After a long list of criticisms and and justifications (which have all been previously reported here and elsewhere), the IDF statement then concludes with these remarks saying that the IDF is currently looking into the complaints made by Amnesty International and others about “the way in which the IDF operated during Operation Cast Lead” — and it very discretely reports even that one or more criminal investigations have been ordered opened:

“Out of a professional, ethical and judicial obligation to thoroughly inspect certain claims made regarding Operation Cast Lead, the IDF conducted a number of investigations following the operation. The investigations proved that the IDF operated throughout the fighting in accordance with international law, maintaining high ethical and professional standards and in many incidents, for the sake of avoiding harm to unassociated civilians, even limited itself beyond existing judicial obligations.

“Nonetheless, the investigations found a few, unfortunate incidents that are unavoidable during combat - especially the type of combat Hamas forced upon the IDF during Operation Cast Lead, when it chose to fight from within civilian population centers. In addition to the investigations ordered by the Chief of the General Staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, the IDF is currently looking into complaints that were received from various sources - private lawyers, human rights organizations (including Amnesty) and media outlets (both domestic and international) - that raise different questions regarding the way in which the IDF operated during Operation Cast Lead. In certain cases, the Chief Military Advocate has already ordered the opening of a criminal investigation“.

The IDF blinked?

Finally, and at last, the defiant facade is softening.

In any case, this is a very positive development.

Maybe it will help ensure that the unfair and utter insensitive cruelty that was evident in the Gaza conflict will never happen again. Never again.

The report presents evidence gathered by Amnesty International delegates, including a military expert, during field research in Gaza and southern Israel in January and February.

The report is designed, in part, to funnel information to the UN Human Rights Council’s Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, led by South Africa’s Justice Richard Goldstone. It is one of a series of recent reports, including by Human Rights Watch and by a group of Israel-based human rights organizations, all intended for the same purpose.

“Israel’s failure to properly investigate its forces’ conduct in Gaza, including war crimes, and its continuing refusal to cooperate with the UN international independent fact-finding mission headed by Richard Goldstone, is evidence of its intention to avoid public scrutiny and accountability,” said Donatella Rovera, who headed the field research mission, and wrote the report.

“Many questions remain to be answered about these attacks”, Rovera said — including “the fact that the strikes continued unabated despite the rising civilian death toll”.

The report said that “the pattern of attacks and the resulting high number of civilian fatalities and 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.”

Rovera indicated that Amnesty International believes that the Goldstone mission “now offers the best means to establish the truth”.

Amnesty said in a statement that “the victims of the attacks it investigated were not caught in the crossfire during battles between Palestinian militants and Israeli forces, nor were they shielding militants or other military objects. Many were killed when their homes were bombed while they slept. Other were sitting in their yard or hanging the laundry on the roof. Children were struck while playing in their bedrooms or on the roof, or near their homes. Paramedics and ambulances were repeatedly attacked while attempting to rescue the wounded or recover the dead … More than 3,000 homes were destroyed and some 20,000 damaged in Israeli attacks which reduced entire neighbourhoods of Gaza to rubble and left an already dire economic situation in ruins. Much of the destruction was wanton and could not be justified on grounds of ‘military necessity’.”

Rovera said there is concern that now, “Five months on, neither side has shown any inclination to change its practices and abide by international humanitarian law, raising the prospect that civilians will again bear the brunt if fighting resumes,”

Both Israel and Hamas have breached the laws of war in a way that constitutes war crimes, the report says.

Amnesty International said in statement accompanying the report that “Under international law, states have a responsibility to exercise universal jurisdiction and start criminal investigations in national courts, wherever there is sufficient evidence of war crimes or other crimes under international law, to arrest and bring to justice alleged perpetrators … Those responsible for war crimes and other serious violations must not be allowed to escape accountability and justice.”

The report says that “The scale and intensity of the attacks on Gaza were unprecedented … [hundreds of unarmed civilians, including children, were killed] … Most were killed with high-precision weapons, relying on surveillance drones which have exceptionally good optics, allowing those observing to see their targets in detail. Others were killed with imprecise weapons, including artillery shells carrying white phosphorus – not previously used in Gaza - which should never be used in densely populated areas”.

It added that “Much of the destruction was wanton and deliberate, and was carried out in a manner and circumstances which indicated that it could not be justified on grounds of military necessity. Rather, it was often the result of reckless and indiscriminate attacks, which were seemingly tolerated or even directly sanctioned up the chain of command, and which at times appeared intended to collectively punish local residents for the actions of armed groups”.

Amnesty International noted that “The Israeli army has not responded to … repeated requests over the past five months for information on specific cases detailed in the report and for meetings to discuss the organization’s findings”.

Amnesty also noted that “The Hamas de facto administration in Gaza has not only failed to investigate rocket attacks by its own and other armed groups, but has persisted in justifying such unlawful attacks”.

But, according to a report today by the French news agency Agence France Presse (AFP), the Israeli military said that “The slant of their [Amnesty's] report indicates that the organisation succumbed to the manipulations of the Hamas terror organisation”, AFP added that “Israel accused the rights group of ignoring ‘the blatant violations of international law perpetrated by Hamas’.”

In its recommendations, the report “calls on states to suspend all transfers of military equipment, assistance and munitions to Israel, Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups until there is no longer a substantial risk that such equipment will be used to commit serious violations of international law. It calls on Israel to commit not to carry out direct, indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks on civilians; or use artillery, mortars and white phosphorus weapons in densely populated areas; and to end its blockade on the Gaza Strip, which is collectively punishing the entire population. [And] It urges Hamas to renounce its policy of unlawful rocket attacks against civilian population centres in Israel and to prevent other armed groups from carrying out such attacks”.

The AFP report said that Israel called the report “unbalanced” and that it presented “a distorted view of the laws of war that does not comply with the rules implemented by democratic states battling terror.”

According to a report in Reuters today, “the Israeli military said it operated in accordance with international law. It said the report ignored ‘efforts made by the Israel Defense Forces to minimize, as much as possible, harm to non-combatants … In many cases, the Israel Defense Forces exercised measures of caution, including warning the civilian population before an attack’, the military said. ‘The Israel Defense Forces directed its attack only against military targets’.”

AFP noted that the Israeli statement “insisted Israeli forces used various fighting methods and advanced technology to minimise harm to the civilian population while engaging terrorists who were operating from densely populated areas and using the local population as ‘human shields’.”

But the Israeli government has argued that almost all males in their teens and twenties are in some way affiliated with or supporters of Hamas, and are thus legitimate military targets.

A statement published on the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs website in late January — and still posted here, says that ” To Israel’s great sorrow, innocent civilians in Gaza have been harmed. However, the figures of civilian casualties have been greatly exaggerated. Most of these figures come from Hamas sources, amplifying the number of civilians killed by including as ‘children’ teenage Hamas fighters and as ‘women’, female terrorists. According to an Israeli investigation, of the 1,100-1,200 reported casualties, 250 were civilians. The rest are believed to be terrorists or have yet to be identified, but given that most of them are young men in their 20s, it is not unreasonable to assume that they are also members of Hamas or other terrorist organizations“.

The IDF went even further, according to Israeli soldiers who participated in the military operation, warning that old women are often working as “lookouts” for Hamas, and are thus also legitimate military targets. Some of these soldiers’ testimony was dismissed as “hearsay” after a hasty military investigation, but Breaking the Silence, an Israeli organization of soldiers critical of some military policies, says that it is collecting evidence that corroborates this testimony.

Amnesty International says in this report that it was Israel, and not Hamas, who used Palestinians as human shields during Operation Cast Lead, and it took issue with often-repeated Israeli claims that warnings sent to Palestinians in Gaza were enough to fulfill Israel’s obligations to avoid harm to civilians and to discriminate between civilian and military targets under international humanitarian law.

According to the Israeli justifications, Palestinians who did not flee their homes — to where? The IDF did not ever specify any safe areas — thus became responsible for the harm they suffered.

In some cases, the report said, the IDF forced Palestinian civilians to stay in or near homes that Israeli soldiers were using as military positions.

The report states that “contrary to repeated allegations by Israeli officials of the use of ‘human shields’, Amnesty International found no evidence that Hamas or other Palestinian fighters directed the movement of civilians to shield military objectives from attacks. It found no evidence that Hamas or other armed groups forced residents to stay in or around buildings used by fighters, nor that fighters prevented residents from leaving buildings or areas which had been commandeered by militants. Israel and Egypt kept Gaza’s borders sealed throughout Operation ‘Cast Lead’ and its 1.5 million inhabitants could neither leave nor find a place in Gaza where their safety could be guaranteed. Unlike in southern Israel, where the Israeli authorities have built bomb shelters to protect local residents from rocket attacks by Palestinian armed groups, in Gaza there are no bomb shelters and none can be built because Israel has long forbidden the entry of construction material into Gaza. Randomly placed telephone calls with recorded warning messages, radio broadcasts and leaflets dropped by the Israeli army all over Gaza telling people to leave their homes and neighborhoods caused widespread panic but offered little protection. In some areas residents were trapped in their homes, hearing the Israeli army broadcasts warning people to leave but unable to do so because Israeli forces in the area were not allowing any movement and therefore anyone who went out risked coming under fire. Others who fled their homes were killed or injured when UN schools and other places where they had sought shelter came under Israeli attack”.

Curiously, neither Amnesty International nor any of the other groups and organizations who have published new reports recently have mentioned one of the most chilling aspects of Israel’s Operation Cast Lead against Gaza — and that is that on various occasions in various places in Gaza during the conflict, civilians waving white flags were nevertheless fired upon, and a number died.

At a recent conference organized in Jerusalem by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA) to evaluate the Gaza war, the world-class Israeli international law expert Professor Yoram Dinstein (author of authoritative books such as War, Aggression, and Self-Defence and The Conduct of Hostilities Under the Law of International Armed Conflict, and The International Law of Belligerent Occupation, and a former President of Tel Aviv University and head of the law school who still lectures there as Professor Emeritus), said that “the law of armed conflict is a very difficult field … and, with international humanitarian law, often issues very harsh criteria. Can you drop a bomb of half a ton on one Hamas activist even tough civilians are in the building? Is it allowed or not? This is debated. But Israel is making a mistake in not going to this forum. We cannot be satisfied with five military investigative teams conducting inquiries [into various aspects of Operation Cast Lead], and then concluding that ‘Israel has the most moral army in the world’. How is this measured? How do you measure it? We indict soldiers for looting — we should also do this if there is data indicating that maybe a war crime was committed. Maybe they would be acquitted in the end, but we cannot issue five reports that say at the end we are the best military in the world — and then say the world [when it is sceptical] is anti-semitic, though maybe it is, but we are losing the public relations battle”, Dinsein added.

But, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs said at the end of January that “Israel takes every report of war crimes seriously, provided it comes from a credible source. However, no official body or organization has presented any evidence of war crimes allegedly committed by Israel. All accusations have been based on rumor, half-truths, anonymous reports from unconfirmed sources, and manipulations of the truth. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) routinely and thoroughly scrutinizes its operational activities and when necessary, is subject to oversight by judicial and governmental authorities. Therefore, there is no need of outside intervention. It is important to emphasize that no credible evidence or proof of war crimes allegedly committed by Israel has been presented”. The link to this statement on the MFA website — a FAQ [Frequently Asked Questions] on the Gaza operation issued in January — is no longer working directly, but is now redirected to the main MFA page. And a search on the MFA website reveals no results. But it is contained in our report at the time, posted here .

Nevertheless, the IDF has said that its own central operational IDF investigation of the entire operation was supposed to have been concluded by June. This statement is posted here .

The Supreme Court said that a “disorderly conduct” charge was “unreasonable to an extreme degree,” and ordered that the military prosecution retry the defendants on more severe charges to reflect the gravity of the offenses, the Jerusalem Post reported.

The Palestinian who was shot at close range while blindfolded with his hands bound last July, Ashraf Abu Rahma, and four Israeli human rights organizations — B’Tselem, the Asssociation for Civil Rights in Israel (ACRI), the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) and Yesh Din – filed the petition to the Surpreme Court, demanding that “the indictments filed against the soldier who fired the shot, Staff Sergeant L., and the platoon commander, lieutenant Col. Omri Borberg, be changed so as to reflect the severity of the offenses. Using a weapon to intimidate, and shooting a handcuffed detainee may amount to abuse of detainee under aggravated circumstances, an offense that carries a penalty of seven years in prison. In the petition, attorneys Limor Yehuda and Dan Yakir from ACRI stated that the decision of the Military Prosecutor to charge the soldier and commander with ‘unbecoming conduct’, an offense which does not appear on criminal records, is highly unreasonable and conveys an alarming message of disrespect for human lives, laying the foundation for future incidents of abuse. The military said the Lieutenant-Colonel, who held the Palestinian as the soldier shot rubber bullets at him, only meant to scare the detainee, and that the decision to prosecute him for disorderly conduct was made based on the evidence”.

In a statement, the four Israeli human rights organizations who had filed the petition to change the indictments “expressed satisfaction with the decision, saying that it conveys a crucial message that protection of human rights must be a primary consideration for law-enforcement agencies. The organizations said they hope that in the future, High Court intervention will not be necessary for military law-enforcement agencies to convey to soldiers and commanders an unequivocal message to safeguard human life and dignity. However, the organizations voiced concern over the fact that even though the abuse of the handcuffed detainee was filmed and caused a public outcry, the High Court’s intervention was necessary for the army to take proper action against the offenders. They said that the many reports regarding violence by security forces in the Occupied Territories , accompanied by feeble responses of the military law-enforcement agencies, raise doubt as to the ability and commitment of the army’s command level to comply with essential moral and legal norms”.

Ashraf Abu Rahma, was related to another Palestinian who died during a demonstration in Bil’in in April by a high-velocity tear gas cannister that hit him directly in the chest,. as we reported earlier here . Basem Abu Rahmeh died within minutes.

Both shootings were videotaped, and can be viewed on Youtube or on the B’Tselem website.

The video of the shooting of bound and blindfolded Ashraf Abu Rahma can be found here.

An AP report using the video footage is available here

I wonder where they got this information?

We are usually never informed about anything here — when the water will be cut, when the electricity will be cut, when the checkpoint will be removed, when the Gate in The Wall might be reopened to ease the congestion for children who must go through the mess at Qalandia checkpoint (”border crossing”) to get to school and back every day.

There are only ever rumors — that is part of what it means to live under occupation.

And now, we have a rumor of an earthquake alert — which will affect both occupiers and occupied.

A Cypriot diplomat in the region said that “They signed and they said they were going to Port Said. With that destination, they were covered by international law all the way”.

Of course, the Free Gaza activists always said publicly that their destination was Gaza, and they were determined to go to Gaza.

This diplomat had earlier indicated, as we reportedhere, that “we cannot stop them, if they tell us they’re going to Crete, or someplace else, then change once they’re at sea and head toward Gaza”. But, he added, if they do so, they will lose their base of support in Cyprus.

This diplomat said, at the time, that there was no physical way the Cypriot authorities wouldl try to stop this Free Gaza expedition from leaving port, if they intend to do so. But it would be a violation of Cypriot law or regulations, he indicated, because there is no “port” at the Free Gaza expedition’s destination in Gaza.

(n.b. There is a little fishing port in Gaza City, but not a real seaport. The Agreement on Movement and Access [to Gaza] that former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had to become involved with negotiating — staying up all night on her birthday, 15 November 2005 — stated that “Construction of a seaport can commence. The GoI [Government of Israel] will undertake to assure donors that it will not interfere with operation of the port”. But, so far, espcially because of the sanctions imposed on Gaza, and now of course with the formal naval blockade, there has been no movement at all on the construction of a seaport in Gaza.)

Today, the Cypriot diplomat explained that “We told them they cannot use Cyprus as a base to establish a formal line to Gaza[to transport humanitarian goods to Gaza, and also not incidentally to move Gazans in and out] because there is no legal port there, no insurance will cover them, there is no law there, and they would in effect be operating as a sort of piracy, entering a pronounced military zone declared by somebody else”

The Cypriot diplomat said that Cyprus is not angry with the Free Gaza activists: “No, we are not angry. Why should we be? We can understand the humanitarian side of what they are trying to do. It is completely understood. On the other hand, you cannot play with the lives of people. You cannot let them go, knowing their lives are in danger. Officially, how could we let them go to Gaza?”

The Free Gaza activists that were towed in the Spirit of Humanity to Ashdod Port yesterday and taken into Israeli immigration custody have apparently still not been released.

Ynet reported yesterday that “Israel is planning to deport within the next few days the 21 peace activists who arrived on a boat from Cyprus with the intention of entering the Gaza Strip. An Israeli Navy unit boarded their boat and escorted it to Ashdod port. Immigration police will transport the detained activists to Ben Gurion Airport, and from there they will be deported out of the country … Eight immigration police arrived at Ashdod police and performed a search of the activists’ belongings. The detainees will then be transferred to the Immigration Administration in Holon. The police will take their fingerprints, and then send them to Ben Gurion Airport, where each one will face a hearing before the Interior Ministry before being deported”

YNet added that “Among the peace activists are two Israeli-American citizens, and 19 others, including five from Ireland, three from Britain, five from Bahrain, three Americans, and Danish, Jordan, and Yemenite citizens.”

Are the Israeli authorities going to deport the Israeli-Americans?

YNet added that Gerta Berlin, founder of Movement for the Freedom of Gaza, who was contacted in Larnaca, Cyprus, said that “The Israeli government does not understand that time is on our side. In the meantime, the administration is losing public support. It would be much smarter on their part if they would simply turn the other cheek and let us
through. The detainment of the boat only works in our favor in the long run”.

The Free Gaza movement’s latest Tweet says: “No word where passengers are. Only a few text messages”.

The Egyptian blogger, Zenobia, is one of those following this case on her site — covering the Egyptian angle in particular. One of her recent posts is here. Zenobia writes that Egyptian officials, at least, suspect that Warren was trying to recruit his victims as agents.

Zenobia has a particularly interesting post, here.

In this post, she embds a Youtube video (also viewable here of an ABC television news report on this case:

An affadavit sworn by a U.S. Department of State diplomatic security officer to obtain a court order for a search warrant, described the extraordinary and sensational charges — that while on duty in Algiers, Warren offered and prepared in his home alcholic drinks to two women of Algerian origin, and he then raped them. This affadavit is posted online here.

In this affadavit, which was posted on the ABC news website, Victim One (Vi) said that she was invited to a party by U.S. Embassay employees at Warren’s home. She stated that Warren mixed for her, out of her sight, several drinks of cola and whisky. Toward the end of the evening, after the last drink that Warren prepared, “she suddenly felt nauseated and felt an immediate need to vomit. and violent onset of nausea as nothing like the physiological effects of alcohol that she had experienced while consuming alcohol on previous occasions. V1 physically held her hand over her mouth in order to avoid vomiting on the floor of the residence. V1 ran to a bathroom where she vomited into a toilet. While V1 was vomiting, Witness #1 (“W1”), a female, was trying to assist V1 in the bathroom. V1 remembered Warren standing in the bathroom doorway while she was sick, saying that V1 should stay the night at his house. After this memory, V1 could not remember anything that happened the rest of the evening. W1 stated that all of the other individuals at the party left the house around this time, and that only V1, W1 and Warren stayed the night in the residence” … and so on.

Victim Two (V2) had known Warren in Egypt, then visited him in Algiers in February 2008 after he was transferred there. She testified that Warren invited him to his new home (which, according to the affadavit, is “within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States”), and prepared apple martinis for both of them, then a second drink for her, and that “While drinking the second apple martini, V2 suddenly felt faint and felt the immediate needed to vomit. V2 described the sudden and violent onset of the illness as nothing like the physiological effects of alcohol related sickness that she had experienced when she consumed alcohol on previous occasions. V2 stated she immediately began to pass in and out of consciousness. V2’s recollections of the ensuing events are characterized as passing in and out of consciousness, due to the debilitating effects of the illness. After nearly fainting and experiencing the immediate need to vomit, V2’s next recollection was being located in Warren’s upstairs bathroom, on the floor. V2 could see and hear, but she could not move” … and so on,

The affadavit adds that “V2 told her husband and her psychologist about the
incident on February 17, 2008, but did not inform anyone at the United States Embassy
until she next returned to Algeria in September 2008. On October 9, 2008, Warren flew from Algeria to the United States, for a meeting scheduled on October 10, 2008. On October 9, 2008, Warren checked into Hilton Washington Hotel, Room 7212, located at 1919 Connecticut Ave., NW, Washington, DC. This hotel is located in the District of Columbia. On October 10, 2008, I met with Warren at his place of employment in Northern Virginia to inform him of the allegations leveled against him by V1 and V2. During this meeting, Warren agreed to cooperate with the investigation. Warren admitted during this meeting that he had engaged in consensual sexual intercourse with V1 and V2 at his residence in Algiers, Algeria. Warren informed me that his personal lap top computer was in his hotel room located at the Washington Hilton Hotel and that photographs of V1 and V2 were probably on his personal lap top computer. Following this meeting, Warren voluntarily surrendered his cell phone and digital camera, which were located in his rental car, to me for forensic analysis. That analysis uncovered multiple photographs of V1 and V2, along with various other women. He declined consent to the seizure or search of his personal computer”.

The diplomatic security agent added, in the report, that “Through the toxicology expert, I learned that drugs which are commonly used to facilitate sexual assault are prescribed sleeping medications, muscle relaxants, anxiety pills, Xanax, and Valium, which are then converted from pill form to powdered form … These drugs are rapidly absorbed and metabolized by the body. Detectable levels remain in the urine for 8 to 12 hours and in the blood for 4 to 8 hours. Symptoms of these drugs appear within 15 to 30 minutes of ingestion, and the effects persist for 3 to 6 hours … [and that] information on how to obtain and use the above-described substances to facilitate sexual assaults can be found on the Internet”.

The diplomatic security agent then adds, in his affadavit in support of a search warrent, that “Searching computer systems requires the use of precise, scientific procedures
which are designed to maintain the integrity of the evidence and to recover
‘hidden’, erased, compressed, encrypted or password-protected data. Computer
hardware and storage devices may contain ‘booby traps’ that destroy or alter data
if certain procedures are not scrupulously followed. Since computer data is
particularly vulnerable to inadvertent or intentional modification or destruction, a
controlled environment, such as a law enforcement laboratory, is essential to
conducting a complete and accurate analysis of the equipment and storage devices
from which the data will be extracted … Computer users can attempt to conceal data within computer equipment and storage devices through a number of methods, including the use of innocuous or misleading filenames and extensions. For example, files with the extension ‘.jpg’ often are image files; however, a user can easily change the extension to ‘.txt’ to conceal the image and make it appear that the file contains text. Computer userscan also attempt to conceal data by using encryption, which means that a password or device, such as a ‘dongle’ or ‘keycard’, is necessary to decrypt the data into readable form. In addition, computer users can conceal data within
another seemingly unrelated and innocuous file in a process called ’steganography’. For example, by using steganography a computer user can conceal text in an image file which cannot be viewed when the image file is opened. Therefore, a substantial amount of time is necessary to extract and sort through data that is concealed or encrypted to determine whether it is evidence,contraband or instrumentalities of a crime”.

Newsweek, the Los Angeles Times, and the International Herald Tribune are among the media which have covered these accusations.

Newsweek reported at the end of January that “Andrew Warren is a 6-foot-4 African-American schooled in the martial arts. Steeped in Middle Eastern history, he is a convert to Islam who speaks six Arabic dialects … Though the CIA won’t confirm it, numerous U.S. government officials acknowledged to NEWSWEEK the revelation, first reported by ABC News correspondent Brian Ross, that Warren was serving in Algiers as CIA station chief … Speaking anonymously in order to be candid, one of Warren’s former instructors at the ‘Farm’, where spies are trained, told NEWSWEEK that Warren was ‘a loose cannon’ whose confidence ‘bordered on narcissism’.” This article can be read in full here.

Six months after the charges were formulated (and many months after the alleged events). this 41-year-old ex-CIA agent was indicted just hours ago on 30 June in Washington DC for sexual assault, as reported by the Washington Post, here

After the indictment, the Washington Post adds, Warren “was released on personal recognizance after a brief appearance yesterday in the District’s federal court. The sexual-abuse charge carries a maximum sentence of life in prison”.

On top of all the unanswered questions in this case, there are these: Is it normal to indict someone six months after the accusations are formalized? Is it normal to release someone “on personal recognizance” who is facing life in prison?

Human Rights Watch has just released another in its series of investigations into the Israeli military operation, entitled: “Precisely Wrong - Gaza Civilians Killed by Israeli Drone-Launched Missiles”. It can be viewed in full here

The drones (also know as Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles) are “one of the most precise weapons in Israel’s arsenal” — yet during Operation Cast Lead drones “killed civilians who were not taking part in hostilities and were far from any fighting”, Human Rights Watch said.

As a result, Human Rights Watch concluded that “Israeli forces failed to take all feasible precautions to verify that these targets were combatants, as required by the laws of war, or that they failed to distinguish between combatants and civilians”.

Gazans call the drones “zanana” because of the constant buzzing noise they make when hovering overhead. They also reportedly fly over the West Bank, and interfere with television reception when they do.

Marc Garlasco, senior military analyst at Human Rights Watch and co-author of the report, said that “When used properly, drones and their precision missiles can help a military minimize civilian casualties … But drones are only as good at sparing civilians as the people who command and operate them.”

“Drone operators can clearly see their targets on the ground and also divert their missiles after launch … Given these capabilities, Israel needs to explain why these civilian deaths took place.”

Human Rights Watch said that “One Israeli drone operator who flew missions in Gaza during the recent fighting told an Israeli military journal that he was able to detect clothing colors, a large radio, and a weapon … Drones carry an array of advanced sensors, often combining radars, electro-optical cameras, infrared cameras, and lasers. These sensors can provide a clear image in real time of individuals on the ground during day and night, with the ability to distinguish between children and adults … The missile launched from a drone carries its own cameras that allow the operator to observe the target from the moment of firing to impact. If doubts arise about a target, the drone operator can redirect the weapon elsewhere”.

Given all these capabilities, the drone attacks in Gaza appear to have been, according to Human Rights Watch, “in violation of the laws of war”.

Human Rights Watch added that “The Israel Defense Forces turned down repeated Human Rights Watch requests for a meeting and did not respond to questions submitted in writing*.

“Precisely Wrong”, the new 39-page report from HRW, is “based on field research in Gaza, where Human Rights Watch researchers interviewed victims and witnesses, examined attack sites, collected missile debris for testing, and reviewed medical records”. The organization said it examined in detail six incidents resulting in 29 civilian deaths (among them 8 children). There were a reported total of 42 drone attacks that killed 87 civilian.

“In the six cases documented in the report, Human Rights Watch found no evidence that Palestinian fighters were present in the immediate area of the attack at the time. None of the civilians who were killed were moving quickly or fleeing the area, so the drone operators would have had time to determine whether they were observing civilians or combatants, and to hold fire if they were unable to tell the difference. In three of the cases, drones fired missiles at children playing on rooftops in residential neighborhoods, far from any ground fighting at the time. Human Rights Watch found no evidence to suggest that the children were acting as spotters, relaying Israeli troop locations, or trying to launch a rocket from the roof”.

In addition, “On December 27, 2008, the first day of the Israeli offensive called “Operation Cast Lead,” a drone-launched missile hit a group of university students as they waited for a bus on a crowded residential street in central Gaza City, killing 12 civilians. The Israeli military has failed to explain why it targeted the group on a crowded downtown street with no known military activity in the area at the time. On December 29, the Israeli military struck a truck that it said was transporting Grad rockets, killing nine civilians. The military released video footage here of the attack to support its case, but the video raises serious doubts that the target constituted a military objective – doubts that should have guided the drone operator to hold fire. The alleged rockets, the military later admitted, proved to be oxygen canisters”.

Human Rights Watch said “it found that Israeli forces failed to take all feasible precautions to verify that these targets were combatants, as required by the laws of war, or that they failed to distinguish between combatants and civilians. Israel has failed to conduct credible investigations into its actions during Operation Cast Lead. On April 22, the military released the results of an internal investigation, which concluded that its forces ‘operated in accordance with international law’ throughout the fighting and that ‘a very small number’ of ‘unavoidable’ incidents occurred due to ‘intelligence or operational errors’.

But, Human Rights Watch noted, “Individuals who have committed serious violations of the laws of war with criminal intent – that is, intentionally or recklessly – are responsible for war crimes”.

The organization called on Israel to release its recorded video footage and other documentation of its attacks in which civilians were wounded or killed: “The drones deployed by the Israeli military – the Israeli-produced Hermes and Heron drones – have video-recording devices so that everything viewed by the operator is recorded. Every Israeli drone missile strike during Operation Cast Lead would therefore be registered on video”

The Israeli military issued a response on Tuesday evening, saying that “The credibility of the Human Rights Watch (HRW) report is questionable, given that it is based on anonymous Palestinian sources, who lack credibility, whose knowledge of military issues is doubtful, and on the other hand are clearly not impartial observers, and form part of the Gazan propaganda system”.

The Israeli military statement added that: “It is surprising that HRW chose to ignore the extensive efforts made by the IDF to avoid causing harm to non-combatants, and chose to base its report entirely on reports by Palestinian witnesses. The actions taken by the IDF in general, and in particular those taken during Operation Cast Lead, conform to international law, as do the weapons and munitions used by the IDF. Furthermore, when using these weapons the IDF strictly adheres to the principles of distinction and proportionality. During operation Cast Lead the IDF made use of advanced technology, tactics and weapon systems which minimized the risk to non-combatants and civilian property. This was done while confronting terrorists, who intentionally operated from within the Gaza Strip’s densely populated areas and used civilians as human shields. The IDF acted exclusively against military targets, and strived to minimize the harm caused to civilian population, at times at the expense of its own military interests.  The IDF is committed to honoring its obligations under international humanitarian law and is examining allegations that it breached these obligations during Operation Cast Lead. As a result, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, IDF Chief of Staff, appointed five investigative teams, each headed by an officer of the rank of Colonel, to thoroughly examine several issues, including claims regarding incidents in which many uninvolved civilians were harmed which were raised by NGOs and international human rights organizations, including HRW as well as Israeli and international media outlets. A summary of the results of these investigations were released by the IDF, and showed that, as a rule, the IDF’s actions during the operation conformed with international law, and that the IDF maintained high professional and moral standards. In addition the investigations showed that in all of the incidents which were examined, the IDF did not directly target non-combatants. In those incidents where IDF activity did cause injury to non-combatants, it was not as the result of an intentional strike on those non-combatants, but rather the unfortunate result of circumstances which were beyond the control of the IDF forces involved, or the result of an unexpected operational failure. As noted, many of the incidents resulted from the deplorable and intentional use that Hamas made of civilians as ‘cover’, blending with the civilian population and using civilian buildings and facilities while launching terror attacks against Israel”.

At a recent conference organized in Jerusalem by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA) to evaluate the Gaza war, the world-class Israeli international law expert Professor Yoram Dinstein, the author of War, Aggression, and Self-Defence and The Conduct of Hostilities Under the Law of International Armed Conflict as well as of The International Law of Belligerent Occupation, and a former President of Tel Aviv University and head of the law school who still lectures there as Professor Emeritus, said that “the law of armed conflict is a very difficult field … and, with international humanitarian law, often issues very harsh criteria.  Can you drop a bomb of half a ton on one Hamas activist even tough civilians are in the building?  Is it allowed or not?  This is debated.  But Israel is making a mistake in not going to this forum.  We cannot be satisfied with five military investigatîve teams conducting inquiries [into various aspects of Operation Cast Lead], and then concluding that ‘Israel has the most moral army in the world’.  How is this measured?  How do you measure it?  We indict soldiers for looting — we should also do this if there is data indicating that maybe a war crime was committed.  Maybe they would be acquitted in the end, but we cannot issue five repourts that say at the wnd we are the best military in the world — and then say the world [when it is sceptical] is anti-semitic, though maybe it is, but we are losing the public relations battle”, Dinsein added.

Yes, the formal Israeli naval blockade of the Gaza Strip — announced on 3-4 January as the IDF began the ground phase of Operation Cast Lead against Gaza — is still in force, the IDF announcement confirmed: “Yesterday evening, the Israeli Navy contacted the boat while at sea, clarifying that it would not be permitted to enter Gazan coastal waters because of security risks in the area and the existing naval blockade. [But] Disregarding all warnings made, the cargo boat entered Gazan coastal waters. As a result of the actions taken by the boat crew, an Israeli Navy force intercepted, boarded, and took control of the boat, directing it towards Ashdod, Israel. No shots were fired during the boarding of the boat. The boat crew will be handed over to the appropriate authorities. Humanitarian goods found on board the boat will be transferred to the Gaza Strip, subject to authorization. The IDF Spokesperson Unit would like to emphasize that any organization or country that wishes to transfer humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, can legally do so via the established crossings between Israel and the Gaza Strip with prior coordination”.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry said that the passengers and crew on board will be “checked by the immigration authorities”, then released.

AP reported that “The ship arrived at Ashdod port after nightfall”. It added that “The ship was flying a Greek flag, but no Greek citizens were aboard. The Greek government issued a statement saying it sent a message to Israel demanding that it release the ship, crew and passengers. Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said Israel was planning to free the crew and passengers. ‘Nobody wants to keep them here’, he said. ‘They will be released as soon as they are checked.” This AP report can be read in full here.

Agence France Presse £(AFP£) reported that “After the navy boarded the converted ferry it towed the vessel toward the nearby Israeli port of Ashdod, the spokesman said, adding that the activists on board would be handed over to authorities … Greece quickly protested the seizing of the Greek-flagged vessel, saying ‘we remonstrated with the Israeli side and asked for the ship, the crew and the passengers to be released immediately’, foreign ministry spokesman Grigoris Delavekouras said in a statement. ‘As we have said in the past, all legal activity by non-governmental organisations must enjoy freedom’, he said … On December 30, shortly after the Gaza war erupted, an Israeli navy vessel collided with a Free Gaza boat, almost sinking it, in what activists called a ‘deliberate ramming’. Earlier on Tuesday, the Free Gaza movement said that Israeli warships had surrounded the Spirit of Humanity and threatened to open fire if it did not turn around. At one point, the Israelis jammed the boat’s instruments, blocking their GPS, radar and navigation systems ‘in direct violation of international maritime law’, the group said. The Israeli foreign ministry said the boat’s owners had lied before departure from Cyprus about the vessel’s destination, saying it was bound for Port Said in Egypt. The ministry also said that under the 1993 autonomy accords struck with the Palestinians, Gaza’s territorial waters, like its land borders, were Israel’s responsibility”. The AFP report can be read in full here.

The latest Twitter message from the Free Gaza movement, sent about 730 PM Jerusalem time, said: “Spoke to Shlomo Dror who likes to scream. He insisted that Israel has right to inspect cargo even though Cyprus already inspected”.

Earlier Twitter messages said that the Free Gaza group was “Waiting to hear from attorneys about kidnapped passengers. Boat going to Ashdod … Boat towed. Passengers turned over to immigration, ironic since we don’t WANT to be in Israel.”

Before that, a Twitter message read: “They’re about to come on board, they’re about to come on board. Then the line went dead … They are 24 miles away from Gaza”.

The Green Party in the United States has released a statement quoting Cynthia McKinney, the Green Party’s 2008 candidate for President of the United States assaying that “This is an putrageous violation of international law against us. Our boat was not in Israeli waters, and we were on a human rights mission to the Gaza Strip … President Obama just told Israel to let in humanitarian and reconstruction supplies, and that’s exactly what we tried to do. We’re asking the international community to demand our release so we can resume our journey.” The Green Party added that “Ms. McKinney had earlier sent appeals to President Obama and the State
Department for assurances of protection for the relief mission. The Spirit of Humanity was sailing in international waters when it was seized”.

Five days ago (on 25 June), Cynthia McKinney posted a Twitter message that can be found in the chain here saying that “The Cyprus Port Authority has just noticed us that they will destroy the boats (for our safety, of course) to prevent us from sailing”.

Or maybe not — can the careful wording of some of the Israeli communications suggest that the formal naval blockade might have ended when Israel put its own unilateral cease-fire into effect on 18 January???

For the past 8 hours, the one Free Gaza boat now at sea has been travelling with intermittent contact with accompanying Israeli naval warships.

This Free Gaza boat, The Spirit of Humanity, is sailing under a Greek flag.

A journalist and cameraman from Al-Jazeera television are onboard, according to the group’s
latest passenger list, published yesterday.

The Free Gaza movement had been warned by multiple sources not to try to undertake this expedition, but they felt they had to stand up to what they called Israeli “intimidation”. When the Free Gaza movement began its expeditions from Cyprus to Gaza by sea last August, they declared their intention to break the siege of Gaza.

At that time, the Israeli government let them pass, saying they did not want to give the Free Gaza movement a propaganda victory.

In an email message this morning, Free Gaza supporters said “We’re a little concerned that the Israelis may be following the same protocol they did when they boarded the Lebanese ship back in February & arrested everyone. If they are following the same protocol, then we could expect an attack as early as 10-11am our time, 8-9am GMT. UPDATES: lefthand column/sidebar at: here.

Here are the latest updates, via Twitter:

23 MINUTES AGO
Spirit is about 60 miles off Gaza, just received a HELP message

27 MINUTES AGO
ALL WE WANT IS TO REACH GAZA. WE DO NOT SEEK A CONFRONTATION, Surrounded by 5 Israeli warships. Told to turn back. Still going forward

2 hours ago
Keep the pressure up. Someone turned the GPS and SPOT back on [navigation equipment restored]. We hear every ten minutes. Passengers/crew are fine. Soon to turn to Gaza

4 hours ago
“You will not be allowed to proceed to Gaza, and the boat that should return to Larnaca.” Message from Israeli gunboats. Spirit continues.

7 hours ago
Passengers are fine, but everything is jammed. Heading west to avoid Israeli waters and remain in International waters

The Fact-finding Mission, led by Justice Richard Goldstone of South Africa, is looking at events before, during, and after Operation Cast Lead (27 December - 18 January) — and the mission has said that events since a June 2008 cease-fire between Israel and Hamas would be “relevant” to its investigation.

The Israeli human rights organizations asked the Goldstone mission, additionally, “to review the policy of closing the Gaza border passages before, during, and after the military operation” — because, they said, “the events of Operation Cast Lead cannot be viewed independently of the closure on the Gaza Strip, which was imposed almost two years before the attack and has continued ever since”.

They said in a statement that they “believe that the Goldstone Committee’s mission of seeking the truth is of critical importance, in particular due to the refusal by Israel’s Attorney General of the organizations’ request to order a domestic, independent, and impartial inquiry into the Gaza events”.

They again called on the Israeli government to cooperate with the Fact-Finding Mission.

And they said that “as human rights organizations based in Israel , it is their mandate to report on issues under Israel ’s control and responsibility”.

For form, the Israeli groups demanded that suspicions that Hamas violated the laws of war be investigated — as Justice Goldstone has already said the Fact-finding Mission intended to do.

The Israeli human rights organizations also said that “reliable, thorough, and impartial investigations are an essential tool for the protection of human rights and for extending maximal protection to civilian populations in wartime”.

The Israeli human rights groups said that the findings they submitted to the Goldstone mission examined “violations of the laws of war that the Israel military allegedly committed during its attack on the Gaza Strip, dubbed ‘Operation Cast Lead’, which should be investigated, referring mainly to policies of collective punishment used against the civilian population of the Gaza Strip. The report details Israeli military offensives that failed to discriminate between combatants and civilians, damage to civilian government buildings for political objectives, attacks on medical rescue teams, damage to public infrastructure, holding detainees in conditions that violate Israeli and international law, and collective punishment”.

The seven Israeli human rights groups are: Association for Civil Rights in Israel ACRI); Gisha: The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel; HaMoked: The Center for the Defence of the Individual; Yesh Din; Adalah - The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel; and Physicians for Human Rights-Israel.

In their statement, the Israeli human rights groups said that the main points examined in their document were the following:

(1.) “Even before the military offensive started, the prolonged closure policy that the State of Israel has imposed on the Gaza Strip has led to a grave humanitarian crisis there. Since 1967, and as part of established Israeli policy, Gaza ’s basic civilian infrastructure including its medical infrastructure and power plants has become totally dependent on the State of Israel”.

(2.) “Public remarks made by Israel’s political and military leadership and the manner in which the offensive was carried out give rise to suspicions that Israel adopted a disproportionate military assault strategy that mainly aimed at harming civilians and causing deliberate destruction to civilian targets, for purposes of deterrence and collective punishment, and not at specific military targets. If this is the case, a heavy cloud of suspicion hangs over the legality of the entire operation”.

(3.) “The fact that attacks by the Israeli military hit targets located within a civilian population, coupled with data concerning the large number of civilian fatalities and casualties, gives rise to serious suspicions of gross violations of international human rights and humanitarian law by Israel . Many casualties of the Gaza offensive had their limbs amputated and maimed (12-15% of the total number of wounded), some of whom were injured by previously unknown weapon types”.

(4.) “Bombing Civilian Buildings and Institutions: Israel systematically and methodically attacked civilian institutions, deviating from the principle that bans attacks against civilian targets in pursuit of political objectives: 68 government buildings were destroyed, more than 4,000 residential houses were totally demolished, and some 17,000 were partly destroyed, leaving tens of thousands homeless”.

(5.) “The Gaza health system nearly collapsed. During the fighting, local hospitals had to operate while coping with an erratic power supply, and with the fact that 16 medical crew members were killed and 25 wounded while attempting to evacuating casualties; in addition, 34 medical institutions and 29 ambulances were damaged. The Israeli army avoided - in advance, knowingly, and deliberately - extending direct aid to the Palestinian casualties and intentionally prevented Palestinian rescue services from doing so“.

(6.) “Palestinians who were captured in the Gaza Strip and placed in Israeli detention were held in cruel, inhuman and degrading conditions, and Israeli soldiers and interrogators used violence against them in some cases. The detainees were held in 2-3 meter-deep ditches, exposed to the cold weather, handcuffed, and often blindfolded. Some of those ditches were dug in what were clearly combat zones, each holding an average of 70 individuals. The army failed to carry out its duty to notify the detainees’ families of their detention and location, and even failed to report their whereabouts to external bodies”.

(7.) “Despite the fact that the Israeli army had precise information about the location of every water, power, and sewage facility in the Gaza Strip, it bombed them and left Gaza without vital infrastructure systems. The Gaza power plant was non-operational for 12 of the 21 days of fighting. Gaza received merely 25% of its required power supply for several days during the assault. In addition, some 800,000 civilians were cut off the supply of running water, and the shortage of power and cooking gas seriously impaired the supply of bread”.

(8.) “Israel ’s absolute control over the Gaza ’s border crossings before and during the operation remains in effect, and the closure prevents Gaza’s Palestinian population from exercising freedom of movement, as well as the import of many goods and raw materials. As long as Israel bans the import of concrete, cement, and other materials essential for the rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip, it will remain impossible to make use of the billions of dollars committed the international community for Gaza’s reconstruction”.

Meanwhile, the Fact-Finding Mission wrapped up its two days of public hearings in Gaza on Monday. At the end of the sessions, Justice Goldstone said that all information received by the Mission would be taken into account, whether it be during the public hearings or as part of the continuing investigations.

According to a UN press release, Justice Goldstone “underlined that the hearings form a part of the United Nations activities in promoting and defending human rights and that the Mission members ‘Fully expect and require that all of those who have participated in the hearings are afforded the full protection due to them as recognised in the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights Defenders’.

He noted that “Appearing at the public hearings had not been without cost to the victims … ‘Every re-telling of their ordeals and tragedies carries a heavy emotional toll as well as personal security risk. We are fully aware of this. We express our deep gratitude for their willingness to share their painful testimonies with us as we endeavour to identify the truth of allegations of violations of human rights and international humanitarian law’.”

And, he said, “As fellow human beings we would like to put on record how deeply moved we were by many of the accounts of profound suffering and grief we have heard in the last two days.”

The UN press release added that “members of the Mission had wished to hold hearings in southern Israel, where the population has been on the receiving end of rocket attacks launched from the Gaza Strip, and to hold hearings on the West Bank. That is not possible as the Government of Israel is so far not cooperating with the Mission. The Mission members will therefore hold public hearings in Geneva, on July 6 and 7, where they will hear from victims of the alleged violations in Israel and on the West Bank, where there are also allegations of violations in the context of Operation Cast Lead”.

The UN will presumably be paying for the travel expenses and per diemallowances for those who will have to travel to Geneva to testify because Israel made it impossible for the hearings to be held locally, due to its decision to refuse to cooperate.

It is not clear exactly what this West Bank involvement will turn out to be.

In yet another note of alarm about the situation in Gaza (and the West Bank as well), the normally discrete International Committee of the Red Cross, which often refuses to speak out publicly — and when it does, it means that its efforts to persuade the State Party concerned through private communication have failed — said in a press release accompanying their latest “Household Economy Assessment” that their research “reveals a significant deterioration of the household economies in both the West Bank and Gaza over the last four years. About 60 percent of the households in both areas fall into categories described by their own communities as ‘poor’ or ‘very poor’. The situation in Gaza, where extremely high levels of poverty were detected, is especially bad … Households in the areas surveyed by the ICRC’s Assessment fall well below the World Bank’s poverty line if their cash income alone is considered. ‘Poor’ households normally supplement their cash income with ‘coping mechanisms’ such as humanitarian assistance, support from relatives, credit or loans, sale of property and possessions, small-scale commercial activities, additional income generated by women and children, and even delaying higher education. However, these ‘coping mechanisms”have grown fragile: most of them have been in use for four years … According to the Assessment, the economic situation of ‘middle’ and ‘better-off’ households is also worsening, and these groups are a major source of informal economic and social support.
Dominik Stillhart, head of the ICRC delegation for Israel and the occupied territories, concludes that ‘Humanitarian assistance alone, in whatever form, will not solve the problem in a sustainable way. It is the responsibility of the State of Israel, as the occupying power, to ensure that Palestinians can meet their basic needs’.”