Israeli officials present spectrum of views on independent investigation of Gaza war

Israeli officials seem to be taking a range of views on the question of establishing an independent Israeli commission to look into last winter’s war on Gaza.

The IDF’s Operation Cast Lead (27 December to 18 January), was primarily justified as necessary to stop rocket, mortar, and missile fire from Gaza onto surrounding Israeli communities (the range was expanded during the war to up to 60 km). In some instances, Israeli officials said that it was necessary to end Hamas rule in Gaza.

Haaretz is reporting that “Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor thinks Israel should establish its own independent committee to investigate Israel Defense Forces activity in the Gaza Strip during last winter’s Operation Cast Lead. ‘I have faith in the army and it is my duty to protect it, its commanders and its soldiers – and the most effective tool for this is serious self-examination’, Meridor said in a recent interview with Haaretz. ‘A state that examines itself [protects itself from] harassment. Today, with the development of international law, one of the best means of defense is for a state to investigate itself … The commission of inquiry that I hope will be established must examine the Goldstone report’s claims, even if it is a biased report, and its mandate from the outset was to examine Israel’s crimes, and one of the committee’s members stated prior to the investigation that Israel commits war crimes’, said Meridor, who also serves as minister of intelligence and atomic energy. ‘But the threat is serious and a commission of inquiry should be established, also to examine the suitability of the rules of war to the new type of war that has been imposed on us’ … As for Meridor’s recent return to politics, he attributed the move to the Second Lebanon War. ‘I saw how a government of intelligent people, some of whom I know very well personally, weren’t asking the elementary questions when sending the nation to war’, he said. ‘Going to war is the hardest decision a government can make. You don’t go to war unless all other options have been exhausted. You don’t go to war because you’re right, but because you know where you want to get to’.”  This article is posted on Haaretz’s website, here.

Israeli officialdom, however, appears to be divided — though mainly over tactics.  Like Meridor, some senior Israeli officials are reportedly speaking out in favor of an independent Israeli investigation.  Some “mainstream” (as opposed to “left-wing”) Israeli experts in international law, and some Israeli legal figures agree.  However, as reported in recent days, the explanation given in some cases is that the independent investigations should be just to comply with the bottom-line recommendation contained in the UN Human Rights Council-mandated Goldstone report — namely, that Israel and Hamas must each establish internal investigations within six months, or be referred to the UN Security Council. Some say this is required for “better PR”.

Israel’s Defense Minister Ehud Barak has a different concept of PR, and is reportedly adamantly opposed to an independent investigation into possible war crimes and crimes against humanity, and other problems related to last winter’s Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. The IDF Chief of Staff agrees. According to a story on Israel’s YNet website today, “IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi attended Tuesday’s cabinet meeting on the formation of an inquiry committee, and said that he could personally guarantee that the IDF operated in the most moral and ethical manner, more than any other military in the world. He stressed that forming such a committee could send a message to military officers that they are not trusted”.

Netanyahu has reportedly wavered, but seems to be more comfortable with the military’s position.

Many of the views are points along the same spectrum.

Israel’s YNet website reported today that “a top General Staff official told Ynet on Wednesday that more could be done on the PR front. ‘There is something that can be done… We can explain better to the world and to ourselves what we are doing’, the source said … A General Staff official told Ynet submission to certain guidelines may be harmful to the IDF’s operational capabilities. ‘The Goldstone Report shows that the world has not internalized the nature of wars … No one in the world can do it better, there is no example of a more cautious or accurate manner of conduct in such a populous environment. We did not drop bombs without looking and checking thoroughly … How can we work and defend Israel’s citizens if we need a lawyer to tell us every thing. I don’t know of a better method in such a conflict, and if anyone does, let them come and say it. Goldstone didn’t say it. If we do not attack, then we will be attacked, and it won’t stop‘, he said. He said the military has nothing to apologize for, and that the IDF was well prepared for the operation, which is why it suffered a relatively low number of casualties … The official said, ‘The question is not how many were hit on our side as opposed to the other side, but how many targets did we hit without harming innocents and the surroundings, and I believe we did this well’.” Nonetheless, the YNet report noted, “he completely rejected all claims of alleged war crimes committed during the Gaza offensive”. This report can be read in full here.

Netanyahu’s first responses to the Goldstone report included exhorting major Israeli allies — and chief among them the U.S. and Europe — to act to reject it, otherwise they would be hampered in carrying out their own wars “on terror” (U.S. President Obama has apparently ordered that this precise terminology be dropped, however.) Netanyahu also said that endorsing the Goldstone report would “kill” the Israel-Palestinian peace process.

The Jerusalem Post reported Wednesday that “Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu directed the relevant ministries on Tuesday to look into ways of launching an international initiative to change the laws of war to deal with the modern-day scourge of terrorism. This new initiative comes fast on the heels of the Goldstone Report, which accused Israel of war crimes for its military operation in the Gaza Strip against Hamas earlier this year. At a meeting of the security cabinet that focused on the report and its ramifications, Netanyahu said Israel’s challenge was ‘to delegitimize the continuous attempt to delegitimize the State of Israel … The most important arena where we need to act in this context is in the arena of public opinion, which is crucial in the democratic world. We must continue to debunk this lie that is spreading with the help of the Goldstone report’, Netanyahu said … Netanyahu said that such a new initiative was necessary to keep up with the spread of terrorism throughout the world, according to a statement put out by the Prime Minister’s Office”.

The Israeli military is conducting its own internal investigations into the war — and some cases have reportedly been sent for possible criminal prosecution, including cases of Palestinian civilians being shot while waving white flags. But Justice Goldstone, his team, and many Israeli as well as international human rights and international law advocates say that it is simply impossible for the Israeli military (or any powerful accused, for that matter) to carry out a credible investigation of itself.

What Netanyahu did explore, according to some Israeli media reports, was the establishment of a judicial commission of inquiry, possibly to be headed by former Supreme Court of Justice Avraham Barak. He dropped the idea when the Palestinian leadership initially agreed, on 1-2 October, and reportedly as a result of American “intense diplomacy”, to withdraw a draft resolution endorsing the Goldstone report’s conclusions, and referring it to the UN General Assembly.

After a groundswell of scathing criticism from Palestinians both inside the occupied territory and around the world —  and from their international supporters as well —  and a precipitous loss of support that threatened the legitimacy of the present Palestinian leadership and system, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas changed course and ordered an all-out effort to get a discussion within the Human Rights Council, which last week finally adopted an even-stronger resolution with what might be an even-greater margin of votes. As a result, the UN General Assembly in New York is looking at dates to schedule a discussion before the end of the main part of its current session in late December.

What will happen next, and beyond that, is not clear.  The UN Human Rights Council still has on its books a resolution calling for considering (or re-considering) the Goldstone report in March 2010 — more or less the six-month period within which Israel and Hamas should have started their own independent internal investigations that is mentioned in the Goldstone report’s recommendations. But the U.S. and now also reportedly Russia are apparently opposed to any discussion within the UN Security Council.

The JPost article noted that “One issue critical to Israel’s dealing with the Goldstone report was not discussed on Tuesday, but is likely to be discussed at the security cabinet’s next meeting: whether Israel should set up a judicial commission to look into various allegations stemming from Operation Cast Lead. Defense Minister Ehud Barak, however, is adamantly opposed to such a committee, and reportedly blocked attempts by Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz to bring the matter to the security cabinet on Tuesday. Barak reportedly said in the cabinet meeting that such a body was not needed, since the IDF was capable of investigating itself. Those in favor of setting up such a body maintain that by doing so, Israel would prevent itself from possibly being hauled before the International Criminal Court in The Hague on war crimes charges, since the ICC does not take up cases where credible and independent investigations are being conducted by the countries involved. Because of the sensitivity of the matter, it was impossible Tuesday to get any of the 15 members of the security cabinet to come out openly and say whether or not they supported establishing an independent committee. Sources close to the prime minister said that he had not yet formulated an opinion on the matter”. This JPost article can be read in full here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *