Ray Cook - As I See It

Israel, Zionism and the Media

Tag: IDF (Page 3 of 3)

Human Rights Watch and its Marxist lies about Israel in Gaza

16/08/2009 / / 0 Comments

The Israel GPO (Government Press office) has taken the unusual step of releasing a news briefing (which is an article printed in Ma’ariv by Ben-Dror Yemini) discrediting HRW’s recent accusations that during the recent Gaza conflict (Operation Cast Lead) Israeli soldiers fired on, and killed, civilians waving or displaying the white flag, an International symbol of surrender of or non-combatancy. Such behaviour, is, of course, a war crime.

But the GPO reports that the Ma’ariv article reveals that the author of the HRW report, Joe Stork :

…a senior official in Human Rights Watch,…….. is a fanatical supporter of the elimination of Israel.  He was a friend of Saddam, ruled out negotiations and supported the Munich Massacre, which “provided an important boost in morale among Palestinians.”

On Thursday last, Joe Stork held a news conference where he accused Israel of these crimes. But Stork is revealed as being far from an objective reporter:

Several times in the past, Stork has called for the destruction of Israel and is a veteran supporter of Palestinian terrorism.  Already as a student, Stork was amongst the founders of a new radical leftist group, which was formed based on the claim that other leftist groups were not sufficiently critical of Israel and of the United States’ support of it.  Already in 1976, Stork participated in a conference organized by Saddam Hussein which celebrated the first anniversary of the UN decision that equated Zionism with racism.  Stork, needless to say, arrived at the conference as a prominent supporter of Palestinian terrorism and as an opponent to the existence of the State of Israel.  He also labeled Palestinian violence against Israel as “revolutionary potential of the Palestinian masses” – language that was typical of fanatical Marxists.

So the question is: what is HRW doing employing someone who is so clearly biased? As an NGO which claims to present facts in a non-political, non-partisan way, the use of Stork shows up HRW for what it really is when it comes to Israel – biased and prepared to be represented by a renowned Israel hater and Marxist who sees the conflict through the prism of his own political prejudices rather than as a seeker of impartial truths.

The article continues:

Stork expressed his position that the global Left must subordinate itself to the PLO in order to strengthen elements that opposed any accord with Israel.  It would seem that he has not changed his ways since then.  He is still conceptually subordinate to those who have maintained their opposition to the existence of the State of Israel.  Once the world’s radical left supported the PLO.  Today, part of the global Left supports Hamas.

…….

This is the man.  A radical Marxist whose positions have not changed over the years.  On the contrary.  Objectivity, neutrality or sticking to the facts are not Stork’s strong suit.  He even proudly exclaims that there is no need for neutrality.

In other words Stork is firmly in the camp of Israel’s enemies, sees no reaqson for impartiality and is prepared, presumably, therefore, to say or do anything to destroy Israel. The words Marxism and Truth have never been comfortably accommodated in  the same sentence.

Yemini concludes:

Israel is called upon to provide explanations in the wake of Human Rights Watch reports.  It is about time that Israel publicly exposed the ideological roots of several of this organization’s leaders and demands the dismissal of these supporters of terrorism and haters of Israel.  Until then, Israel, justifiably, cannot seriously comment on criticism from such a body.

I second that!

So, you may well ask, just because he is biased, does that mean the stories are false? Quite right too. The BBC interviewed Mark Regev, spokesman for the Israeli Prime Minister on this very issue. (One can just see the BBC News team rubbing its hands once again with glee on more stories of the IDF’s “war crimes”).

Mark Regev says:

I would want to say two things though about this report. I think anyone who reads it sees that it is based once again on a very problematic methodology. In other words, Human Rights Watch is relying on testimony from people who are not free to speak out against the Hamas regime

Absolutely!  Where did Stork get his information? From Palestinians in Gaza who exist under a terror regime which uses its own citizens as human shields and intimidates them into toeing the Hamas line when they engage with journalists. It is clear to anyone who is impartial that interviewing Gazans, who are in all likelihood produced by Hamas for the all-too-willing Mr Stork, cannot be considered conducive to finding the truth. And when you ignore the other side completely, produce unsubstantiated claims by persons unknown then the whole story smacks of vicious propaganda.

Mark Regev, sadly, appears evasive in the interview, he always comes over as usch and I think he should be replaced by someone in better command of the facts. But the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs website, which quotes the BBC interview with Mark Regev, appears to realise that his performance was far from adequate and reminds us that the IDF issued a 150+ page report on its actions in Gaza where it addressed many of the issues for which it has been accused of criminal behaviour and adds these telling paragraphs:

Sadly, Hamas terror operatives ruthlessly pervert the intent of the IDF’s obligations to prevent harm to civilians by exploiting those with white flags as cover for belligerent action and to protect themselves from return fire. Any person who displays a white flag in this way acts illegally, does not enjoy protection from retaliatory action, and endangers nearby civilian populations. As a clear example of this practice, the video below shows a Hamas terrorist planting an explosive device and hiding amongst civilians who are waving white flags.

Merely displaying a white flag does not automatically grant immunity, and in cases of suspicion that a person holding a white flag is endangering security forces, they are authorized to take necessary precautionary steps and, in accordance with rules of engagement, to verify and neutralize the threat.

This is the point about many of the IDF’s perceived infringements during Cast Lead. Hamas do not observe ANY rules of international law, the Geneva Convention or any conventions. They are a  terror organisation which is prepared to use any means and every dirty trick and to sacrifice its own population in order to attack Israel either physically or by propaganda to which the world’s press is only too willing to give credibility. Hamas flouts the norms of warfare by using white flags to cover its own combatants. I am sure it sent out innocent people as well as its own forces with white flags to evade capture or attack or as a cover for its operations in flagrant breach of international law.

The world seems to believe that Hamas is just an army like the IDF. It isn’t. To make any moral comparison is repugnant.

Hamas does not answer to the world’s press, its own people and certainly not to NGO’s. It is virtually immune from criticism by the UN . Yet any lie it chooses to tell, often given a fig-leaf of credibility by its success in inducing a response from the IDF which appears to flout international law, is believed and swallowed whole by every news outlet in the world (including some in Israel).

Here’s some actual evidence from an IDF video on YouTube:

So before Israel is condemned for shooting white flag carriers, make sure they aren’t terrorists  or protecting terrorists.

If you want to believe your favourite terror organisation, Hamas, that’s your choice. But think. Maybe your political views, like Mr Stork’s, have coloured your perceptions.

IDF report does not go far enough

25/04/2009 / / 0 Comments

Last week the Israeli Defence Force (IDF) published its preliminary findings into the conduct of its forces during its Gaza offensive (Operation Cast Lead). A more detailed investigation is scheduled to be completed by June. This initial report is not comprehensive and incidents are still being investigated.

The findings will not be unexpected either from those who are inclined to to believe that the IDF did not commit any crimes and those who believe it definitely did.

The former group, although disturbed by many reports which came out of Gaza at the time and subsequent stories from Israeli soldiers, would characterise the IDF as a predominantly moral army which like any army has some soldiers whose actions may be immoral, reprehensible or worse. They would not, however, characterise the IDF and, therefore, Israel, as intent on criminal acts or anything other than displaying the greatest possible care to avoid unnecessary civilian casualties. I would include myself in this group.

The latter group, which, like the first, will probably have already made up its mind, will see the report as a whitewash.

So let’s examine the findings.

Five investigation teams were set up and headed by senior officers who had not been directly involved in the operation.

The teams looked at incidents where UN facilities were fired on, incidents involving medical facilities and vehicles, deaths and injuries to uninvolved civilians, the use of white phosphorous and damage to buildings and infrastructure.

The first finding was:

The investigations showed that throughout the fighting in Gaza, the IDF operated in accordance with international law.

Secondly, the IDF operating to very high moral standards against an enemy which used human shields.

The report now goes on to justify the operation as a response to eight years of rocket and mortar fire including three years of such attacks since Israel withdrew from Gaza and abandoned its settlements. Hundreds of thousands of Israelis lived in constant fear of these attacks which were indiscriminate by their very nature and, therefore, contrary to all norms of international law.

Thee battlefied is described:

The fighting in Gaza took place in a complex battlefield against an enemy who chose, as a conscious part of its doctrine, to locate itself in the midst of the civilian population. The enemy booby trapped its houses with explosives, fired from the schools attended by its own children and used its own people as human shields while cynically abusing the IDF’s legal and ethical commitment to avoid injuring uninvolved civilians. 

This is an aspect of the conflict that is barely reported in the Westerm media and was overwhelmed by the concentration of civilian suffering without regard to the true background to that suffering.

Now the extreme lengths the IDF went to to avoid civilian casualties are described:

In order to ensure compliance with the IDF’s obligations under international law, the IDF invested an enormous effort and huge resources to warn civilians in the Gaza Strip away from harm. The IDF dropped more than 2,250,000 leaflets during the fighting, used Palestinian radio, made personal telephone warnings to more than 165,000 Gaza residents and carried out a special warning shot procedure (“A knock on the roof”), in order to ensure that Palestinian civilians could avoid harm. Additionally, the IDF made extensive use of accurate munitions, wherever and whenever possible, to minimize harm to civilians. In addition, during the operation the IDF authorized humanitarian convoys to enter the Gaza and employed a humanitarian recess for several hours a day….

Like other militaries that are forced to fight a terrorist enemy that hides and operates under a civilian cover, the IDF had to face difficult moral dilemmas as a result of the illegitimate approach of Hamas. This approach turned Gaza’s urban areas into a battle field and intentionally made use of uninvolved civilians, civilian buildings and sensitive humanitarian facilities (i.e. hospitals, religious and educational institutions and facilities associated with the UN and other international organizations). …

In some of the incidents the IDF even placed more limits on its actions than required under international law, and acted with restraint in order to avoid harming civilians.

Crucially, mistakes are given very little coverage:

Notwithstanding this, the investigations revealed a very small number of incidents in which intelligence or operational errors took place during the fighting. These unfortunate incidents were unavoidable and occur in all combat situations, in particular of the type which Hamas forced on the IDF, by choosing to fight from within the civilian population.

In other words, mistakes happen in war, Hamas chose to use the civilian infrastructure etc. etc. But where’s the substance. This is precisely the area where the IDF has been criticised, indeed, demonised, by the world’s press. Is this really adequate? Some well-reported incidents have been explained elsewhere. Should these not be repeated in this report? 

Anshel Pfeffer in the London Jewish Chronicle ends a piece about this report with this:

In the absence of an investigation by an objective party, trusted by all sides (and, no, the United Nations does not fit the bill), this is the best we are going to get.

I would have been very surprised if a group investigating itself would have come to any other set of conclusions. The problem with all such investigations, whatever the reputation of the investigators, is that those inclined to cynicism will be cynical. On the other hand, the report is hardly likely to change anyone’s overall opinion of Operation Cast Lead or the IDF’s conduct. The use of  white phosphorous is not addressed at all although other reports have stated that many of the images purporting to show WP were in fact other smokescreen producers. 

Sadly, there is no sign of a totally impartial investigation. The UN team is made up of members who had previously condemned Operation Cast Lead and, therefore, its impartiality is compromised.

The report lacks specifics and witness testimony. In particular, I’d like to see more information on the use of WP and an explanation for images which appear to show WP in a schoolyard after the conflict ended. Perhaps the June report will provide more information on all thse matters. Maybe the IDF knows that the UN report is likely to be damaging and will only give more detail when it decides to rebut future accusations. Who knows.

What has become clear is that the IDF were determined to minimise their own casualties. This would be the attitude of any army in the world. To do so in the conditions that pertained in Gaza entailed an aggressive operation in an urban area. Hamas had thought, and announced beforehand, that they had created a killing field for IDF soldiers. The entire Gaza strip had been turned into one huge booby-trap with over a million civilians embedded in this network of terror. Hamas’ perverted ideology requires that the lives of  their own civilians be used as part of the propaganda battle. In that battle, Israel and the IDF were clear losers.

No report will erase the memory of the media images coming from Gaza during the operation. And no report will retrospectively be able to make the Israeli case or provide the rebuttals  that were so absent or poorly presented at the time.

This video is an attempt by the IDF to describe the conditions they encountered. I believe it is too weak and should show more graphically, with photographic evidence the conditions which pertained in Gaza in December and January.

Soldiers Speak Out

30/03/2009 / / 0 Comments

A new website has been launched by IDF soldiers to redress the balance and speak out about the moral actions of Israeli soldiers.

See an interview on Jerusalem Post here

Visit the website here.

Listen to their stories. 

Make up your own mind.

Also, read this article in the Jerusalem Post.

Now tell me who is moral and who is immoral?

BBC appears surprised at IDF morality

29/03/2009 / / 1 Comment

On Friday the BBC published a news item on its website: Israel army punishes Gaza soldier. 

Straight away the headline tells a subtle lie. It uses the present tense. We might be fooled into thinking this was some reaction to recent (disproved) stories of misconduct. Maybe a fig leaf for greater crimes, a token gesture? But no, it happened during Operation Cast Lead. Yes, during, before the current round of unchecked and unproved allegations.

The BBC is quoting a Ha’aretz story; the same paper that released the story about alleged atrocities emanating from a pre-military academy.

An Israeli soldier was removed from the combat area after he shot a Gazan woman in the leg “by mistake” during the recent offensive, military sources say.

The soldiers were firing in the air and urging a group of Palestinians who looked “suspicious” at the time, the military said….

…A statement from the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) said there had been a warning of a suicide attacker in the area where the incident occurred.

The soldier was an infantryman from the Givati Brigades, and has been demoted and put on probation

The BBC report then goes on to rehash recent unproven accusations and drops its own little bomblet: “The Israeli forces’ conduct has been heavily criticised. ” Thus conflating criticism of general tactics with specific allegations of war crimes committed by individuals.

It goes on:

Several international rights experts and organisations have raised concerns that both Israeli forces and Palestinian militants may have committed war crimes during the 22-day conflict.

This despite the fact that Hamas were, had and continue to fire rockets and mortars deliberately intended to kill civilians, a war crime as patent as it is cynical, and the BBC say “may have”. Hamas use schools, mosques, ambulances, innocent civilians’ homes, hospitals and media centers to stockpile weapons and use as firing positions, and the BBC say “may have”. The BBC tries to be even-handed in its treatment of the IDF and Hamas as if the latter were not a terrorist organisation that has no interest in observing ANY international laws and cynically exploits Israel’s attempts at observing those same laws.

Listen to what an IDF Colonel had to say:

He said the soldiers entered “thousands” of homes in Gaza. “Almost in every house we found rifles, grenades, RPGs (rocket propelled grenades),” he said.

They also saw Hamas militants moving from house to house carrying white flags to pose as civilians, he added.

He blamed Hamas for exposing civilians to danger by using civilian institutions for cover:

“When you find in a backpack, a blue backpack with logo of the UN on the backpack, an IED, (improvised explosive device) you understand how cynical, how far they go,” he said.

So Hamas use the white flag as a cover and the world wonders why, perhaps, some really innocent people carrying a white flag may have been shot. They use UN equipment to hide bombs, they place weapons in thousands of homes and the world wonders why innocents were killed, UN facilities damaged and Gazan residents’ homes damaged or demolished. When the enemy cynically exploits its opponents morality – yes, I said morality – a morality they clearly do not have, then it is not surprising mistakes happen – in fact it is amazing so few civilians were killed even if you accept the Palestinian figure and not the Israeli one.

As long as the West believes that asymmetric warfare can still be waged without some ‘loose rules of engagement’ then they will never win the War on Terror.

Nevertheless, and I have said this repeatedly in recent posts, Israel must not sink to the level of Hamas and its fellow travellers. Where there are inexcusable lapses which amount to patent crimes, the perpetrators must be brought to justice. So far no investigations into individual allegations have yielded any clear evidence. Hearsay and rumour are powerful weapons to diminish reputations when so many are willing to accept them prima facie without taking the care to wait for full investigations.

Some believe that Israel has given up caring what the world thinks. Understandable. But dangerous. If you don’t care what others think, that removes a powerful moral deterrent. It must not happen.

IDF smokescreen?

27/03/2009 / / 1 Comment

The IDF is now busy refuting claims of breaking international law by using white phosphorus in built-up areas of Gaza.

Channel 4 News last night was busy showing old footage of Gaza two days after the end of the conflict where the stuff was alleged to have been found in a schoolyard. Shocking images of people who apparently had been struck by white phosphorus hammered home the point and tried, as usual, to paint Israel has heartless monsters indiscriminately burning down a UN compound etc etc.

The IDF reports:

This particular investigation is dealing with the use of ammunition containing elements of phosphorous, including, amongst others, the 155mm smoke shells which were referred to in the Human Rights Watch report. This type of ammunition disperses in the atmosphere and creates an effective smoke screen. It is used by many Western armies.

The investigation is close to conclusion, and based on the findings at this stage, it is already possible to conclude that the IDF’s use of smoke shells was in accordance with international law. These shells were used for specific operational needs only and in accord with international humanitarian law. The claim that smoke shells were used indiscriminately, or to threaten the civilian population, is baseless.

It should be noted that contrary to the claims in the report, smoke shells are not an incendiary weapon. The third protocol of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) – which defines particular limitations on incendiary weapons – makes it clear that weapons intended for screening are not classed as incendiary weapons. The State of Israel is not a signatory of the third protocol, however, in any, case, as noted this protocol does not ban the use of smoke shells for the purpose of screening.

The problem with this statement is that it avoids mentioning the affects of white phosphorus in built-up areas. It takes a line of stressing the legality whilst ignoring the moral aspects.

Furthermore, the statement that WP is not an incendiary weapon because it is not classed as one is, frankly, ridiculous. tell that to the people in the UN compound.

The Red Cross representative, Peter Herby backed up Israel’s claims of legality during the conflict as reported by the Associated Press (article no longer available on their website):

‘But it’s not very unusual to use phosphorus to create smoke or illuminate a target. We have no evidence to suggest it’s being used in any other way’. In response, the IDF said Tuesday that it ‘wishes to reiterate that it uses weapons in compliance with international law, while strictly observing that they be used in accordance with the type of combat and its characteristics.’ Herby said that using phosphorus to illuminate a target or create smoke is legitimate under international law, and that there was no evidence the Jewish state was intentionally using phosphorus in a questionable way, such as burning down buildings or knowingly putting civilians at risk. 

OK. All very well. I completely accept it wasn’t used deliberately to harm civilians. I’d like to see an investigation by the IDF to see whether there were any occasions when it was used in way which was reckless of life. Apparently other screening material is available, but I am not an expert.

The rider to all of this is that the IDF used WP to protect its soldiers in precisely the conditions where without its use they and probably civilians would be at risk in a fire fight between the IDF and Hamas. The IDF’s main objective was to minimise its own casualties; this is a primary obligation of ANY army. If you have a defensive material which will save lives judgements have to be made. Sometimes they are wrong. Do you defend your men or worry about the propaganda value given to the enemy.

Once again, the IDF by blandly putting the legal case does not address the image case and does not explain the conditions under which it used WP or any reluctance to do so in residential areas.

Neither do we know what machinations Hamas were up to. Did they plant WP in places that reporters would find it? We know they had it because they fired it indiscriminately at Israel as a weapon, not as a defensive measure. But no-one mentions that particular breach of international law. But as I have said before, Hamas are terrorists, so no-one expects them to observe the law.


The most honest assessment of Israel yet

26/03/2009 / / 0 Comments

I’m not even going to quote the article I am referring to – just read it – please, please read it.

Ami Isseroff writes the most honest, the most compelling, the most moving assessment I have yet read of what Israel has done wrong and what it needs to do to put it right.

Isseroff  enunciates far better and far more eloquently many of the points that I have falteringly been trying to make recently.

He  makes them from the viewpoint of an Israeli committed to Zionism.

He explores why Israel is losing the propaganda battle, he constructively criticises the culture of denial and calls for more openness.

Just go here, do yourself a favour Israeli war crimes allegations: Doing our patriotic duty and read it.

The Good, and possibly the Bad and the Ugly

24/03/2009 / / 0 Comments

With a number of reports coming out of Israel of possible abuses and violations by Israeli soldiers it is interesting to read a couple of reactions from inside Israel.

Firstly Herb Keinon in the Jerusalem post with an excellent article here where he he reports that Alan Baker, former Foreign Ministry legal adviser has said:

it is incumbent on

Israel to investigate the allegations to show the world it is taking the matter seriously 

As I have also stated, it is very important that Israel investigates ALL allegations in an open and thorough way.

“There is no doubt that Israel did not systematically go in and commit war crimes,” Baker said.

He said that in isolated incidents, things may have happened that caused innocent people to be killed, and that it was in Israel’s interest to investigate itself, and prosecute where necessary. 

Exactly right. This is the key issue that makes Israel different from its enemeies and many of the countries who so gloatingly read about Israel’s internal breast-beating over these allegations. Israel is seen as part of the western democracies and is held to account to uphold international law. No other country in the region would be remotely interested in investigating potential crimes in their military. Only truly democratic open societies can do this. Israel has to do it, not to placate foreign media or governments, it must do it to retain its self-respect as a nation, whatever the findings reveal.

The ‘good’ bit in the title comes from yNetnews.com where soldiers who took part in the Gaza conflict rebut claims of immoral conduct.

I don’t believe there were soldiers who were looking to kill (Palestinians) for no reason,” said 21-year-old Givati Brigade soldier Assaf Danziger, who was lightly injured three days before the conclusion of Operation Cast Lead.

 “What happened there was not enjoyable to anyone; we wanted it to end as soon as possible and tried to avoid contact with innocent civilians,” he said.

 According to Danziger, soldiers were given specific orders to open fire only at armed terrorists or people who posed a threat. “There were no incidents of vandalism at any of the buildings we occupied. We did only what was justified and acted out of necessity. No one shot at civilians. People walked by us freely,” he recounted. 

Other stories of  soldiers being berated by colleagues for stealing even a can of drink and being made to put it back, of soldiers who cleaned apartments where they had been billeted and folded sheets and blankets go unreported. *

But please read this article in the JP which offers a firm and fair answer to the concerted attack and demonization of Israel being waged by the Guardian newspaper and also this article referenced in it: a leading article in the Independent which is well balanced apart from the headline – here’s a quote:

It is true that all armies suffer occasional breakdowns in discipline. And we should not make the mistake of holding Israeli soldiers to a higher standard of conduct than we expect from our own. We in Britain should remember that Baha Mousa, an Iraqi hotel receptionist, was beaten to death in the custody of British troops in Basra in 2003 and none of our soldiers was convicted of this killing. American military personnel were guilty of appalling abuses of prisoners in Baghdad’s Abu Ghraib prison.

We should bear in mind too that this testimony was made public by a concerned Israeli academic. Whatever crimes might be laid at the door of the IDF, it should not be Israeli society on trial here. Indeed, it is a tribute to the openness of Israel’s democracy, that we have learned of these allegations. Nor does the conduct of Israeli troops invalidate the overall objective of Operation Cast Lead, namely to stop Hamas firing rockets into towns in southern Israel.

This is the point. Unless Israel is perfect it is the most appaling state in the world. Ever since its formation Israel has faced an existential threat from its neighbours. It’s hardly surprising that Israel is drifting to the right and its people increasingly brutalised by continuous attacks and fear of attacks. Even so, abuses and crimes cannot be dismissed. They must be investigated and, if proved true, action must be taken against perpetrators. If proved true, Israel must do some serious soul searching about the future conduct of its military.

* 26/03/2009 This was my poorly remembered reading of a YnetNews article which I can now quote:

 

A Paratroopers Brigade soldier who also participated in the war called the claims “nonsense”. Speaking on condition of anonymity, he said, “It is true that in war morality can be interpreted in many different ways, and there are always a few idiots who act inappropriately, but most of the soldiers represented Israel honorably and with a high degree of morality.

“For instance, on three separate occasions my company commander checked soldiers’ bags for stolen goods. Those who stole the smallest things, like candy, were severely punished,” he said.

“We were forbidden from sleeping in Palestinians’ beds even when we had no alternate accommodations, and we didn’t touch any of their food even after we hadn’t had enough to eat for two days.”


 

We must not fear the truth

20/03/2009 / / 0 Comments

Yesterday Ha’aretz published a story about testimony of IDF soldiers on the Yitzhak Rabin pre-military preparatory course at the Oranim Academic College in Kiryat Tivon.

The course head, Dani Zamir, published conversations in a course newsletter. The testimony purports to be that of a group therapy session where three IDF soldiers related incidents in which civilians were killed by snipers and of wanton destruction of property.

In fact, the actual stories are extremely disturbing. An old woman killed, apparently because she strayed into a fire zone; others killed because they took a wrong turn after being evacuated by the IDF and snipers had been instructed to kill anything  that moved. 

The world’s press has obviously homed in on these stories and the BBC was not slow to comment. However, it must be said, the story was not headlined by the BBC and their reaction was somewhat muted. They did manage to try to suggest that this was a religious war by quoting some rabbis who were involved. Somewhat ironic when it is the other side who are actually conducting a religious war when it’s supposed to be a territorial one.

The anti-Zionists and the Jew-haters will of course say ‘I told you so’ about these reports, and this will confirm them in their beliefs and be used to justify their hatred.

There have, however, been doubts cast on the stories because Zamir has a long history of left-wing agitation and views. Furthermore, those giving testimony may not have witnessed these events but were only reporting heresay. One of the soldiers wasn’t even in Gaza, apparently.

We await the IDF internal investigations. Ha’aretz says it has more to expose.

But let me be quite clear on this: we who support Israel must not try to find excuses or escape into denial. If crimes have been committed the perpetrators must be punished. Any nation claiming to be civilised, especially one that claims to have the most moral army in the world, must investigate, publish and take any necessary action, however painful. It was interesting to read some of the comments posted on the yNet website. So many said that Israel should not was its dirty linen in public and give succour to the enemy.  There is an understandable view in some sections of the Israeli public, and certainly in the Diaspora, that Jews should never criticise Israel because it has plenty of detractors. As Herb Keinon wryly writes in the Jerusalem Post  “The whole world is against us, goes an old Jewish joke, and now we’ve joined in.” It’s this ability for Jews to search their conscience that separates then from many of their enemies.

There have been various stories and reports about abuses, atrocities and petty vandalism since the IDF operation began. The Jewish Chronicle on the 6th March had a piece headlined ‘I don’t feel bad about what we did’. It interviewed six soldiers. The last two soldiers, Arik Dubonov and Amir Marmor expressed reservations:

From the first briefings before going in, it was clear that the army had changed its entire mindset. Instead of getting the usual precautions on not harming civilians, we were told about the need to make a very aggressive entry. We were told ‘any sign of danger, open up with massive fire.’…

Some of us were very uncomfortable with these orders… (Dubonov)

… to me it was like a punishment exercise.. from the enormous extent of the destruction. We were there for a week and despite the fact that no-one fired on us, the firing and the demolitions continued incessantly. (Marmor)

The other soldiers interviewed had a different story but still did not make comfortable reading. Different experiences at different stages and areas of the conflict.

I have never fought as a soldier. I doubt many soldiers have fought under the conditions the IDF fought under. Clearly, the tactic was to go in hard in order to save Israeli soldiers lives against an enemy that had promised much but delivered little. The IDF could not allow Hamas any scope to operate. To achieve this aim against an enemy that hid in hospitals, mosques and schools, that popped out of tunnels in houses and booby-trapped residential buildings, was not going to be anything but a dirty war with civilians in the middle. Despite this, the IDF policy was to do as much as it could to avoid civilian casualties. That may seem ironic in light of the allegations, but it is, nonetheless, the truth. If their was a failure or the rules of engagement were too loose, as some have suggested, that does not mean that every action was reckless or worse.

Israel should carefully examine its tactics: did its forces need to destroy houses just to create sight lines? Is the policy of disproportionate response (Olmert’s words, not mine) justified?  Are all its forces and their commanders properly trained to respect civilian property, let alone their lives? 

So far nothing is proved; no investigations completed, no recommendations made, no prosecutions begun. I can wait. But I also want to see Israel facing up to its responsibilities: no cover-ups, no automatic denials.

I believe Israel is a highly moral country. The debate raging in Israel over these latest reports, the debate which has always raged about its treatment of the Palestinians, its war ethics, its defence policies and tactics, all these are signs of a healthy democracy. No such debate, no such self-examination, no such remorse or self-doubt would enter the minds of Israel’s enemies. 

The anti-Semites and Jew-haters may have their chance to gloat, but that should not weaken the resolve of those who know that Israel faces an increasing existential threat and needs our support more than ever. But that support will be weakened if Israel is not seen by those very supporters to do the right thing: thoroughly investigate ALL allegations from whatever quarter and take any necessary action.

Hamas Propaganda and the Lies About Gazan Casualties

16/02/2009 / / 0 Comments

During the recent Gaza conflict UNWRA was the main source for Gaza casualty figures and these figures were used by the world’s press, including the BBC, as absolutely undeniable because they came from the UN. But the figures did not come from the UN, they came from Hamas and the gullible UNWRA gave the Hamas lies cover due because everyone believes the UN, don’t they?

Throughout the conflict Israeli sources could just about be heard in the background stating that the Hamas figures were exaggerated and many combatants were included as civilians. Now, at last, and, as often is the case with the Israeli government, too late to change the world’s impression of the conflict, the Israeli figures have been published.

The Jerusalem Post reports here that the Palestinian Center for Human Rights has quoted 895 Gazan civilians killed which represents more than two-thirds of all deaths. But  the IDF has carefully compiled the actual names of many of those killed and its figures show a very different story. The IDF puts the percentage at about one third which is about 450.

Dealing with real human lives lost in a statistical war of words is a regrettable course to have to follow but a necessary one in order to expose Hamas lies and attempt to redress the balance of world opinion.

Another, and very important ‘detail’ that had UNWRA and the world and the BBC et alia exercised about Israeli ‘war crimes’ was the incident near a UN school in Jabalya. The Jeruslaem Post reports:

Initial Palestinian reports falsely claimed IDF shells had hit the school and killed 40 or more people, many of them civilians.

In fact, he said, 12 Palestinians were killed in the incident – nine Hamas operatives and three noncombatants. Furthermore, as had since been acknowledged by the UN, the IDF was returning fire after coming under attack, and its shells did not hit the school compound. 

Yet most of the world still believes the Hamas lies (only 48 of its fighters killed as opposed to about 900 now reported by the IDF) reinforced by news reports, including Israeli newspapers, and the UN itself who prefer the story of a group it classifies as a terrorist organisation over the counter claims of one of its own members, namely Israel. And the rest of the world goes along with this analysis.

When will Israel get its act together and realise how important it is to rebut the lies of Hamas as they occur.  The JP reports that “the IDF was considering setting up a response team” for just this purpose.  About time! 

So, more than 400 children killed? Hardly when the total of non-combatants is around that mark.

So will the world’s press now issue rebuttals of its previous reports and tell the world the actual truth. Fat chance. Will Jeremy Bowen of the BBC report the IDF findings in his blog? 

I blame the Israeli government and organisations like Shin Bet for not doing enough to counter Hamas claims and the falsified, exaggerated and emotional images they trot out hour by hour in any conflict.

Even though several impressive spokespersons were put forward this time for the very purpose of better serving Israel’s case, they failed miserably because they could not counter the terrible daily images coming out of Gaza. Quite often they themselves did not seem to believe in their own story. This is a measure of how successful Hamas propaganda is and how poor Israeli counter-propaganda is.

What we need to see now is a further detailed analysis of homes, schools, hospitals, mosques and civic building destroyed or damaged and how many of those as a result of IDF actions and how many as  a result of secondary explosions caused by Hamas weapons dumps.

There is also the matter of the use of white phosphorus but that brings up the whole question of the appropriateness of some articles of International Law in the new reality of assymetric warfare, something I intend to write about in a future article.

These three elements: casualties, destruction of property and use of certain weapons such as WP and tank shells in built-up areas all need to be thoroughly analysed and answered quickly by Israel; not because they are obliged to do so, but because they need to provide evidence to counter the vicious worldwide assault on Israel’s right to defend itself.
Newer posts »

© 2024 Ray Cook – As I See It

Theme by Anders Norén — Up ↑