ICRC: World holds Israel to legal double standard
The head of the International Red Cross in Israel and the Palestinian areas said Tuesday that the world was holding Israel to a double standard when it came to war crimes allegations.Israel Should Get Its Retaliation In First
Jacques De Maio was one of a number of non-Israeli officials speaking at an Institute for National Security Studies conference on the law of armed conflict in urban areas.
“Why is there so much more focus on Israel than on Syria [and] other places where many more civilians are dying?” the ICRC official asked rhetorically, pointing out that “in other ongoing wars, more civilians die in one week than in Israeli wars in a full year.”
While De Maio made that argument without using the phrase “war crimes” to refer to the IDF’s actions in this summer’s Gaza operation, he added that both Israel and Hamas “violated international law” during the fighting.
He also defended his dialogue with the IDF and Israel regarding its actions and the law of armed conflict. He said there had even been a petition to cancel his speech at the conference so he would not appear to be endorsing the IDF’s conduct during the summer operation.
But De Maio said the dialogue was not endorsement, as “we don’t endorse Israel, and when we talk to Hamas, the Taliban and other terrorists, we don’t endorse them, either.”
The ICRC official said that “our goal is to influence those fighting to be more humanitarian.”
To defend itself while also bolstering the long-term interest of other liberal democracies engaged in the struggle against transnational terrorism, Israel should undertake a preemptive strike, both in the legal arena and in the court of public opinion. The facts and the law are on Israel’s side.Livni: We must join world in fight against terrorism
In this hostile international environment, knowledgeable Israelis are concerned about the March 2015 publication of the Schabas report. Either from lack of familiarity with the international laws of war or out of misplaced sympathy for the conventional view, some intellectuals here, including law professors, are tempted to conclude that Israel has few legal responses. They seem to believe that Israel should contritely accept the UNHRC's factual findings, legal conclusions, and practical recommendations and concentrate on damage control.There is no chance that Netanyahu's government will adopt that approach, nor should it. Whether it will launch an offensive against the UNHRC’s kangaroo court is another question.Here are five defective claims likely to inform the Schabas commission, and outlines of the replies that Israel should be honing for a preemptive strike in advance of the commission's forthcoming report.
Speaking at the same INSS conference, IDF Advocate-General Maj.- Gen. Danny Efroni said there was no precedent for the extent to which Hamas systematically endangered civilians directly and indirectly as human shields during Operation Protective Edge this summer.
Operation Pillar of Defense in November 2012 had a relatively extremely low civilian casualty toll, Efroni said, adding that he had warned in an article following the war that low casualties could not always be achieved because of Hamas’s tactics.
The IDF had to rework its tactics in real time due to Hamas tactics, even as Israel is at the forefront of Western nations in developing tools to comply with international law in urban environments, fighting against terrorists who intentionally endanger their own civilian populace, he said.
Efroni said that the army was internationally criticized – unfairly and for political reasons, in his opinion – for three aspects: the IDF’s striking of Hamas members’ private homes, the large cumulative number of civilian casualties, and the use of artillery in urban fighting.
Hamas members used their houses as command centers, in which they also gave orders regarding the firing of rockets at Israel, he said, adding that criticism of the IDF for hitting them would simply encourage Hamas to continue its illegal tactic.
Next, Efroni slammed the IDF’s critics for leaning hard on Israel, which at least tried to take precautions, as opposed to on Hamas, regarding the high civilian casualties.