August, 10 2010, 03:00pm EDT
Israel/Gaza: Wartime Inquiries Fall Short
Governments and UN Should Press for Justice
NEW YORK
Israeli military investigations into the Gaza war have brought some
results over the past 18 months but fall far short of addressing the
widespread and serious allegations of unlawful conduct during the
fighting, while Hamas has announced no serious investigations
whatsoever, Human Rights Watch said today.
Human Rights Watch called on governments and the United Nations
to increase their pressure on Israel and Hamas to conduct credible,
independent investigations.
"International pressure for investigations has pushed Israel, if
not Hamas, to take some steps, but there can be no let-up," said Sarah
Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. "The victims
on all sides deserve justice."
In July 2010, Israel gave UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon an
update of its Gaza investigations, claiming "significant results." The
Palestinian authorities in the West Bank also submitted a report to the
secretary-general, which is not yet public. Hamas has reportedly
prepared a report on its investigations but has also not released it
publicly. Ban is expected to pass the reports from Israel and the West
Bank authorities to the General Assembly in the coming weeks.
"Secretary-General Ban should candidly assess the investigations
by both sides and not just passively transmit the reports to the General
Assembly," Whitson said.
In February, the General Assembly called
on Israel and Hamas for the second time to conduct thorough and
impartial investigations into the serious violations of international
human rights and humanitarian law documented by the UN
Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict, headed by Justice
Richard Goldstone. That report found that both Israel and Hamas had
committed war crimes and possible crimes against humanity.
Hamas authorities in Gaza have neither investigated nor
disciplined anyone for ordering or carrying out hundreds of deliberate
or indiscriminate rocket
attacks into Israeli cities and towns during the fighting in
December 2008 and January 2009, which are war crimes. Hamas officials,
at a May 14 meeting in Gaza City, told Human Rights Watch that they were
investigating allegations of wartime abuses but provided no details.
At that meeting, Human Rights Watch reiterated its concerns about
Hamas's failure
to investigate laws-of-war and human rights violations, including
rocket attacks against Israeli population centers, the continued
incommunicado detention of the captured Israeli soldier Gilad
Shalit, and ill-treatment
of Gaza residents in custody. Hamas allowed Human Rights Watch to
visit Palestinian detainees at Gaza's central prison but denied a
request to visit Shalit and a detention facility where torture allegedly
occurs.
On July 21, the Israeli government made public the report
it gave to the UN secretary-general on its Gaza investigations. All of
these were conducted by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). The government
has rejected calls for independent investigations.
The military has failed to investigate many serious allegations of
abuses or the policies that apparently led to civilian deaths, Human
Rights Watch said.
To date, Israeli military courts have convicted only one soldier for a
wartime abuse - the theft of a credit card. Two other soldiers are on
trial for forcing a child to open a bag they suspected of being rigged
with explosives. A third soldier was recently indicted for shooting and
killing a civilian who was walking in a group holding white flags.
Israel says the military has opened more than 150 investigations, but
more than 100 of these were limited to "operational debriefings" (in
Hebrew, tahkir mivza'i). Rather than criminal investigations,
these are after-action reports in which an officer in the chain of
command interviews the soldiers involved, with no testimony from
Palestinian victims or witnesses.
The operational debriefings may serve a useful military purpose, but
they are inadequate substitutes for impartial and thorough
investigations into possible criminal wrongdoing, Human Rights Watch
said.
The IDF military advocate general has also opened 47 criminal
investigations in which military investigators summoned witnesses and
more broadly examined evidence. Of these, at least seven cases have been
closed without charges.
Human Rights Watch investigated
at least two of these closed cases and found that the evidence strongly
suggests violations of the laws of war. In one case, on January 7, an
Israeli soldier apparently opened fire on two women and three children
from the 'Abd Rabbo family in eastern Jabalya who were holding white
flags, killing two girls and wounding the grandmother and third
girl. The military said it closed the case because "the evidence was
insufficient to initiate criminal proceedings."
The second case involved the killing of Rawhiya al-Najjar, 47, as she
carried a white flag in Khuza'a on January 13. The military determined
that she had been hit accidentally by a ricochet bullet. But five
witnesses interviewed by Human Rights Watch said that Israeli soldiers
continued to fire after al-Najjar was struck in the head, preventing a
group of women from retrieving her body and wounding Jasmin al-Najjar,
23. Another civilian carrying a white flag, Mahmoud al-Najjar, 57, was
shot and killed later that day trying to reach the body.
Other Israeli military investigations have resulted in
unspecified disciplinary action, reserved for less serious offenses,
against five unidentified commanders and soldiers. A brigadier general
and a colonel were disciplined for ordering the use of explosive shells
in an urban area, in violation of operational orders. A lieutenant
colonel was disciplined because soldiers under his command used a
civilian to perform a military task.
An officer of unspecified rank was reprimanded and two others
sanctioned for using poor judgment in a January 3 strike just outside
the Ibrahim al-Maqadema mosque in Jabalya refugee camp that reportedly
killed 10 civilians inside the mosque and two members of Hamas's armed
wing standing outside. A previous Israeli update on the military's
internal investigations, released in July 2009, stated that a soldier
had been disciplined by the commander in the field for destroying
property, which military investigators told Human Rights Watch involved
uprooting vegetation.
Israel said it is making operational changes to reduce civilian
casualties and damage to civilian property during future military
operations. According to the July report, the military has added a
humanitarian affairs officer to each combat unit at the battalion level
and above. In October 2009 it introduced a new "Standing Order on
Destruction of Private Property for Military Purposes," which clarifies
when and under what circumstances the military may destroy civilian
structures and agricultural infrastructure.
The report also said that the Israeli military is establishing
new orders on the use of munitions containing white phosphorus, which
can cause severe burns and ignite civilian structures, and is
"establishing permanent restrictions on the use of munitions containing
white phosphorus in urban areas."
"Israel's recognition of the need to change its policies,
especially on property destruction and the use of white phosphorus, is a
positive step, but the military should make the new policies public to
ensure they are consistent with international law," Whitson said.
Israel initially denied that it had used white phosphorus during the
fighting in Gaza but, after the evidence became undeniable, it conceded
that it had and investigated its use. A Human Rights Watch report showed
how Israeli forces repeatedly exploded
white phosphorus munitions in the air over populated areas, killing
and injuring civilians, and damaging civilian structures, including a
school, a market, a humanitarian aid warehouse, and a hospital.
Another Human Rights Watch report showed that Israeli forces
deliberately destroyed 189
civilian structures without a lawful military justification, which
could amount to the war crime of wanton destruction. That report
investigated roughly 5 percent of the destruction of civilian property
in Gaza.
Various bodies of the United Nations are monitoring the post-war
investigations by Israel and Hamas. The General Assembly is expected to
take up the secretary-general's report. At the Human Rights Council, a Committee
of Experts is assessing whether Israel and Hamas are conducting
investigations that meet international standards. Its report is expected
in September.
"A growing number of states are demanding accountability from
both sides, and their pressure is bearing fruit," Whitson said. "Now all
European governments, as well as the US and Canada, should insist on
the same rules for Israel and Hamas as they demand elsewhere: that those
responsible for war crimes be held accountable, and the victims receive
justice and compensation."
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
LATEST NEWS
'Nothing Is Sacrosanct': GOP Floats Social Security Cuts After Musk Capitol Hill Visit
"They're going to put everything on the table," one Republican lawmaker said of Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy.
Dec 06, 2024
Republican lawmakers on Thursday signaled a willingness to target Social Security and other mandatory programs after meeting with Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, the billionaire pair President-elect Donald Trump chose to lead a new commission tasked with slashing federal spending and regulations.
Though the GOP's 2024 platform pledged to shield Social Security, the party has reverted to its long-held position in the weeks since Trump's election victory, with some lawmakers openly attacking the program while others suggest cuts more subtly by stressing the supposed need for "hard decisions" to shore up its finances. (Progressives argue Social Security's solvency can be guaranteed for decades to come by requiring the rich to contribute more to the program, a proposal Republicans oppose.)
On Thursday, Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) emerged from a meeting with Musk and Ramaswamy with the message that "nothing is sacrosanct."
"They're going to put everything on the table," said Norman, one of the wealthiest members of Congress.
After airing Norman's remarks, Fox Business reported that Musk and Ramaswamy told lawmakers that no federal program is safe from cuts, "and that includes Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid."
Fox Business reports that cutting Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid is "on the table" for Republicans pic.twitter.com/ETUjJHbt3h
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) December 5, 2024
NBC News congressional correspondent Julie Tsirkin said Thursday that after meeting with Musk, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.)—who was recently elected Senate majority leader for the upcoming Congress—told her that "perhaps mandatory programs are areas that they're looking to make cuts in, like Social Security, for example."
"But again, no specifics were laid out there," Tsirkin added.
Thune has previously voiced support for raising Social Security's retirement age, a change that would cut benefits across the board.
🚨🚨🚨
BREAKING: After meeting with Elon Musk, Republican leader Sen. John Thune announces plans to cut Social Security
HANDS OFF OUR EARNED BENEFITS! pic.twitter.com/eTX8wpHuwr
— Social Security Works (@SSWorks) December 5, 2024
In the days leading up to their Capitol Hill visit, both Musk and Ramaswamy took swipes at Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid and made clear the programs would be in the crosshairs of their advisory commission, which is examining ways to slash federal spending without congressional approval.
Earlier this week, Musk amplified a series of social media posts by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), who once said he hopes to "get rid of" Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Defenders of Social Security saw Lee's thread, and Musk's apparent endorsement of it, as a declaration of war on the New Deal program.
Days later, Ramaswamy said in an interview with CNBC that "there are hundreds of billions of dollars of savings to extract" from Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, claiming the programs are rife with waste, fraud, and abuse.
"People love to have lazy armchair discussions about, oh, are you going to make cuts to entitlements or not, when, in fact, the dirty little secret is that many of those entitlement dollars aren't even going to people who they were supposed to be going to in the first place," said Ramaswamy, advancing a narrative that observers warned could be used to justify additional bureaucratic barriers making it harder for eligible people to receive benefits.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, said Thursday that the Trump-GOP agenda is "so predictable."
"Tax cuts for billionaire donors; benefit cuts for people on Social Security—how the billionaires loot our country (what, not rich enough already, fellas?)," Whitehouse wrote on social media.
In a column on Thursday, MSNBC's Ryan Teague Beckwith wrote that "Republicans somehow keep coming back to the idea of cutting Social Security" despite widespread opposition to such cuts among the American public.
"Would Trump try to cut Social Security? It's hard to say. Over the years, he has staked out every possible position on Social Security—sometimes within hours of each other," wrote Beckwith, noting that Trump previously called the program a "huge Ponzi scheme" and backed calls to raise the retirement age.
"So if Republicans—or Musk—decide to propose changes to Social Security benefits," Beckwith added, "it's possible that he might go along with it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Progressive Caucus Chair Ready to 'Fight Billionaires, Grifters, and Republican Frauds'
"Our caucus will make sure the Democratic Party stands up to corporate interests for working people," said Rep. Greg Casar.
Dec 05, 2024
The Congressional Progressive Caucus on Thursday elected its leaders for the next term, including Rep. Greg Casar as chair.
"The members of the Progressive Caucus know how to fight billionaires, grifters, and Republican frauds in Congress. Our caucus will make sure the Democratic Party stands up to corporate interests for working people," said Casar (D-Texas), who will replace term-limited Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.).
"I'm honored to build on the legacy of Chair Jayapal," Casar continued. "I've fought back against extremist, egocentric autocrats in Texas for my entire adult life. The Democratic Party must directly take on Trump, and it'll be CPC members boldly leading the way and putting working people first."
Casar, who is currently the CPC whip and ran unopposed, will be joined for the 119th Congress by Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) as deputy chair and Jesús "Chuy" García (D-Ill.) as whip.
"The Congressional Progressive Caucus has always served as an incredible vehicle for transformative change, justice, and movement building," noted Omar. "I am honored to have the support of my colleagues to serve another term as the deputy chair of the Progressive Caucus. Over the next term, we are going to fight to build an inclusive movement that meets the moment."
García said that "I am proud to join incoming Chair Casar, Deputy Chair Omar, and all members of the newly elected executive board as we prepare for the 119th Congress—in which I believe the role the CPC plays will be more critical than ever."
"We are a caucus that gives platform to ideas deeply popular across the political spectrum, and a caucus that builds diverse coalitions to get things done," he continued. "I look forward to working with my colleagues in Congress and partners across the country who believe in people-centered policies rooted in equity and justice for all."
The CPC, first led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) in 1991, when he was still in the U.S. House of Representatives, has nearly 100 members. The new caucus leaders are set to begin their terms on January 3 and will face not only a Republican-controlled House and Senate, but also U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, who is set to be sworn in on January 20.
"It is my great honor to pass the torch to the next class of elected leadership of the Progressive Caucus: My dear friends and trusted colleagues Reps. Greg Casar, Ilhan Omar, and Chuy García," said Jayapal.
"I was proud to establish term limits when I became chair in 2018, and have full confidence in the abilities of our new class to lead this caucus in the fight against the worst of the incoming Trump administration while rebuilding our party with a focus on economic justice for working people," she added. "I will be cheering these three new leaders and our new vice chairs at every turn as chair emerita come next year, and my heart is very full knowing we will have them at the helm of the CPC."
Speaking with NBC News on Wednesday, 35-year-old Casar said that "the progressive movement needs to change. We need to re-emphasize core economic issues every time some of these cultural war issues are brought up."
"So when we hear Republicans attacking queer Americans again, I think the progressive response needs to be that a trans person didn't deny your health insurance claim, a big corporation did—with Republican help," he explained. "We need to connect the dots for people that the Republican Party obsession with these culture war issues is driven by Republicans' desire to distract voters and have them look away while Republicans pick their pocket."
According to NBC:
That means the Democratic Party needs to "shed off some of its more corporate elements," to sharpen the economic-populist contrast with Republicans and not let voters equate the two parties, he said. He predicted Trump and the Republican-led Congress will offer plenty of opportunities to drive that distinction, including when it pursues an extension of tax cuts for upper earners.
"The core of the Republican Party is about helping Wall Street and billionaires. And I think we have to call out the game," Casar said. "The Democratic Party, at its best, can hold people or can have inside of its tent people across geography, across race and across ideology. Because we're all in the same boat when it comes to making sure that you can retire with dignity, that your kids can go to school, that you can buy a house."
Others—including Sanders, who sought the Democratic nomination for president in 2016 and 2020—have issued similar calls since Democrats lost the White House and Senate in last month's elections.
"In the recent elections, just 150 billionaire families spent nearly $2 billion to get their candidates elected," Sanders said Saturday. "Our job in the coming months and years is clear. We must defeat the oligarchs and create an economy and government that works for all, not just the few."
On Thursday, both Sanders and Jayapal, who have led the congressional fight for Medicare for All, reiterated calls for a single-payer healthcare program in response to a social media post by Elon Musk, who is set to co-lead Trump's forthcoming Department of Government Efficiency with fellow billionaire Vivek Ramaswamy.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Billionaire Jeff Bezos Wants to 'Help' Trump Gut Regulations
"Shockingly another one of the richest guys on Earth wants to defund our government and scrap regulations."
Dec 05, 2024
Billionaire Amazon founder Jeff Bezos on Wednesday expressed his optimism about U.S. President-elect Donald Trump's next term and suggested he would "help" the Republican gut regulations.
"If we're talking about Trump, I think it's very interesting, I'm actually very optimistic this time around... I'm very hopeful about this—he seems to have a lot of energy around reducing regulation," Bezos told The New York Times' Andrew Ross Sorkin during the newspaper's DealBook Summit.
"And my point of view, if I can help him do that, I'm gonna help him, because we do have too much regulation in this country. This country is so set up to grow," he continued, suggesting that regulatory cuts would solve the nation's economic problems.
After complaining about the burden of regulations, Bezos added, "I'm very optimistic that President Trump is serious about this regulatory agenda and I think he has a good chance of succeeding."
The comments came during a discussion about Bezos' ownership of The Washington Post, which also addressed the billionaire's recent controversial decisions to block the newspaper's drafted endorsement of Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris and have it stop endorsing presidential candidates.
Bezos said Wednesday that he is "very proud" of the move, that the Post "is going to continue to cover all presidents very aggressively," and the decision did not result from fears about Trump targeting his companies.
As Inc.reported Thursday: "Trump had railed against Bezos and his companies, including Amazon and The Washington Post, during his first term. In 2019, Amazon argued in a court case that Trump's bias against the company harmed its chances of winning a $10 billion Pentagon contract. The Biden administration later pursued a contract with both Amazon and Microsoft."
Bezos owns Blue Origin, an aerospace company and a competitor to Elon Musk's SpaceX. Musk—the world's richest person, followed by Bezos, according to the Bloomberg and Forbes trackers—has been appointed to lead Trump's forthcoming Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) with fellow billionaire Vivek Ramaswamy.
Bezos' remarks at the Times summit led Fortune's Brooke Seipel to suggest that he may be the next billionaire to join DOGE.
Musk and Ramaswamy headed to Capitol Hill on Thursday to speak with GOP lawmakers about their plans for the government.
"Despite its name, the Department of Government Efficiency is neither a department nor part of the government, which frees Musk and Ramaswamy from having to go through the typical ethics and background checks required for federal employment," The Associated Pressnoted. "They said they will not be paid for their work."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular