July 30, 2006

Qana again

Ten years ago Israel responded to Hezbollah rockets launched in close proximity to a UN shelter, an errant shell struck that shelter killing nearly 100 civilians. The resulting furor and diplomatic storm forced Israel to abandon its attempts to protect its civilian population and sue for a ceasefire while leaving Hezbollah intact. (The Hezbollah rockets had forced tens of thousands of Israelis in the North from their homes.)

Of course there was plenty of condemnation for Israel and none for Hezbollah. In one of those little known bits of information a UN peacekeeper was shot in the chest when he tried to get Hezbollah rocket launchers to move away from the protected compound.

Now, unfortunately it has happened again. No doubt that most of the blame will be directed toward Israel when it is Hezbollah that deserves the blame. (Yes according to international law Hezbollah is culpable. Elder of Ziyon gives chapter and verse.)

If the law isn't enough for you, I'd like to point you to a Washington Post editorial from April 1999 called Air War Accidents. Here's the synopsis

A STARK DIFFERENCE divides the atrocities deliberately committed, and still being committed, by the Serbs against the Kosovars from the accidents of NATO air power that have taken additional Kosovar lives. It is a difference of scale: the Serbs have taken thousands of lives and have either deported or uprooted and harassed more than a million Kosovars, practically all of them, while the NATO-inflicted toll is measured in the hundreds. It is also a moral difference: The Serb depredations are vile and unjustified, a violation of fundamental human rights, while NATO's airstrikes are necessary and justified to defend a people under continuing merciless attack. People who ignore these fundamental distinctions are lending themselves wittingly or not to Serbian propaganda and to a general moral obtuseness.

While the scope argument doesn't hold here, the moral one does. (Especially since Hezbollah sets up near civilian buildings, something that didn't apply in the NATO case.)

The editorial does go on to say that if many more mistakes happen then NATO will have to explain how so many are happening.

I wonder if the Post will be so understanding to Israel tomorrow?

Technorati tags: , , , .

Crossposted on Israpundit and Soccer Dad.

Posted by SoccerDad at July 30, 2006 11:43 AM | TrackBack
Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • del.icio.us
  • digg
  • Furl
  • Spurl
  • YahooMyWeb
  • co.mments
  • Ma.gnolia
  • De.lirio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlinkList
  • NewsVine
  • scuttle
  • Fark
  • Shadows
Add this blog to my Technorati Favorites!
Comments

"I wonder if the Post will be so understanding to Israel tomorrow"?
....................
I wouldn't count on it.

Posted by: Laura at July 30, 2006 2:12 PM

Actually, I didn't give chapter and verse against using human shields, but since you asked....

"Art. 28. The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations." (Convention 4, part 3, section 1, article 28)

and

"7. The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations. The Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations." (Protocol 1, part IV, article 51, section 7)

Posted by: Elder of Zyon at July 30, 2006 2:41 PM

"Now, unfortunately it has happened again."

Yes, but it is too early to know to conclude what caused the building's collapse:

http://shlemazl.blogspot.com/2006/07/building-in-qana-struck-by-air-force.html

Posted by: shlemazl at July 30, 2006 5:16 PM