"No matter what Hamas did, it does not justify the incredible use of lethal force without distinction and without proportionality as far as the Palestinian population is concerned in Gaza,” says Sven Kühn von Burgsdorff, recently retired European Union ambassador to Palestine, adding that “Israel must adhere to international law and protect civilians.”
Gaza: Forcing patients to flee hospitals a ‘death sentence’ warns WHO
[The UN] pointed out that many of the vulnerable, particularly pregnant women, children, the elderly and persons with disabilities simply will be unable to flee south.
This is certainly one way to goose participation on Lemmy! Hats off.
Well, so far we’ve had this:
-
Hamas attacks Israel.
-
Hamas stays in heavily-populated area.
-
Israel calls for civilians to move south out of heavily-populated area and Hamas calls for them to stay where they are.
Hamas has chosen to fight.
Israel isn’t going to just absorb attacks from Hamas. Nor would I expect them to do so; that’s not an obligation of war.
Hamas isn’t going to fight in the open. Nor would I expect them to do so, as they’d get mauled.
So there’s going to be fighting in built-up areas. There’s a question of whether civilians are going to be in those built-up areas or not – that is, they can stay or evacuate prior to this getting going. I think that it’s pretty difficult to argue that they’re better-off staying.
[The UN] pointed out that many of the vulnerable, particularly pregnant women, children, the elderly and persons with disabilities simply will be unable to flee south.
I’d guess that most if not all people probably can manage to get out; there have been days to walk out. But it is true that some people probably will not leave. There is not an obligation on Israel not to fight in cities; that is, Hamas does not have the ability to say “I can strike you and you cannot strike back because I choose to fight in a city and have called for the civilian population to stay”.
** [The UN] pointed out that many of the vulnerable, particularly pregnant women, children, the elderly and persons with disabilities simply will be unable to flee south.**
You’ve already made the comment, and I’ve responded. Repeating it does not change the situation.
The UN -this is the organization that employs experts of all kinds who work directly on the ground there, onsite- says that some vulnerable groups will be unable to flee.
You sit probably thousands of miles away in some living room or so with no technical or local expertise nor any argument that fosters your opinion, but you say you “guess that most if not all people probably can manage to get out.”
Don’t you see yourself how out of touch and senseless your argument is?
Hamas is trying to create a situation where they can strike Israel and then claim that Israel cannot strike back, because Hamas is aiming to use human shields.
The rules of war don’t give Hamas that ability. That is, they do not say “Israel is obliged to not fight in cities, even if Hamas chooses to make that their battleground”.
The major source of protection for civilians in war is the Fourth Geneva Convention, and it explicitly states that this cannot be done:
Article 28
The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.
There are restrictions that aim at limiting the impact on civilians where this can reasonably be avoided in the Geneva Conventions. If Israel were to cut off civilians from retreating from a city, that would be problematic, but they have not done that; on the contrary, they have warned that there will be military operations occurring and that people should leave the area.
If civilians are trying to leave and provision might be made for evacuation without prejudicing Israel’s military operations, then one might make a reasonable argument that Israel is obliged to make that provision. But Hamas doesn’t get to claim that they cannot be attacked.
With reports of fleeing civilians being attacked, it does not sound any safer to leave.
Removed by mod
-
