by Rafael Bardaji and Joseph Raskas
A report issued by a high-level group of former diplomats and military officials recently concluded that if Israel sought to systematically kill civilians in Gaza, either Israel's military did not try nearly hard enough or it got very unlucky, because it failed spectacularly to achieve that supposed objective.
Increasingly, human
rights organizations are attempting to make military forces operating
under the purview of the Laws of Armed Conflict subject to persistent
human rights claims in the civil sphere. Israeli soldiers have
historically been made the mark -- much as they are being made now by
the U.N. Human Rights Council. But such moves mask a broader agenda that
should worry the entire West.
Consider: Last summer,
courtesy of Iran, the Gaza-based terrorist group, Hamas, perpetrated the
kidnapping and brutal murder of three Israeli teens, battered Israel
with more than 450 rockets, and plotted what were intended to be
strategic, mass-casualty attacks launched via tunnels emerging in
Israel, in some cases near schools. In response to Hamas's unlawful
aggression, Israel was forced to fight a war it did not want and sought
for months to avoid -- but nevertheless, it was still roundly condemned
and heavily pressured to halt its campaign.
A report issued by a
high-level group of former diplomats and military officials recently
concluded that if Israel sought to systematically kill civilians in
Gaza, either Israel's military did not try nearly hard enough or it got
very unlucky, because it failed spectacularly to achieve that supposed
objective. The preliminary findings of the international group -- whose
11 members include the former NATO Military Committee Chairman Gen.
Klaus Naumann of Germany; former Italian Foreign Minister Giulio Terzi;
former U.S. State Department Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues
Pierre-Richard Prosper; and the former commander of British Forces in
Afghanistan, Col. Richard Kemp -- demonstrate the combat-to-civilian
kill ratio was approximately 1:1 -- a significantly better score than
the 3:1 ratio that U.N. estimates show for such conflicts worldwide.
However, by focusing
exclusively on the civilian casualty count, rather than the strategic
circumstances that brought them about, the so-called human rights
campaign capably masks its wider aim: to fundamentally erode the moral
imperative of certain Western wars.
Operating under the
banner of socially concerned citizenry, these groups ascribe a singular
importance to having wars fought by the rules that they seek to impose,
at the expense of fighting the war to a victorious and convincing
triumph.
This activism does not
only place an imprimatur of human rights upon a misguided agenda. It
also erodes the necessity and justness of such wars, while seeking to
provide justification for even more misguided ideological campaigns.
Moreover, the fear of legal action initiated or otherwise encouraged by
these organizations hamstrings the prosecution of war by civilized
societies.
Both Israel and the
West are immersed in legitimate and necessary wars and face guerrilla
forces -- which deliberately and indiscriminately target civilian
populations and launch their battles from within civilian areas, with
the expectation that the resulting carnage will provide fodder for human
rights activists to bring about intervention in the wars.
Democratic armies --
those of Israel and the United States in particular -- work gallantly to
hold civilian deaths to a minimum. But more and more they are being
handicapped in fighting the war.
Citizens of the West
need to be made aware of how their nations' democratic agendas,
governmental objectives, and military campaigns are being undermined by
ideologies and actors that are anathema to Western culture. Ignoring or
failing to confront the perpetrators for fear of otherwise lending
legitimacy to those conditions is understandable -- but the
counterculture will only continue to grow.
We must give the enemy
no quarter in demolishing his malicious propaganda. World leaders must
continue to condemn as often as necessary the ongoing human rights
violations committed by non-state actors against democratic states.
Organizations -- governmental and otherwise -- that voice concern for
the treatment of such malevolent actors should be exposed and labeled
for what they truly are: apologists for terrorists.
The ruling that the
so-called human rights campaign seeks to impose is not regarding what
type of force Israel can impose on Hamas, but whether or not democratic
armies of the West have the right to use force of any kind.
Western nations pursue
war only after careful deliberation leading to a conclusion that war is
necessary and just. Once that conclusion has been reached, however, a
war must be fought to be won.
Rafael Bardaji served as
national security adviser to Spain's former President José María Aznar
from 1996 to 2004, and is currently the executive director of Friends of
Israel Initiative.
Joseph Raskas is a combat veteran of the Israel
Defense Forces and currently an analyst for Friends of Israel
Initiative.
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=12963
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment