Crimes of War, Information War

Different sources are creating a distorted and unhelpful narrative

Hospitals and War Crimes

As the war rolls on there are continuous shifts in media attention given the circumstances on the ground. The past few days we have been inundated with reports about what is going on at the Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza, a facility used not just as a medical facility, but also as a Hamas command center and access point to the tunnel network where Hamas fighters reside and where hostages are being held. There has been fighting around and in the hospital, yet, Israel’s military has also been able to offer support and deliver the necessary medical supplies, see the photo above this article.

It all depends on who you listen to, and the different sides are going out of their way to make a case as to what is really happening at Al-Shifa. That said, when the Biden Administration confirms that the hospital was used as a cover for terror and if even the BBC has to walk back some of its reporting on the battle there, you will get a sense that you need to be pro-active in evaluating the news. Or to try and ignore certain media reports altogether.

On a broader scale it raises the question about ‘war crimes’ committed by Israel, a core piece of this information war. We need to understand the legal context in order to interpret the news. It is a Dutch international lawyer, Geert-Jan Knoops (who argued before the international courts with regards to Rwanda, Sierra Lone and the former Yugoslavia) who in 2014 argued that:

It furthermore emphasizes that as long as such airstrikes are not launched “intentionally” to take civilian life, whilst the available evidence does not show criminal intent, the burden of proof for war crimes cannot be met.

More importantly, and perhaps decisive for Protective Edge, are the ICTY observations on the proportionality principle: If an airstrike remains within the ambit of “a reasonable military commander’s purview,” whilst these casualties are measured against the military advantage pursued by the operation and are not “clearly disproportional,” the airstrike cannot be presumed a war crime.

Knoops has been making the rounds on TV and has basically argued the same thing if we apply these standards to the current war. And yes, he wrote this in Haaretz which is one of Israel’s more progressive and critical newspapers. Does it exonerate Israel from what it is doing in Gaza as being within the confines of not committing war crimes and acting proportionally? Based on what we see and hear I would think so.

Hamas’ Role

And that is before considering the other crucially important war crime question: how is Hamas faring when we apply certain war crimes standards to its operations in Gaza. The practice of hiding among citizens and in medical facilities while engaging in warfare is now well-documented when it comes to Hamas, even some colourful testimonies point to that. And while at the Al-Shifa hospital they have deliberately put their own citizens into harm’s way, the Al-Quds hospital (the second largest in Gaza) is used openly as a launching pad for attacks on Israeli troops.

But the war crime that stands out in all its infamy over all else was of course the day of October 7 itself. Investigations into the murder, kidnapping and rape are underway. It will be a long time before we see any of the perpetrators in court, if ever.

Information

Now I do have to say it was not easy putting today’s update together. Because of the gruelling content as always, yes, but more so if you realize how media distort the picture to serve their specific narrative. And it is not just journalists and commentators whose reports we need to take with a grain of salt, but it is actual government information that drives some of the stories and subsequent debates. In The Netherlands this week it was revealed that the Dutch embassy in Tel Aviv was feeding its political masters in The Hague highly selective information. The report which somehow found its way into the newspapers was heavily slanted against Israel and while its exposure helped uncover the erroneous and biased information, it raises real concerns. What if governments start to rely on these reports? What if formal policy is hijacked by errant civil servants who happen to disagree with their elected governments? Yesterday in Canada we witnessed Trudeau weighing in with some sharp criticism of Israel. Where did that come from? From information from his embassy in Tel Aviv or from his minister of foreign affairs? Or was it pre-baked at his insistence in order to serve a pre-determined political agenda.? Who knows. But its factual basis is very sloppy.

And note that the UN or the World Health Organization (WHO) also start to take positions that will collapse under closer inspection but that until that point inform their actions. These multilateral organizations in turn are subject to political influence and memos from some vocal member states that drive a certain agenda.

We are in a huge information war and the goings on at the Gaza hospitals is just one aspect of how a broader story is framed to isolate and counter Israel. We should try and get the facts, but even more these days we should analyze and inspect the motivations and aspirations of those who disseminate it. Be they journalists, diplomats, multilateral officials, politicians or world leaders.