The Forum > Article Comments > Human Rights Watch targets Israel > Comments
Human Rights Watch targets Israel : Comments
By Sarah Mandel, published 26/7/2006Political bias of HRW's Middle East division is regularly expressed in its disproportionate focus on Israel.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- ...
- 8
- 9
- 10
-
- All
The necessary proportionality in warfare is defined as being not excessive to the military advantage to be gained by attacking legitimate targets [Art.51(5)(b)], for a legitimate purpose. In this instance, Israel's stated objective is to disarm, and weaken Hizbollah, and to put into effect UNSC Resolutions 425 & 1559 (an eminently legitimate objective).
Israel however has made use of all reasonable avenues by which to advise civilians within potential target areas of their areas status [Art.57(2)(a)(i)] and by doing so have reasonably attempted to comply with the protocol [Art.57(2)(a)(i)-(iii)]. The choice of targets, including civilian infrastructure, roads, electricity plants and even strategically placed villages and houses, which offer legitimate ‘military advantage’ to their opponent’s, are thus legitimate targets [Art.52(2)].
However, neither Hizbollah nor HAMAS have made any reasonable attempt to ensure that they target purely military targets [Art.51(4)(a)] and/or use weapons which are incapable of distinguishing between Military & Civilian Targets [Art.51(4)(a)-(c)]. Combatant’s utilise the false civilian status, in order to safeguard their assets from direct attack (perfidy) [Art.37(1)(c)], the effect of which is to ensure strikes are made within otherwise civilian areas [Art.51(5)(b)], which action by the Hizbollah & HAMAS is prohibited [Art.51(7)].
More to the point, Lebanon had to enforce border security with its own army, and disarm the militias (their obligations under UNSC RES425) they have not, but placed them in control of the border. Their is no menion of this by HRW, only specious claims of 'disproportionality'.
Inshallah
2bob