Israel’s Defiant Massive Attacks Resulting in A Massive Loss of Innocent Lives

by: Ricky Gunawan and Christine Tambunan

The sound of conflict was marched again recently in faraway mid-eastern. Numbers of medias are competing to report recent updates from the crisis existed between Israeli and Palestinian. The conflict is an ongoing heated dispute between the Israel and Palestinian militant organization named Hamas. It is essentially a quarrel between two seemingly-mutually exclusive national identities, both of which claim the same area of land.

The ground push has resulted in escalating casualties on both sides, as Israel continues the air assault it started on December 27, 2008. At least 507 Palestinians, including 100 women and children, have been killed since the first air strikes occurred and 2.600 Palestinians have been injured, most of them innocent civilians and children. The day after Israel began an attack in Gaza, the U.N. Security Council issued a statement calling for an immediate cease-fire. The Council, however, has failed to agree on a further statement as the conflict persists in a dreadful condition.

In this dire armed conflict there are some basic principles of international law in terms of war and armed conflict which are applicable. Military necessity, along with distinction, and proportionality, are the three important principles concerning the legal use of force in armed conflict.

Distinction means that each side shall distinguish between combatants and civilians. Military necessity is governed by several constraints. Any attack or action must be intended to help in the military defeat of the enemy, it must be an attack on a military objective, and the harm caused to civilian or civilian’s properties must be proportional and not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. Evidently, as the medias are reporting, Israel did not and still is not acting proportionally. There were only a few troops that had been hurt by the Palestinians yet the Israel retaliates with numerous attacks towards civilian property such as hospitals, universities, civilian houses, towns, that were supposed to be completely protected under the international law.

In addition, the international humanitarian law guaranteed protection for every party that do not nor have not anymore take actions in the event of armed conflict, and subsequently offering protection for civilian and their properties. The fourth Geneva Convention regulates that every civilian and their properties and even organization or state that wish to submit humanitarian aid is fully guaranteed under humanitarian law. Failure to act in accordance with it could be said as an act of war crime.

In a nutshell, Israel has to allow the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) or any other impartial humanitarian organization undertakes the protection of civilian persons and for their relief as well. Furthermore, Israel must facilitate any movement or act to protect children and women in the conflict areas. All of which are regulated in the Geneva Convention to which Israel is a party; and all of which have been breached by the Israel.

Thus, one would raise a question: why is the Israel is so defiant to hold a cease-fire and unblocked humanitarian aid to the conflict area?

The minute the conflict exploded, both sides had met failure in protecting the rights of its civilians. The bombing raids over the last week have greatly worsened the already harsh humanitarian situation in Gaza, which is home to an estimated 1.5 million people facing stern shortages of food, water, and fuel and cooking gas.

This current catastrophe is pushing more women and children to a devastating condition. Displacement, following total or partial destruction of their homes, is causing myriad psychological as well as physical injure to them.

Regrettably, the U.N. has failed to neither resolve this conflict nor stop Israel from doing the mass obliteration. The U.N. Security Council has been impotent to force an end to Israeli attacks against Gaza. Washington, once more, vetoed a resolution calling for an end to the Israeli ongoing colossal aggression against the Gaza Strip. The Council has only been able to issue a 'non-binding' statement that calls on Israel to voluntarily take all its military actions in the besieged area to a direct end.

The Security Council needs to immediately stop the Israeli regime from pushing ahead with its Gaza offensive. It must urge Israel to lift restrictions on the delivery of humanitarian aid into Gaza. The Council should not remain silent. It can and must act and it should do it without further delay before innocent lives lose even more.

Additionally, Israel must, straight away, permit foreign journalist access to Gaza, as in every war zone and genocide site like Rwanda; coverage by the media is able to daunt further violence and is crucial to provide public understanding of the deteriorating armed conflict.

Question left: will the U.N., once again, fail to stop another grave human rights violation, as they failed to do so in Srebrenica and Rwanda in this modern day?