ÇáãÓÇÚÏ ÇáÔÎÕí ÇáÑÞãí

ãÔÇåÏÉ ÇáäÓÎÉ ßÇãáÉ : International Law and the Gaza War



Hosam Hawamdeh
10-16-2009, 03:51 PM
lawjo-From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia





Accusations of violations regarding international humanitarian law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_humanitarian_law), which governs the actions by belligerents (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belligerents) during an armed conflict, have been directed at both Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel) and Hamas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas) during the Gaza War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_War). The accusations covered violating laws governing distinction (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction_%28law%29) and proportionality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportionality_%28law%29#International_law) by Israel, the indiscriminate firing of rockets at civilian locations and extrajudicial violence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Hamas_political_violence_in_Gaza) within the Gaza Strip by Hamas.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AI_briefing-0)[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Under_Cover_of_War-1) As of September 2009, some 360 complaints had been filed by individuals and NGOs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGO) at the prosecutor's office in The Hague (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hague) calling for investigations into alleged crimes committed by Israel during the Gaza War.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-JTA1-2)

On September 15 2009, a 574 page report by UN inquiry team was released, officially titled "Human Rights in Palestine and Other Occupied Arab Territories: Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict". It concluded that the Israel Defence Force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defence_Force) (IDF) and Palestinian armed groups committed war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-3) On October 16 2009, The UN Human Rights Council endorsed the report.[5 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-APFOct16-4)

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-APFOct16-4)
Allegations of Israeli misconduct



The UN Human Rights Council as well as many non-governmental organizations, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have accused Israel of violating international law as regards collective punishment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Collective_punishments),[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-UN_RFalk-5) targeting civilians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distinction_%28law%29),[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AI_briefing-0)[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-UN_RFalk-5)[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-6), proportionality,[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-UN_RFalk-5)[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Javno-7) of prohibiting access to medical assistance,[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AI_briefing-0)[9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-nyt_4children_deadmothers-8) and of using civilians as human shields.[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-BBC_Human_Shields-9)[11] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-unchildren-10) Richard Falk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Falk), the United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories, and AI said that such actions are in violation of international humanitarian law governing the obligations of an occupying force and the laws of war.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AI_briefing-0)[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-UN_RFalk-5)

The UK newspaper The Guardian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian) conducted an investigation of it's own which, according to the paper, uncovered evidence of war crimes including the use of Palestinian children as human shields and the targeting of medics and hospitals. The paper also found evidence of attacks on clearly distinguishable civilian targets. [12] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-11)

Israel has responded to these accusations by stating that use of force in Gaza are acts of self-defense rather than being reprisals or punishment.[13] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-12) (White Phosphorus air-exploded shells over largely civilian population centers being needed in this self-defense argument) A study by military analyst Anthony H. Cordesman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Cordesman) of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Strategic_and_International_Studies) concluded that Israel did not violate the laws of war during its operation in Gaza.[14] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AnthonyHCordesman-13)[15] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-US_study:_IDF_didn.27t_violate_rules_of_war-14) Norman Finkelstein, a political scientist, wrote that Cordesman's study lacked credibility as it is based almost entirely on official Israeli sources and ignored information that was readily available from the UN, NGOs and news reports.[16] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-15)

Sixteen human rights campaigners, including Desmond Tutu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Tutu) and Mary Robinson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Robinson), sent an open letter to the United Nations calling for a "prompt, independent and impartial investigation [that] would provide a public record of gross violations of international humanitarian law committed."[17] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-un_open_letter-16) The letter stated that the signatories had been "shocked to the core" by the damage inflicted during the Israeli offensive.[17] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-un_open_letter-16) In response to criticism of using disproportionate force, OC Southern Command Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoav_Galant) said, "800 terrorists and 300 civilians, who we did not want to harm, were killed ... This ratio of almost a quarter [of the individuals] uninvolved [in the fighting] is an achievement unmatched in the history of this kind of combat."[18] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-17)

In order to protect soldiers from charges for possible war crime charges, the IDF censor banned the publication of the identity of military leaders who fought Hamas in Gaza.[19] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-IDFcensorbans-18) In addition, a defense team was set up to co-ordinate a legal defense for civilians and the military, should war crimes charges be raised.[20] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-warcrimedefenceteam-19) Israeli human rights groups criticized the Israeli military for failing to properly investigate violations of the laws of war in Gaza, despite plenty of evidence of possible war crimes.[21] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-bbc_gaza_abuses-20)







collective punishment


The UN Human Rights Council as well as many non-governmental organizations and notable figures, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, have accused Israel of imposing collective punishment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Collective_punishments) on the population of Gaza by the blockade, invasion and bombardment of Gaza.[22] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Israel.E2.80.99s_bombardment_of_Gaza_is_not_self-defence_.E2.80.93_it.E2.80.99s_a_war_crime-21)[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-UN_RFalk-5) Several experts in the field, though, argue that the bar on collective punishment forbids the imposition of criminal or military penalties (imprisonment, death, etc) on some people for crimes committed by other individuals, leading to the conclusion that none of Israel's actions involve the imposition of criminal-type penalties.[23] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Collective_Punishment_and_Newspeak-22)[24 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-International_Law_and_Gaza:_The_Assault_on_Israel. 27s_Right_to_Self-Defense-23)

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-International_Law_and_Gaza:_The_Assault_on_Israel. 27s_Right_to_Self-Defense-23)

Attacks on civilians and civilian objects (the principle of distinction


Israel has been criticized for violating laws covering distinction. Israel has stated that "anything affiliated with Hamas is a legitimate target."[25] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-bbc2009jan5-24) This has been criticized as being too broad. Amnesty International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amnesty_International) (AI) has said that this definition includes, "presumptively civilian" targets such as government ministries that serve no military purpose.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AI_briefing-0) Israel has said that these government ministries and the parliament building are part of the Hamas infrastructure and as such legitimate targets. B'Tselem describes Israel's reasoning as being "legally flawed," stating that simple Hamas' affiliation does not make such locations legitimate targets.[25] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-bbc2009jan5-24) Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_Center_for_Public_Affairs) (JCPA) asserted that under various provisions on International Law (e.g., UN Security Council Resolution 1566), Palestinian governing authorities in Gaza, whether directly involved in terror attacks or not, are criminal terrorists, by virtue of their willing provision of finance, plan, support and safe haven for terrorists.[26] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-25) AI and B'Tselem point out that in many instances, IDF targeted civilian buildings without providing explanation for the attack, and some of such attacks raise the strong possibility that Israel may have violated the prohibition against targeting objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population.[27] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-amnesty.org-26) AI asserts that those instances would violate Articles 51, 52 and 54 of Protocol I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_I).[27] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-amnesty.org-26) A Center for Strategic International Studies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Strategic_International_Studies) report notes that the IDF admits it did hit some purely civilian targets, including UN facilities, but says that it is not clear that combatants were not in or near such targets; CSIS also claims that the laws of war require an effort to discriminate, and not perfect success.[14] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AnthonyHCordesman-13) AI further notes that Israel’s firing of artillery, shelling from tanks and from naval ships into densely populated civilian areas in Gaza may also amount to indiscriminate attacks.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AI_briefing-0) Retired U.S. Army colonel said however that the number of artillery rounds was low, indicating considerable restraint from the IDF, and that from military perspective he believes that things could not have been done any differently.[28] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Adapting_Artillery_to_Urban_War-27)

In June 2009, HRW issued a report entitled "Precisely wrong", presenting an investigation of six UAV (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UAV) attacks that resulted in large civilian death.[29] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Report:_IDF_used_RPV_fire_to_target_civilians-28) HRW concluded that in the cases probed, Israeli forces either failed to take all feasible precautions to verify that the targets were combatants, or failed to distinguish between combatants and civilians and to target only the former; as a result, HRW deduce that these attacks were a violation of International Humanitarian Law.[30] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-29) The report methodology included interviews with victims and witnesses, investigations of the attack sites and IDF and media reports; the probes were based on the presumption that the impact mark and the fragmentation patterns were consistent with the Israeli-produced Spike missile that are used by the drones.[31] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Precisely_Wrong_-_Overview-30) The Israeli military did not cooperate with HRW on the report and said that the report appeared to be based on "unnamed and unreliable Palestinian sources" whose military expertise was "unproven".[29] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Report:_IDF_used_RPV_fire_to_target_civilians-28) Spike's manufacturer, Israeli concern Rafael (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rafael), says the missile can be fired not only by drones, but by helicopters, infantry units and naval craft.[32] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Human_Rights_Watch_accuses_Israel_over_Gaza_drones-31) Several military experts said that drones may reach operational heights of 4,000 metres; the launch of a missile at that altitude would likely elude the naked eye.[33] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Human_Rights_Watch_accuses_Israel_over_Gaza_drones 2-32) HRW military expert also conceded that two of the incidents cited took place in the evening or night, something that could potentially rule out anyone seeing the small aircraft.[32] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Human_Rights_Watch_accuses_Israel_over_Gaza_drones-31)

In July 2009, Amnesty released 117-page report that was based on physical evidence and testimony gathered by a team of four researchers, including a military expert, from dozens of attack sites in Gaza and southern Israel during and after the war.[34] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-22_Days_of_Death_and_Destruction-33) The pattern of Israeli attacks and the high number of civilian casualties "showed elements of reckless conduct, disregard for civilian lives and property and a consistent failure to distinguish between military targets and civilians and civilian objects," Amnesty charged.[35] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Israel_and_Hamas_.27both_guilty_of_war_crimes.27_-_Amnesty-34)[36] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-35) The group said that hundreds of Palestinian civilians were killed using high-precision weapons, while others were shot at close range.[37] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Amnesty_details_Gaza_.27war_crimes.27-36) The IDF responded that the report ignores the efforts the military made to minimize harm to innocent civilians that included millions of flyers, personal phone calls to homes of Palestinians and radio broadcasts to warn civilians of the impending operation.[38] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Hamas.2C_Israel_reject_Amnesty_claims-37)

In August 2009, HRW published a report that deals with seven incidents in which 11 Palestinian civilians, including 5 women and 4 children, were killed by Israeli soldiers despite the fact that they were waiving white flags supposedly visible to the IDF. According to the testimonies on which the report is based, the IDF was in control of the areas in which the incidents occurred, no fighting was taking place at the when they occurred and no armed people traveled among the civilians.[39] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Report:_IDF_killed_women_and_children_with_white_f lags_in_Gaza-38) HRW researches concluded that the Israeli soldiers at best failed to protect civilians, and at worst deliberately shot at them.[40] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Gaza_white_flag_deaths_probe_call-39) In one of the cases mentioned in the report, on January 7, Israeli soldiers shot and killed two of the girls of the Abd Rabbo family (aged 2 and 7), wounding the third girl (aged 4) and their grandmother.[41] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-IDF_dismisses_Cast_Lead_claims-40) Pro-Israeli NGOs CAMERA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Committee_for_Accuracy_in_Middle_East_Reporting_in _America) and Monitor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NGO_Monitor) found out significant contradictions between the testimonies of the family members and the neighbors that were told HRW and the reports of the incident published in numerous newspapers in winter 2009.[42] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-CRIME_AGAINST_HUMANITY-41) In a response to the report, the Israeli military said its soldiers were obligated to avoid harming anyone waving a white flag, but that in some cases Hamas militants had used civilians with white flags for cover. In correlation with the statement, the IDF uploaded a video to the internet depicting what it said was a Hamas gunman planting an explosive device and then attempting to take shelter in a home of uninvolved civilians waving white flags during fighting in Gaza.[43] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Rights_group:_IDF_killed_Gazans_waving_.27white_fl ags.27_during_war-42) Nevertheless, as of September 2009, the IDF is investigating several similar allegations, including the complaint filed by the Al-Mezan Center for Human Rights on behalf of the Abd Rabbo family.[44 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Military_Police_begin_probing_Gaza_.27white-flag.27_deaths-43)

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Military_Police_begin_probing_Gaza_.27white-flag.27_deaths-43)

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Military_Police_begin_probing_Gaza_.27white-flag.27_deaths-43)


Attacks on civil police



HRW points out that under international humanitarian law, police are presumed to be civilian - and thus immune from attack - unless formally incorporated into the armed forces of a party to a conflict or directly participating in the hostilities.[45] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Q_.26_A_on_Hostilities_between_Israel_and_Hamas-44) HRW representative stated that a decision that police and police stations are legitimate military targets depends on whether those police play a role in fighting against Israel, or whether a particular police station is used to store weapons or for some other military purpose.[46] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-hrw_civilians_release-45) IDF stated that it perceives police in Gaza as equivalent to the enemy's armed force and as such legitimate targets.[47] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Consent_and_advise-46) Israeli Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_and_Terrorism_Information_Center) (ITIC) alleged that the distinction between the internal security forces and Hamas military wing is not sharply defined and cites Gaza police officials who said that police were instructed to fight the enemy in case of an invasion into the Gaza Strip.[48] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Mounting_evidence_indicates-47)[49] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-48) Many security force members were reported to "moonlight" with the Izzidin al-Qassam Brigades.[50] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-49) Amnesty International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amnesty_International) criticized Israel for targeting and killing large number of civilian police.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AI_briefing-0) One of the traffic course trainees who had participated in the ceremony attacked by IAF (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IAF) on 27 December, 2008, told B'Tselem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B%27Tselem) that they were trained in first-aid and in maintaining order.[51] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-50) The Israeli 'Orient Research Group' claimed that 78 of the 89 killed during the first IAF strike were terror operatives, many of them belonging to the al-Qassam Brigades.[52] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-51) In an update published in September 2009, JCPA claims that among the total of 343 members of the Palestinian security forces who were killed, 286 have been identified as terror organization members.[53] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Palestinian-52)

The principle of proportionality



Amnesty stated that some attacks on homes of Hamas leaders have killed dozens of civilians, even though it should have been apparent to Israeli forces that the target of attack was not likely to be present or that civilians were likely to be killed in the attack. AI asserted that such conduct may amount to disproportionate attacks, a type of indiscriminate attack, that “may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated” (Article 51 (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Protocol_I#Art_51._-_Protection_of_the_civilian_population)(5b) of Additional Protocol I (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_I)).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AI_briefing-0) The official report of the Israeli Government, published in July 2009, notes that while Israel is not a party to the Protocol I, Israel however accepts its provisions as reflective of customary international law.[54] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-FACTUAL_AND_LEGAL_ASPECTS-53) A senior legal adviser in Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs points out that a standard practice in assessing the anticipated military advantage, as was established by committee to review NATO bombings in Yugoslavia, is that of 'reasonable military commander' rather than a human rights lawyer.[55] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-The_inadequacy_of_international_law-54) Professor Newton, expert in laws of warfare testifying in front of the Goldstone committee, said that in order to properly examine a proportionality assessment, the relevant question is what information was available to the commander at the time the attack was authorized.[56] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Public_hearings_.E2.80.93_Geneva.2C_Afternoon_Sess ion_of_7_July_2009-55)

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerusalem_Center_for_Public_Affairs) (JCPA) asserts that the rule of distinction permits attacking legitimate targets, even if the attack is expected to cause collateral damage to civilians and even if, in retrospect, the attack was a mistake based on faulty intelligence; moreover, Article 28 (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Geneva_Convention/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Article_28) of the Fourth Geneva Convention (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention) makes clear that the presence of civilians “may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations".[57] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-International_Law_and_the_Fighting_in_Gaza-56) CSIS report notes that Israel planned its air and air-land campaigns in ways that clearly discriminated between military and civilian targets and that were intended to limit civilian casualties and collateral damage, by systematic and comprehensive use of its IS&R assets, careful mapping, GPS abilities and guidance from targeting experts briefed in the laws and conventions of war; the report concludes that this aspect of the IDF‘s actions met the key legal test that the anticipated military advantage did not outweigh the risk to civilians.[14] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AnthonyHCordesman-13) Israeli Government report further adds that on numerous occasions a last-minute decision not to attack legitimate military targets or to divert missiles moments before the impact was upheld to avoid the possibility of civilian harm, even though such an attack might not be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage. The report claims that the IDF also refrained from attacking Shifa Hospital in Gaza City, despite alleged Hamas’ use of an entire ground floor wing as its headquarters, out of concern for the inevitable harm to civilians present in the hospital.[54] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-FACTUAL_AND_LEGAL_ASPECTS-53)

Food, medical supplies and relief



AI accused Israel of failure to provide adequate supply of food, essential supplies, medicine and medical care to the population of Gaza, as well as deliberate impediment of emergency relief and humanitarian assistance.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-AI_briefing-0) JCPA asserted that according to Article 23 (http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Geneva_Convention/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Article_23) of the Fourth Geneva Convention (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention), Israel is under no obligation to provide anything itself; Israel is only required not to interfere with passage of food and so forth sent by others for the benefit of children under age fifteen, mothers of newborns and pregnant women; under Article 23, a party can block passage even of food, clothing and medicine even for these population groups if it has serious grounds for suspecting that the items will be intercepted before reaching their destination.[57] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-International_Law_and_the_Fighting_in_Gaza-56) Several instances of Hamas seizing convoys of humanitarian aid were reported before and in the course of the fighting.[58] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Hamas_seizes_aid_meant_for_Red_Crescent-57)[59] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Hamas_raids_aid_trucks.2C_sells_supplies-58) Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs claimed that more than 37,000 tons of humanitarian aid were allowed to Gaza from Israel and that numerous efforts for providing medical help took place during the war.[60] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Humanitarian_aid_to_Gaza_during_IDF_operation-59) The emergency clinic, opened at the Erez crossing at the end of the fighting, was shut down shortly due to the low number of Palestinian patients, supposedly as a the result of a direct order by Hamas not to tr
ounded to Israel.[61] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Law_and_the_Gaza_War#cite_note-Israel_to_close_clinic_at_Erez_crossing-60)