banded together in bipartisan harmony to pass a resolution (344–36) that called “on the President and the Secretary of State to oppose unequivocally any endorsement or further consideration” of it.
For nearly a year now, vicious attacks on the Goldstone report and on Judge Goldstone himself have been the thing for Israel’s numerous apologists to do.
There is just one not-so-minor problem with this knee-jerk criticism of the report and infinite stream of ad hominem libel against its main author. A majority of the most damning—and damaging—war crimes that are alleged to have taken place have now been confirmed by the IDF’s own investigations into the matter, themselves only conducted in an effort to derail the Goldstone report’s referral to the International Criminal Court.
IDF confirms over 20 gravest findings of the Goldstone Report Several of the most dramatic instances of war crimes, which previously stirred Israel’s defenders into fits, are now publicly admitted by the IDF in the recent update to its official response (which can be found here).[PDF]
Some examples of war crimes include:
- White phosphorous in urban areas: This one is probably the most famous admission that emerged after a series of easily disproved lies. Israel’s initial response was one of absolute denial, indeed indignation, that people would suggest it had used banned chemical weapons in densely populated areas. But the steady stream of photos and videos depicting phosphorous burns on children and buildings eventually forced Israel to admit it had used these prohibited weapons.
- The murder of two unarmed Palestinians carrying white flags of surrender.
- The Al-Fakhura Street incident: Israeli mortar fire at a site adjacent to a UN Relief Works Agency compound resulted in multiple civilian deaths.
- The use of innocent Palestinians as human shields: The Goldstone report explains that in order “to carry out house searches as human shields the Israeli soldiers took off AD/03’s blindfold but he remained handcuffed. He was forced to walk in front of the soldiers and told that, if he saw someone in the house but failed to tell them, he would be killed. He was instructed to search each room in each house cupboard by cupboard. After one house was completed he was taken to another house with a gun pressed against his head and told to carry out the same procedure there. He was punched, slapped and insulted throughout the process.” The new Israeli report identifies this anonymous human shield AD/03 and confirms this episode. Other cases of human shield use, e.g. Abbas Ahmad Ibrahim Halawa and Mahmoud Abd Rabbo al-Ajrami, were also confirmed.
- Al-Samouni family massacre: The Israelis attacked two houses of the Samouni family, killing 23 people in total. Subsequently, they prevented the Red Cross and PRCS from providing care to the wounded and dying for three days. Confirmed by Israel and the subject of a military investigation.
- Firing on Al Maqadmah and other mosques during prayer time.
Israel admits it did not minimize civilian casualties The IDF report states: “IDF orders include the obligation to take all feasible precautions in order to minimize the incidental loss of civilian life or property” [emphasis added]. Israelis accept this statement as an article of faith and become unglued at the suggestion that “everything possible” wasn’t done to ensure the safety of innocent people. This expression of faith is often followed by the questions: “What? Do you think Israel wants to kill civilians?” These questions are of course answered far more accurately with data on casualties than with ideological blindness.
They are also answered, however, through inadvertent slips in the public relations machine that shapes international media coverage of Israel/Palestine. Today, we are treated to a spate of articles across the English and Hebrew-language press (e.g. here and here) about how Israel “promises” to do a better job of not killing innocent human beings next time around.
“The IDF has … implemented operational changes in its orders and combat doctrine designed to further minimise civilian casualties and damage to civilian property in the future,” it said.
“In particular, the IDF has adopted important new procedures designed to enhance the protection of civilians in urban warfare, for instance by further emphasising that the protection of civilians is an integral part of an IDF commander’s mission.”
Perhaps in a future “update” the IDF can enlighten the world as to how it was previously taking “all feasible precautions” and yet finds only now new tactics to protect civilians. Perhaps the IDF spokesperson can further explain how emphasizing to its soldiers that “protection of civilians is an integral part” of the mission is considered an “operational change” from earlier practice. One must presume that protection of civilians has not been given sufficient attention until now, and only Goldstone’s courageous and now confirmed report has forced Israel to reconsider the meaning of “all feasible precautions” and “minimize civilian casualties”. As Magnes Zionist has pointed out, Israel seems to think it can get away with a “I didn’t do it but will try harder next time” approach.
Or perhaps the IDF’s commanders and soldiers got a bit confused by all this talk of “protecting civilians” and that talk of the “Dahiya Doctrine.”
But all of this gives the IDF a bit too much credit, too much benefit of the doubt. This new report is nothing more than a desperate tactic to try and avoid criminal prosecution for war crimes and possible crimes against humanity in the ICC. Most of the IDF’s “investigations” have already been dismissed as part of this whitewash, notwithstanding all the irate IDF officers unaccustomed to the pretense of accountability.
All it teaches us is four concrete things:
(1) the Goldstone report did a stunningly good job in identifying possible war crimes despite Israel’s concerted non-cooperation with the commission,
(2) Israel has by its own admission failed to adequately protect civilians in war,
(3) many people owe Judge Goldstone a sincere, begging apology for the disgraceful manner in which he has been treated, and
(4) justice for the Palestinian victims of Israeli terrorism is still far away.
http://fwd4.me/yuK
