Additional Resources
Top Commentators:
- Elliott Abrams
- Fouad Ajami
- Shlomo Avineri
- Benny Avni
- Alan Dershowitz
- Jackson Diehl
- Dore Gold
- Daniel Gordis
- Tom Gross
- Jonathan Halevy
- David Ignatius
- Pinchas Inbari
- Jeff Jacoby
- Efraim Karsh
- Mordechai Kedar
- Charles Krauthammer
- Emily Landau
- David Makovsky
- Aaron David Miller
- Benny Morris
- Jacques Neriah
- Marty Peretz
- Melanie Phillips
- Daniel Pipes
- Harold Rhode
- Gary Rosenblatt
- Jennifer Rubin
- David Schenkar
- Shimon Shapira
- Jonathan Spyer
- Gerald Steinberg
- Bret Stephens
- Amir Taheri
- Josh Teitelbaum
- Khaled Abu Toameh
- Jonathan Tobin
- Michael Totten
- Michael Young
- Mort Zuckerman
Think Tanks:
- American Enterprise Institute
- Brookings Institution
- Center for Security Policy
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Heritage Foundation
- Hudson Institute
- Institute for Contemporary Affairs
- Institute for Counter-Terrorism
- Institute for Global Jewish Affairs
- Institute for National Security Studies
- Institute for Science and Intl. Security
- Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
- Investigative Project
- Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
- RAND Corporation
- Saban Center for Middle East Policy
- Shalem Center
- Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Media:
- CAMERA
- Daily Alert
- Jewish Political Studies Review
- MEMRI
- NGO Monitor
- Palestinian Media Watch
- The Israel Project
- YouTube
Government:
Back
(Israel Hayom) Brig.-Gen. (res.) Yossi Kuperwasser - Some are claiming that the specter of prosecution and trial hampers the freedom of action of the IDF, as well as its ability to function when faced with complex operational challenges. This claim is mainly voiced in the context of the IDF's war on terrorist organizations, which themselves flagrantly violate the rules of war, intentionally attacking civilians and hiding behind human shields. It is true that fighting armed terrorist organizations is much more complicated than fighting other armies, and that applying international law's rules of war demands some creative thinking. This is mostly because the other side does not see itself as obligated to international law and tries to leverage the asymmetry of the two sides' commitment to it to improve its ability to achieve its goals. The IDF uses four main principles behind the laws of war in its operations: The principle of necessity - military force is exercised only when there is a military purpose in doing so whose focus is protecting the security of the country and its citizens and defeating the enemy. The principle of humanity - avoiding unnecessary suffering. The principle of distinction - an assault distinguishes between military targets and soldiers and civilians and civilian objects. The principle of proportionality - it is acknowledged that assaults on military targets could cause collateral damage to civilians but it seeks to ensure that the collateral damage is not excessive in relation to the military advantage resulting from the action. The IDF is careful to uphold these principles, not only because doing so anchors its ability to defend itself in the International Criminal Court, but because the laws of war align with our own moral codes. It could be argued that in a specific situation, not adhering to the laws of war could lead to greater success and reduce the danger to Israel in the short term, but the cost of doing so would be insufferably high. It would harm uninvolved persons, as well as our ability as a people to face ourselves. The moral advantage actually increases Israel's power in the long run. The writer, who headed the Research and Assessment Division of IDF Military Intelligence, is a Senior Project Director at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.2022-01-17 00:00:00Full Article
The IDF's Commitment to the International Laws of War Is Not a Disadvantage
(Israel Hayom) Brig.-Gen. (res.) Yossi Kuperwasser - Some are claiming that the specter of prosecution and trial hampers the freedom of action of the IDF, as well as its ability to function when faced with complex operational challenges. This claim is mainly voiced in the context of the IDF's war on terrorist organizations, which themselves flagrantly violate the rules of war, intentionally attacking civilians and hiding behind human shields. It is true that fighting armed terrorist organizations is much more complicated than fighting other armies, and that applying international law's rules of war demands some creative thinking. This is mostly because the other side does not see itself as obligated to international law and tries to leverage the asymmetry of the two sides' commitment to it to improve its ability to achieve its goals. The IDF uses four main principles behind the laws of war in its operations: The principle of necessity - military force is exercised only when there is a military purpose in doing so whose focus is protecting the security of the country and its citizens and defeating the enemy. The principle of humanity - avoiding unnecessary suffering. The principle of distinction - an assault distinguishes between military targets and soldiers and civilians and civilian objects. The principle of proportionality - it is acknowledged that assaults on military targets could cause collateral damage to civilians but it seeks to ensure that the collateral damage is not excessive in relation to the military advantage resulting from the action. The IDF is careful to uphold these principles, not only because doing so anchors its ability to defend itself in the International Criminal Court, but because the laws of war align with our own moral codes. It could be argued that in a specific situation, not adhering to the laws of war could lead to greater success and reduce the danger to Israel in the short term, but the cost of doing so would be insufferably high. It would harm uninvolved persons, as well as our ability as a people to face ourselves. The moral advantage actually increases Israel's power in the long run. The writer, who headed the Research and Assessment Division of IDF Military Intelligence, is a Senior Project Director at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.2022-01-17 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|