(The Australian) Jim Molan - As a general in Iraq I was experienced in the practical application of the laws of armed conflict. Now having spent a week in Israel researching Israel's moral approach to warfighting, the results exceeded my expectation. I can say that Israel's prosecution of Operation Protective Edge [the 2014 Gaza war] not only met a reasonable international standard of observance of the laws of armed conflict, it exceeded them significantly, often at cost to Israeli soldiers and citizens. It did this to preserve the life and property of those trying to kill Israeli citizens. Where there were individual failures, Israel is taking transparent legal action. Given our examination of the cause of Operation Protective Edge, it would be indefensible to argue that Israel wanted it, initiated it or sustained it, or that Israel acted in anything other than defense of its citizens. On this basis alone, Israel's war was just. While acknowledging the tragedy of death in war and given the immense capability of the IDF, it stands to Israel's everlasting credit that far more did not die. But from the very top of the command chain down to the infantry and pilots, the personal moral position that individuals took was mirrored in the targeting processes, decisions on the ground and in the real care taken. The Israelis scrupulously "cared" for the Palestinians. By contrast, Hamas was an enemy whose central strategy was to directly target the Israeli population and who repeatedly used their own population as human shields, both of which in any fair system would constitute major war crimes. The writer is a retired major-general in the Australian Army.
2015-06-11 00:00:00Full ArticleBACK Visit the Daily Alert Archive