On the flip side, in this war many of the Gaza combatants are either irregular forces or militants deliberately wearing civilian clothing.
So if some guy in a track suit and flip-flops uses an anti tank grenade launcher, discards the empty tube, walks away, and gets lit up, then the next day the Internet is awash with videos of the “IDF murdering a civilian!”
For reference, I think both sides are in the wrong in this conflict, and Israel more than Gaza.
However, the Internet is full of armchair international law experts that are being played like a fiddle by Hamas’ propaganda arm.
Speaking of international laws of combat: no protections apply to non-uniformed combatants pretending to be civilians. None. They can be tortured, executed on the spot, whatever.
If you want protections to apply to you, then wear a uniform or never go anywhere near a gun.
“Francs-tireurs (a term originating in the Franco-Prussian War) are enemy civilians or militia who continue to fight in territory occupied by a warring party and do not wear military uniforms, and may otherwise be known as guerrillas, partisans, insurgents, etc. Though they could be legally jailed or executed by most armies a century ago, the experience of World War II influenced nations occupied by foreign forces to change the law to protect this group.”
Sorry I hadn't read the whole thread: I agree the "false colors" sense of perfidy generally is granted due process. I was thinking of the "feigning surrender" sense of perfidy, which is pretty much universally met with summary execution.
This is my fault; I hadn't read the whole thread. There's two acts that constitute perfidy: one is wearing false uniforms or displaying false colors; I agree that isn't usually met with summary execution. The other one is taking back up arms after signalling a surrender. That is absolutely met with summary execution.
> However, the Internet is full of armchair international law experts that are being played like a fiddle by Hamas’ propaganda arm.
And Israeli hasbara? I see a lot of this take, that everyone is just blindly trusting, eg, casualty counts from the Gazan health ministry, but there seems to be very little questioning of and critical thinking about the propaganda the IDF is spreading in this conflict. Why should we take their word for it that killing a bunch of aid workers[1] was just a mistake, for example?
> Speaking of international laws of combat: no protections apply to non-uniformed combatants pretending to be civilians. None. They can be tortured, executed on the spot, whatever.
Speaking of "armchair international law experts", this is completely wrong.
BLUF: Failing to distinguish does not deprive you of fundamental guarantees of humane treatment, including the prohibition of torture and summary execution - both of which are war crimes.
The individual obligation to distinguish is linked to Prisoner of War (POW) status - those who do not distinguish, do not get the protections of that status. That is the only consequence of the failure to distinguish. All those persons who are not POWs are automatically civilians, as made clear by the residual clause in Article 4(4) Fourth Geneva Convention (GC IV). While civilians can be interned for "imperative reasons of security", they are entitled to their own detailed treatment obligations (Articles 79-135 GC IV). In any case, even if they are somehow not entitled to that treatment, the fundamental humane treatment guarantees of Art 27 GC IV [1] and Art 75 Additional Protocol I [2] (which, as customary law, applies to all parties to a conflict) nonetheless apply. If we argue that it is a non-international armed conflict (which knows neither POW status nor the obligation to distinguish), Common Article 3 [3] similarly obligates humane treatment. Humane treatment is also a norm under customary law [4].
Under these rules, you cannot torture people and you cannot summarily execute people [4]. Read the provisions yourself. In fact, summary execution and torture are actual war crimes [5]. If you want to punish a person, you need to give them a fair trial (IHL does not prohibit the death penalty).
You seem to be hinting at the Bush-era "illegal enemy combatant" theory but even the Bush Admin never argued that those persons are not entitled to humane treatment (it was mostly about fair trial rights), and the US (as its lone defender) has long since abandoned the position.
Whether Hamas is actually subject to such an obligation to distinguish is highly controversial. On one level is the issue of conflict classification, since POW status and the obligation to distinguish only exist in the law of international armed conflict (IAC). If we accept that there is an IAC (e.g. because of the military occupation), then the question still arises if Hamas somehow "belongs" to the State of Palestine or if they should just be seen as civilians directly participating in hostilities or as being in a parallel non-international armed conflict between Hamas and Israel. In turn, if we accept that there is an obligation to distinguish applicable to Hamas, then Israel also needs to treat Hamas fighters that distinguished as POWs (and, as set out above, if they failed to distinguish, as civilians).
> On the flip side, in this war many of the Gaza combatants are either irregular forces or militants deliberately wearing civilian clothing.
I'd be more inclined to believe that this was all it was, if the IDF didn't just blow up a convoy of foreign aid workers who had already received clearance and pre-registered their route with the IDF.
Sure, accidents happen, but it speaks volumes to the general level of diligence that goes into approving each strike, and this makes me very skeptical that other incidents that get coverage are simply attacks on plainclothed militants.
In the linked article the only check the IDF was still using on the target list provided by the AI was discarding any and all targets it selected who were women, as they don't believe Hamas would use them as fighters.
> At the height of the phenomenon, Avraham Burg, former chairman of the Jewish Agency for Israel, speaker of Israel's Knesset and interim President of Israel, stated his view that, given Israeli indifference to the tortured lives of Palestinian children under occupation, suicide bombings come as no surprise.
... Palestinians have been tortured from birth for decades. Acting surprised when they fight back is either disingenuous or stupid, or both.
As long as PA pays pension to terrorist families, UNRWA teachers teach math with "how many jews killed" and Iran and Qatar actively sponsor islamist terror, the society will remain the way it is now.
Does child soldier only mean toddlers though? I thought it was more commonly 16, 17 year olds.
Presumably recruiting 17 year olds is against international law.
But for a guerrilla fighting group that doesn't care about international law, a 17 year old is almost the ideal recruit. They can fight almost as effectively as an 18 year old can, and if they die in combat you can also claim, technically truthfully, that the enemy is deliberately targeting children.
It seems that you're claiming the only way to violate international law is to bomb all their people at once.
This is very wrong.
Targeting hospitals without clear proof of military activity is against international law. As is collective punishment, using starvation as a weapon of war, and many other things which are currently being livestreamed to the world.
If you understand a topic this poorly, why not read a little about it before 'contributing' to the discussion?
I'm convinced that there's no way to fight a war without pissing someone off.
Even more so, it's impossible to fight an _assymetric_ war without pissing a lot of people off.
> Targeting hospitals without clear proof of military activity is against international law.
What's "clear proof" is in the eye of the beholder.
> As is collective punishment, using starvation as a weapon of war
I'm actually willing to give Israel the benefit of doubt here, as they actually have no experience whatsoever in coordinating large scale aid deliveries, even if delays somewhat further their goal of punishing palestinians.
> UK government lawyers say Israel is breaking international law, claims top Tory in leaked recording
So what? Every major player on the world stage breaks international law whenever they damn well please, UK, US, Israel, China, Russia, they all do, to the point where in my eyes "x is breaking international law" is a completely worthless statement. Nobody is really going to do anything about it if you're on the right side of the new iron curtain.
This might be very cynical from me, but honestly, can you name the last time when the words “international law” carried any real weight?
It's far less complicated than you make it out to be. I'm on whichever side that doesn't deem it acceptable to deliberately kill kids by the thousand. Whatever else you type does not change that determination.
> I'm on whichever side that doesn't deem it acceptable to deliberately kill kids by the thousand.
Unfortunately, that side doesn’t exist in this world. Civilians have died in every war ever known to man. Whether they are kids or not is completely irrelevant.
Now whether the right-wing soldier who has seen his friends murdered in a music festival and has been sent in with a tank into Gaza care? Very likely less so. Does every member of this right wing government care? Likely less. However the independent court system in Israel can also enforce the various conventions Israel is a signatory to (e.g. the Geneva convention). The situation where young soldiers are in Gaza armed to the teeth fighting an enemy that blends in with civilians is the creation of Hamas.
If Israel follows international law 100% you will still see a lot dead toddlers in this kind of warfare. So just that fact doesn't prove much.
I wonder if we track this sentiment how far back it would go, I'd suspect it goes back about as far as there have been public complaints about child deaths.
You are aware you’re parroting war propaganda, right? I mean sure, this does happen in some cases I’m sure, for that matter I have seen the IDF _on video_ use Palestinians as human shields. But the entire article is about the fact that nobody is even looking if there are civilians there before dropping bombs, and 20K+ of women and children are now dead as a result.
"When people cite deaths from numbers supplied by Hamas, they are parroting terrorist propaganda."
No. Stop it. Numbers provided by the Health Ministry historically have been largely verified. The 30 000+ figure is not in question. All you have is a propaganda talking point doubting its source, not questioning methodology or providing a reasoned alternative figure. The fact Israel can't, and doesn't care enough to, provide numbers of its own IS THE PROBLEM.
Just parrot 'terrorist figures' and you have a license to continue. "Women and kids have killed" as a license to continue killing women and kids. Except you don't and this ugly tribalist brutality will never be forgotten.
When a country is run by literal terrorists, there are no figures that can be trusted. I'm not sure why that's difficult to understand. How many did Hamas themselves kill because they tried to leave an embattle area because Hamas wanted to use them as human shields?? You want to blame Israel for everything, but HAMAS IS THE PROBLEM.
Without Hamas using the entire country as a staging ground for terrorism (and continuing to do so), none of this would have happened.
"Hamas is the problem" but how then to explain increasing settler land theft, and supportive government decisions, in the West Bank where Hamas is not in charge? Who is common to both conflicts?
Keep squeezing those people and eventually Israel will have the terrorist pretext it needs to annex the West Bank entirely. Rein in the settlers and you might have some credibility. Until then this will remain an obvious war on all Palestinians.
So if some guy in a track suit and flip-flops uses an anti tank grenade launcher, discards the empty tube, walks away, and gets lit up, then the next day the Internet is awash with videos of the “IDF murdering a civilian!”
For reference, I think both sides are in the wrong in this conflict, and Israel more than Gaza.
However, the Internet is full of armchair international law experts that are being played like a fiddle by Hamas’ propaganda arm.
Speaking of international laws of combat: no protections apply to non-uniformed combatants pretending to be civilians. None. They can be tortured, executed on the spot, whatever.
If you want protections to apply to you, then wear a uniform or never go anywhere near a gun.