War crimes in Gaza.

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
May 11, 2002
4,039
12
0
43
#1
ISRAEL is reeling from the accusations of a UN fact-finding mission that it deliberately sowed death and destruction among civilians in the Gaza Strip during a three-week military operation ending in January.

The mission was chaired by a respected South African judge, Richard Goldstone and published its report on Tuesday September 15th. It concludes that “While the Israeli government has sought to portray its operation as essentially a response to rocket attacks in exercise of its right to self-defence, the Mission considers the plan to have been directed, at least in part, at a different target: the people of Gaza as a whole.”

The purpose, the mission added, was “punishing the Gaza population for its resilience and for its apparent support for Hamas”. It held that Israel’s partial blockade of the Gaza Strip since Hamas took power there three-and-a-half years ago amounted to collective punishment and violated the Geneva Conventions.

The mission recommends international legal action not only against Israel, but also against Hamas, for war crimes and possible crimes against humanity. It has recommended that the findings are handed to the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague and also urged the UN Security Council and, separately, the General Assembly, to ensure that those responsible for the crimes are brought to justice. In particular the mission would like to see the Security Council set up a committee of experts to monitor whether Israel and Hamas conducts domestic investigations and, if so, to see how thorough these are. It also urges that, if the experts are not satisfied, the Security Council should refer the matter to the ICC prosecutor.

The death toll in Israel’s “Operation Cast Lead”, between December 27th and January 18th, is put at around 1,400 by Palestinian sources and non-governmental aid agencies. Israel estimates the toll at 1,166. Three Israeli civilians were killed by rocket fire into Israel, and ten soldiers were killed during the fighting, four of them by “friendly fire”.

“The data provided by non-governmental sources with regard to the percentage of civilians among those killed are generally consistent and raise very serious concerns with regard to the way Israel conducted the military operations,” the Goldstone mission concludes. It accuses Israel of “indiscriminate attacks” that resulted in civilian deaths and injuries, and also, on several occasions, of deliberately targeting civilians.

It also concluded, among other findings, that 240 Palestinian policemen were killed unlawfully, 99 of them in bombings on the first day of the operation, even though some of them may have been Hamas fighters. The bombing of public buildings, including the parliament and the main prison, was found to be unlawful. Israel’s warnings to civilians to flee targeted areas were described as inadequate. The report notes that the mission found no evidence of the Palestinians firing from mosques, hospitals or UN facilities, although “this might have occurred”. The mission also concludes that “It may be that the Palestinian combatants did not at all times adequately distinguish themselves from the civilian population.” In addition it concluded that repression within Israel fosters “a political climate in which dissent with the government and its actions in the Occupied Territories is not tolerated.”

Israeli officials argue that the last two points are so patently biased that they ought to reflect on the credibility of the whole 575-page report. Israel refused to co-operate with the mission (although individual Israelis did testify), noting that the UN Human Rights Council, which established it, has a long record of egregious bias against the Jewish state. In correspondence with Justice Goldstone, Israel noted pointedly that other eminent jurists had declined to serve on the mission because of its provenance.

Israel’s government argues, too, that one of the mission’s four members, Professor Christine Chinkin of the London School of Economics, had expressed “prejudgmental assertions, including that ‘the rocket attacks on Israel by Hamas do not amount to an armed attack entitling Israel to rely on self-defence’.” The other two mission members are Hina Jilani, a Pakistani jurist and Desmond Travers, a retired Irish army officer.

Justice Goldstone, who was a prosecutor at the international criminal tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, insists that his mission had “unbiased and even-handed terms of reference” and functioned as a “completely independent body.” Israeli officials wondered privately yesterday whether he had set the tone of the report, or was swept along by other mission members and staffers.

In its formal reaction, Israel declares itself “appalled” at the report. Officials say privately they had expected a tough document accusing the army of a disproportionate response to the years of incessant but largely ineffective firing of rockets and mortars from Gaza into Israel. They were shocked, they said, that the mission accused Israel of deliberately targeting the Palestinian civilian population. The prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, has given orders for a diplomatic campaign to discredit the report and counter the mission’s effort to have Israelis charged with war crimes.

The Israelis dismiss the mission’s ostensible evenhandedness in recommending that the Palestinians, too, be held to account for firing rockets at Israeli civilians and for acts of brutality and repression against their own people. In the prevailing atmosphere at the UN, they say, this will remain a dead letter while the recommendations against Israel will be assiduously followed up.


http://www.economist.com/world/middleeast-africa/displayStory.cfm?story_id=14445878&source=most_commented
 
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
43
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#4
Obama comes to aid of Israel over UN war crimes charges
By Jean Shaoul
26 September 2009


An authoritative and highly critical United Nations inquiry released last week concluded that Israel “committed actions amounting to war crimes, possibly crimes against humanity” during its three-week offensive against Gaza in December last year.

The report is one of the most damning ever made of Israel’s government and armed forces. Whereas in 1982, Israel betrayed its duty to protect the Palestinian refugees in Sabra and Shatilla in Beirut and was indirectly responsible for the massacre of more than 800 people by its Phalange allies, this time Israel was the direct perpetrator of war crimes.

The inquiry recommended that the UN Security Council call on Israel to conduct its own independent investigations into the military’s conduct, and that the council refer the findings to the International Criminal Court if it fails to do so within six months. The ICC is a treaty body set up to try war crimes and is separate from the International Court of Justice, a UN body to settle disputes between countries.

The report predictably elicited a furious counteroffensive from Israel, denouncing its findings. The campaign was waged throughout the media, including in the nominally liberal press. Britain’s Guardian, for example, gave space to Dan Koski, who works for an organisation dedicated to countering the arguments of human rights organisations critical of Israel, to mount a defence of Israel’s actions.

But Tel Aviv’s success in avoiding accountability for its criminal actions rests more properly on the active support of the United States and silent complicity of the major European powers, all of whom are anxious to avoid being brought to book for their own contempt for international law. The Security Council—dominated as it is by the US and the European powers that hold the power of veto—was the only body that could refer the case to the ICC, as Israel is not a signatory to the court.

The inquiry was forced upon the UN following international condemnation of Israel’s disproportionate and brutal force against an essentially unarmed population.

Israel launched a massive 22-day offensive against an unprotected population. It faced almost no opposition in Gaza as evidenced by the huge disparity in casualties. On the Palestinian side, 1,400 people—the majority of them civilians, including 400 women and children—were killed, at least 5,000 people injured, and 21,000 homes destroyed as well as much of the vital infrastructure. On the Israeli side, 13 people died, and several of these were the result of “friendly fire.”

Operation Cast Lead was a criminal venture from the very start. On the first day of the war, Yoav Galant, Israel’s Southern Front Commander, declared that the military would try to “send Gaza decades into the past” in terms of weapons capabilities, while achieving “the maximum number of enemy casualties and keeping Israel Defence Forces casualties at a minimum.”

The Israeli government knew this was illegal and made extensive preparations to evade prosecution. It refused to allow reporters into Gaza, where there were few international journalists after the BBC’s Alan Johnston was held captive for four months by Hamas, to ensure that the military’s conduct was shielded from public scrutiny. With only journalists “embedded” in Israel’s armed forces allowed to report, the sole on the spot independent coverage was provided by Al Jazeera.

Israel refused to allow the publication of photos or names of soldiers in Operation Cast Lead. It made official commitments at the highest levels to shield soldiers from charges of war crimes and declared that it will pay all legal expenses abroad. Officers who travel abroad have first to get approval for their trip.

The four-member inquiry panel, set up by the UN Human Rights Council, was chaired by someone of the highest credentials: the South African judge Richard Goldstone, who was the chief prosecutor in war crimes involving the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and is himself Jewish and a lifelong supporter of Israel.

He insisted that the inquiry deal with the run-up to the war and Hamas’s actions, so that the investigation would be seen as both “even handed” and comprehensive. When Israel refused to cooperate with his inquiry and prevented the panel from taking evidence in Israel and the West Bank, Goldstone held public hearings in Gaza and talked to Palestinians and Israelis in Geneva. The panel interviewed 188 people and read 300 reports.

The inquiry rejected Israel’s arguments that Hamas, which controls Gaza, was to blame and that Operation Cast Lead was a legitimate act of self-defence in response to rocket fire on Israeli towns and villages launched by militants from Gaza. The war was, it said, “a deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorise a civilian population, radically diminish its local economic capacity both to work and to provide for itself and to force upon it an ever-increasing sense of dependency and vulnerability” (emphasis added).

It accused Israel of using Palestinians as human shields and said that Israel’s economic blockade of Gaza amounted to “collective punishment intentionally inflicted by the government of Israel on the people of the Gaza Strip.”

Israel’s actions deprived Gazans of means of subsistence, employment, housing and water, denied their freedom of movement and “could lead a competent court to find that the crime of persecution, a crime against humanity, had been committed.”

The investigation also condemned Hamas, stating that rocket attacks, aimed at civilian targets, “would constitute war crimes and may amount to crimes against humanity.” It criticised Gazan security forces for carrying out extrajudicial executions and the arbitrary arrest, detention and ill-treatment of its political opponents. The report also called for the release of Gilad Shalit, an Israeli soldier captured in Gaza in July 2006. But it insisted that there could be no equation of the power of Israel, the occupying force, and that of the Palestinian people or its representatives, Hamas.

The report also said that all those countries that had signed the 1949 Geneva Conventions had a duty to search for and prosecute those responsible, using their “universal jurisdiction” to prosecute war criminals.

But while the UN human rights council in Geneva is expected to discuss the report on September 29, nothing will come of it.

The Obama administration came almost immediately to the aid of Tel Aviv, sharply criticising the report as unfair to Israel and for supposedly failing to deal fully with Hamas’s role before and during the conflict. The recommendation that Israel be referred to the ICC was summarily dismissed.

The US and other major imperialist powers have always sought to prevent any action being taken against Israel either through the ICC or by countries using “universal jurisdiction” to launch a prosecution in their own courts.

Belgium was bullied into changing its legislation based on universal jurisdiction after it attempted in February 2002 to charge then prime minister Ariel Sharon for war crimes in relation to Sabra and Shatilla. The then US Secretary of State Donald Rumsfeld even threatened to move the NATO headquarters out of Brussels.

When a Spanish court earlier this year attempted to open a criminal investigation under international law into the assassination of a Hamas leader in Gaza City by Israel in 2002, the investigation was dropped and the legislation amended, limiting it to cases involving Spanish victims or suspects present on Spanish soil.

As Richard Falk, the UN special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories and a professor of international public law, said, “But politically I think it [a referral to the ICC] is highly unlikely because the US and probably some European governments will create effective impunity for Israel by preventing the referral.”

At stake in such interventions is not simply a desire to protect a major US ally. The concerns of the Washington elite, and the political class in Europe, fall closer to home. Israel’s prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu spelled out very publicly why world leaders should quash the report and so allow Israel to plan and commit further crimes against the Palestinians and whomever else it chooses.

He warned that prosecuting Israel for war crimes could serve as a precedent for prosecutions against other countries. “It’s not just our problem,” Netanyahu told the media. “If they accused IDF [Israeli Defence Force] officers, IDF commanders, IDF soldiers, IDF pilots and even leaders, they will accuse you too. What, NATO isn’t fighting in various places? What, Russia isn’t fighting in various places?”

There is another factor that enables Israel to act with impunity, unlike 1982 when hundreds of thousands of Israelis demonstrated against their government’s complicity in the massacre of Sabra and Shatilla and demanded an independent inquiry.

Today, the widespread revulsion among the Israeli population at the murderous campaigns of the IDF against the Palestinians cannot find even the most limited political expression. The peace movement has collapsed and the Labour Party now sits in coalition with Netanyahu, after earlier occupying a government role alongside Kadima. Its leader Ehud Barak, then acting as minister of defence, was responsible for directing the assault in Gaza. source
 
Apr 4, 2006
1,719
333
83
43
www.myspace.com
#5
fuck arabs , they are not people isreal is just defending themselfs
Well man, thats pretty much whats going on.

Pretty much every state in the Middle East ruled under Sharia Law wants to destroy Israel.

The funny thing is, Israel is the Jews holy land. Could you imagine what would happen if someone tried to kick Muslims out of their holy land Mecca?

The shit would hit the fan.

I personally don't really like Jews [not all] but they are ENTITLED to their holy land, so are the Christians. The Muslims are doing everything in their power to prevent that.

You don't see any sort of a movement preventing Muslims from their holy land.

If you ask me the only reason why anyone supports Palestine is because they hate Jews.
 
Nov 20, 2006
593
0
0
36
#6
Obama told Goldstone that his report was flawed, so Goldstone called him out and asked why and hasn't got a response yet. lol. Israel basically admitted committing war crimes by suggesting a change to international laws.There is also the issue of Iran's nukes where recently there has been been a proposed deal where Iran will send it's uranium abroad to be processed for medical and energy purposes, which gains Iran legitimacy from the U.N.. Hopefully the United States puts more pressure on the Israeli government to stop fucking around.
 
Mar 8, 2006
474
13
0
44
www.thephylumonline.com
#7
If you ask me the only reason why anyone supports Palestine is because they hate Jews.

really? seems pretty ignorant. you don't think there might be a multitude of people who support both (not all of their policies and actions, just the principal of co-existence)? i mean, i personally support anyone who is being murdered indiscriminately (again, not necessarily all of their actions). do i hate jews or arabs? no. do i think hamas and the israeli government are both technically terrorist organizations? maybe. i don't think your statements are exactly what i would call objective. technically, the two sides have already agreed on mutual existence multiple times...even drawn borders, etc. guess what? one side (you guess which one) has never honored any of those agreements to this day. and one side (guess which one) have been living like dogs for decades, without any political, economic, or military leverage. i think a lot of arabs, especially the ones who involve themselves or even identify with terrorist organizations such as hamas, do so out of a general sense of hopelessness with the status quo, for a sense of security (what is the alternative? throwing rocks?), and because the hypocrisy in the region as far as human rights is off the charts. every palestinian or even israeli or "JOO" as you seem to want to refer to israelis, does not hold the same exact belief system, political, or even religious ideology. you can't just lump everybody in like that. the actions of hamas or the israeli government represent the wishes of their respective people about as much as the actions of the US government do the american people. nobody has a right to murder people indiscriminately...agree or disagree?