Amnesty International joined a chorus of voices accusing Israel of war crimes for its use of white phosphorus incendiaries over populated areas of the Gaza Strip.

White phosphorus munitions are used for a variety of roles by military forces. It is commonly used as a smoke screen to mask military movements on the ground. It is also known to cause dramatic burns when in contact with skin.

The use of white phosphorus is not prohibited by international law.  Experts say it could form the basis for war crimes charges if it were used indiscriminately over densely populated areas, reports said.

Donatella Rovera with Amnesty International said the extensive use of white phosphorus by Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip was “inherently indiscriminate.”

“Its repeated use in this manner, despite evidence of its indiscriminate effects and its toll on civilians, is a war crime,” she said.

Israel freely admitted to using white phosphorus in its three-week campaign against the Hamas-held Gaza Strip, though denied allegations it was used as a weapon against civilian targets.

Human Rights Watch made similar allegations and the United Nations issued statements on the use of white phosphorus as well.

With Hamas and Israel ignoring international calls for a cease-fire, the top human rights official with the United Nations called for an investigation into war crimes in the Gaza Strip.

The Israeli military pushed deeper into the Hama-held Gaza Strip Sunday in the 16^th day of assaults on the tiny Palestinian enclave. Khaled Meshaal, the exiled Hamas leader, blamed Israel for launching a “holocaust” against the people of the Gaza Strip and said a cease-fire would only be reached if Israel held its fire.

The violence comes as members of the international community rallied for an end to the conflict. The U.N. Security Council passed a resolution Friday in that regard.

Navi Pilly, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, raised concerns over the humanitarian impact on the Israeli offensive, suggesting Israel had acted indiscriminately on several occasions, the AP reported.

“I am concerned with violations of international law,” she said.

The Palestinian death toll from the fighting passed 840 Saturday. There have been three civilian casualties on the Israeli side and 10 military deaths, though seven of those were from friendly fire.

Palestinian human rights officials suggested the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank may file formal war crimes charges against Israel in international court for activity in the Hamas-held Gaza Strip.

Israeli forces launched their twelfth day of assaults on the tiny enclave on the border with Egypt. Hamas, the militant leadership of the Gaza Strip, violated a six-month cease-fire with rocket barrages on the Israeli border town of Ashkelon.

Raji Sourani with the Palestinian Center for Human Rights said the Palestinian Authority will conduct legal proceedings against top Israeli officials for alleged war crimes committed in the Gaza Strip offensive, the Inter Press Service said Wednesday.

“The repeated bombing of clearly marked civilian buildings, where civilians were sheltering, crosses several red lines in regard to international law,” Sourani said.

The United Nations called for investigations into the shelling of a Gazan school in the Jabaliya refugee camp Tuesday, which killed some 40 Palestinians. The International Committee of the Red Cross and Palestinian Red Crescent, meanwhile, condemned Israeli strikes on aid vehicles, which the ICRC said were clearly marked.

Israeli officials denied any deliberate targeting of Palestinian civilians, claiming they were collateral damage due to the Hamas tactic of operating in densely populated areas. Both sides agreed to daily 3-hour cease fires to allow humanitarian aid to enter the Gaza Strip.

At least 658 Palestinians were killed in the offensive since Dec. 27.  Ten Israelis, seven of them soldiers, died in the conflicts.  Four of those seven were from friendly fire, however.

Canadian lawyers acting on behalf of a Palestinian man sued two Montreal companies and their director for violation of international laws pertaining to the transfer of civilian populations into Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories.

Court documents filed in the Superior Court of the District of Montreal claim two firms acting on behalf of the Israeli government, Green Park International and Green Mount International, “on their own behalf and as de facto agents of the State of Israel, are … aiding, abetting and assisting and conspiring with the State of Israel in carrying out an illegal purpose,” The Canadian Jewish News reported.

Toronto lawyer Mark Arnold said the companies, acting as representatives of the Israeli government, violated Geneva Convention articles that prohibit the transfer of foreign civilians in occupied territories.  Arnold says that since Canadian law includes the Geneva Conventions in its domestic laws, Green Park and Green Mount are liable for the violations.

Analysts claim, however, the case faces legal hurdles from the fact a Canadian citizen cannot sue a foreign government or its affiliates. Also of consideration is the notion Israeli citizens residing in settlements in Palestine do not directly affect Canada.

Arnold disagrees, saying the firms are Canadian and subject to domestic laws pertaining to the Geneva Conventions.

“In this case, the wrongdoer is Canadian, subject to (Canadian law),” he said.

Under the shadow of the fifth anniversary of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, leaders of many Arab nations gathered in the tiny African nation of Senegal for the Organization of the Islamic Conference meeting.  While the leaders of the impoverished nation wonder if hosting such an event will ultimately generate good graces from the wealthy oil-rich patrons, some of the leaders used the high-profile forum as a platform to raise issues concerning the broader Middle East.  I wrote last week or so that many Arab leaders were pointing to the ongoing escalation in Gaza as something tantamount to war crimes.  It seems others feel the same way.

Ethnic cleansing and Palestinians

PRESIDENT Mahmoud Abbas of Palestine the other day at the OIC summit in Dakar accused Israel of ‘ethnic cleansing’ in Jerusalem by banning the building of Palestinian homes and cutting the city off from the West Bank. ‘Our people in the city are facing an ethnic cleansing campaign through a set of Israeli decisions heavy taxes, closing Palestinian institutions in addition to separating the city from the West Bank by the racist separation wall,’ Mr Abbas reportedly said adding this was in total violation of the peace process. The future of Jerusalem, which Israel claims as its capital, has not been accepted internationally, is one of the most divisive issues facing peace negotiators.

Peace talks between Mr. Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert faltered late last year after Israel announced plans to build hundreds of new homes in and around East Jerusalem on land it occupied in 1967. Israel says the construction is within areas it intends to keep in any future peace deal with the Palestinians. It defends its construction of the West Bank barriers that the International Court of Justice has termed illegal. An Israeli spokesman has termed the remarks of Mr. Abbas as ‘inflammatory’ while a US State Department spokesman said the use of the words ‘ethnic cleansing’ was probably an example of ‘overheated political rhetoric’.

OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu told the Islamic summit that Israelis responsible for attacks on Palestinians should be tried for war crimes. The UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has said Israel must stop using disproportionate and excessive force’ against Palestinians. On a subsequent visit to the region, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, said the two sides had agreed to resume negotiations, but new Israeli settlement projects in the occupied West Bank have since heightened tensions.

The Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel sent a letter to Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak and other ministers that accused the government of war crimes in its latest incursion into Gaza.  The letter reminded the ministers that a key principle in “humanitarian international law is the principle of distinguishing between fighters and civilians during war.” 

The Israeli military launched an incursion into Gaza last week Monday that left over 100 Palestinians and three Israeli soldiers dead. Israel is responding to a barrage of rocket attacks from Palestinian militants into southern Israel.

Meanwhile, following meetings in Cairo in preparation for a summit in Damascus later this Spring, the Arab League called the Israeli attacks on Gaza “crimes against humanity.”  The ministers said in a statement they considered “these Israeli crimes as crimes of war,” adding, “The criminal aggression against Gaza shows that Israeli policy against the Palestinian people is based on genocide and ethnic cleansing.”

But will anything happen?  The argument can be made that Israel withdrew its military forces from Gaza after less than a week and that this sort of condemnation harnesses Israeli aggression, but this tit for tat sort of thing is the status quo.  Ariel Sharon, when he served in the military, was a noted aggressor against Arabs and current ministers have made statements suggesting, to coin the phrase, there will be blood.  The Palestinians use force, so the Israelis use force, so the argument goes.  But Israel also has a blockade on Gaza and the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East says it will run out of food soon.  The Israelis also tried shutting off the electricity in Gaza to force the residents there to turn against the militants, notably Hamas.  English reports say the humanitarian crisis in Gaza is the worst that it's been in over 40 years and they blame the Israeli blockade for that atrocity.

This seems to paint a lopsided picture of international law.  There is a tenant in international relations theory that says the most powerful states make all the rules.  They succeed because they are the best at what they do; if you want to be as great, you have to play by their rules too, or you get cast aside.  A question along this front is to ask whether Man follows the rule of God because they are the rules of God, or because God's rules are good.  In international affairs, it seems that this Hobbesian notion of supremacy also carries into international law.  As an aside, two towns in Vermont passed non-binding resolutions to indict U.S. President George Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney for violating the U.S. Constitution.  But this, and the international condemnation against Israel, is largely symbolic.  It seems, and this can be supported by the situation in Sudan where many sitting government ministers are accused of war crimes, that the powerful have the privilege of immunity as well.  It was only after the U.S. overthrew the Saddam Hussein regime that Saddam faced justice.  It was only after Yugoslavia collapsed that Slobodan Milosevic was brought before the Hague.  What does this privilege of immunity for the powerful mean for Israel?

A report by the New York based Human Rights Watch states that Israel conducted indiscriminate air raids against Lebanese civilians during the July War with the military wing of Hezbollah. The report alleges that Israel acted with “reckless indifference” regarding the fate of civilians and questioned Israel's argument that Hezbollah was using civilians as human shields. The five month study said it could find no evidence that human shields were employed by the Shi’ite guerrilla movement, but also noted that Hezbollah “indiscriminately and at times deliberately” targeted Israeli civilians.

The 249 page report, entitled “Why They Died: Civilian Casualties in Lebanon during the 2006 War”, noted that Israel failed to make distinctions between military and civilian targets, often targeting Hezbollah's social welfare and political interests. The report also notes that Israel did not distinguish between Hezbollah guerilla's and civilians fleeing combat;

“Hezbollah fighters often didn't carry their weapons in the open or regularly wear uniforms, which made them a hard target to identify. But that doesn't justify the Israel Defense Force's failure to distinguish between civilians and combatants, and if in doubt to treat a person as a civlian, as the laws of war require.”

Israel has countered that it was indeed acting within the standards of military conduct. Mark Regev, Israel's Foreign Minister, stated Israel had acted accordingly, citing a CNN interview with a U.N. relief coordinator, Jan Egeland, who stated that Hezbollah guerrilla's were “shielding themselves close to U.N. posts and close to the civilian population.” “Hezbollah had a clear pattern of behavior where it embedded itself among the Lebanese civilian population and exploited it as human shields,” Regev stated. Mr. Regev also noted that Israel had issued several warnings to citizens in southern Lebanon to evacuate the area, however, Human Rights Watch officials countered that “issuing warnings doesn't make indiscriminate attacks lawful.”

On July 12, 2006, Hezbollah launched rocket attacks on Israeli targets, including Israeli border patrols. Hezbollah attacks killed three Israeli soldiers and captured two others. Israel responded with massive force against a wide range of targets in southern Lebanon, as well as bombing the runway of Beirut's Rafik Hariri International Airport. Hezbollah responsed with Katyusha rocket attacks against civilian targets in Israel. After a U.N. brokered ceasefire, both sides were officially criticized for their actions during the conflict.

More than 1,000 Lebanese civilians were killed during the conflict, in addition to 119 Israeli soldiers and 40 Israeli civilians.

BBC/Reuters

A family representing a human rights activist working in the Palestinian territories is seeking to pursue a case against Caterpillar for aiding and abetting human rights violations.  In 2003, Rachel Corrie, a 23-year-old peace activist, was crushed by an Israeli bulldozer manufactured by Caterpillar as she tried to prevent the demolition of homes in the Gaza Strip.  Palestinians effected by the demolitions have also joined the civil case.

The case was dismissed in 2005 on the grounds that Caterpillar was not responsible for the use of its product.  Defense attorneys argue that common law dating back centuries dictates the manufacturer can indeed be held liable.  The defense team for Caterpillar has countered that following that logic would imply that the US was also be responsible for the actions, as Caterpillar is a  US company.  Furthermore, that logic would relegate the case to foreign affairs, requiring US courts to improperly intervene in matters of the executive branch.

In the past, the Nazi trials found chemical manufactures guilty of war crimes for providing the chemicals used to exterminate Jewish citizens in death camps.  Recently, the French businessman, Frans van Anraat, was convicted at The Hague for selling dual use chemicals to the Iraqi government for use at chemical weapons.  A recent case regarding Agent Orange, however, has not yet reached a verdict against the manufacturers of the defoliant. Lawyers in the Agent Orange case argue the harmful effects of dioxin - the active ingredient in Agent Orange - were not know during the Vietnam War.

AP

On this date in 1967, President Abdul Nasser of Egypt orders the UN Emergency Force (UNEF) in Egypt to disband. In 1957, Egypt had decided to nationalize the Suez Canal, imposing severe economic complications on Israel and her allies. Mounting circumstances resulted in the eventual invasion of the Sinai Peninsula by Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). UNEF troops were deployed to the area to keep the peace following tense diplomatic efforts. Escalations continued in the area throughout the 60's. Throughout early 1967, Egyptian and United Arab Republic (Syria) forces concentrated their forces in the area and Nasser demanded UNEF forces withdraw in order to prevent UN casualties. The UN had attempted to redeploy UNEF to the Israeli side of the border, but the Israeli government refused. The Israelis saw Arab actions as a strategic move against its interests and launched a pre-emptive attack on Egyptian air defenses on June 5, marking the beginning of the Six-Day War. Six UNEF troops were killed during the conflict.

Complications from the Six-Day War remain today. In May, the Egyptian Foreign Minister demanded a formal inquiry into allegations that IDF had murdered some 400 Egyptian and Palestinian POW's during the Six-Day War. Israel's current Infrastructure Prime Minister, Binyamin Ben Eliezer, was the leader of the IDF unit alleged to have committed the atrocities. The Arab coordinator with the International Criminal Court has stated it will file suit against Ben Eliezer at the ICC if Egypt fails to do so. Recently, Ben Eliezer has stated that Israel will continue to engage in "liquidation fire" against suspected Palestinian militants. This is contentious activity on behalf of the Israeli's as "liquidation fire" is tantamount to assassination attempts, most which occur in civilian areas.

Israel today mounted an aerial attack against a HAMAS security headquarters, killing two and wounding several others. Forces from the US backed Fatah movement and HAMAS officials have been fighting for weeks, threatening the further destabilize the region.

Today also marks the day in 1983 when Israel, Lebanon and the United States signed an agreement for Israeli withdraw from Lebanon. In June, 2006, members from the military wing of Hezb'Allah crossed into Israel and captured IDF soldiers, sparking a war between Hezb'Allah and Israel.

It is also the birthday of the Ayatollah Khomenei.

On a personal note, it is also Alan Johnston's birthday today.  He is the BBC report stationed in the Gaza Strip and was taken hostage months ago.  As I listen to BBC World Service all day, I wish him a sincere happy birthday.  Please sign the petition on the right in his support.

A joint report from The Center for the Defence of the Individual and B'Tselem, an Israeli human rights group, allege grave violations of international law occurred at the hands of the Israeli government. According to the report, Shin Bet, the Israeli security agency, degrades Palestinian prisoners and prevents access to lawyers or International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). In the case of "ticking bombs", Shin Bet has employed "special" interrogation methods, including the "shabah position" in which detainees are shackled in stress positions while hooded and listening to loud music. According to the Public Committee Against Torture in Israel, there has been a sharp increase in "torture, ill treatment, humiliation and incarceration in inhuman conditions of Palestinian detainees by the Shin Bet" since 2003.

As the result of a lawsuit filed in 1999 on behalf of Palestinian prisoners, Shin Bet must operate according to detailed methods. These rules allow the use of "moderate physical and psychological pressure" in order to extract information from detainees, including sensory deprivation. The 1999 ruling by the Israeli Supreme Court did, however, ban certain interrogation methods, such as the "shabah position." The Court did acknowledge that interrogations were likely to be unpleasant considering their intent was to break the will of the suspect. According to Shin Bet officials, interrogation methods are compliant with the 1999 ruling and that the B'Tselem report is erroneous.

According to the United Nation Convention Against Torture, torture may be defined as "any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession." Israel is a signatory to this Convention, though nearly half of Israel Knesset members support harsh interrogation methods.

A report in 2004 suggests that Shin Bet methods were exemplified in the Abu Ghraib scandal, where US military personnel documented several cases of torture committed against Iraqi prisoners.

In related news, a New York federal judge threw out a war crimes charges against a former Shin Bet director for ordering the aerial bombing of civilian targets in an effort to assasinate HAMAS leader, Saleh Shahada.

Opinio Juris is highlighting the case.

San Fransisco Chronicle/Reuters/Guardian UK/Boston Globe
Photo: BBC