Ubiquitous
2007-11-28 12:01:37 UTC
Here is a jaw-droppingly bizarre story from the BBC:
Thirty hooded gunmen sit at desks around a flip chart, pen
and paper in hand, listening to a lecture on the laws of
war by the international Red Cross.
All the Palestinian armed factions have signed up to the course,
though they are being taught in individual groups.
The head of Gaza operations for the Red Cross, Anthony Dalziel,
said the course was part of his organisation's worldwide effort
to teach international humanitarian law to all parties in armed
conflict.
Are the lessons catching on? It would appear not:
Abu Khaled is a local factional leader in Gaza. He told me his
fighters were told to take the Red Cross course to show the
world they are not as many see them.
"People think we are terrorists," he said. "But actually the
Islamic law we follow is far stricter than international law
in its rules of how to protect civilians and prisoners in war..."
I asked Abu Khaled about the rockets fired at Israel by his
faction and others, with the aim of killing ordinary Israelis.
"They are responsible," he insisted. "You can't expect the
victims to respect the laws alone. If they stop targeting our
civilians, they will see we are open to leaving theirs alone."
Then came a threat not entirely in keeping with the Red
Cross class going on around us.
"If they keep hurting our civilians they should know--today we
may be targeting their people in Sderot, tomorrow and in the
future, with new technology, our resistance will spread further.
"Our missiles will reach deeper inside Israel."
Is this a little like when you get a ticket and the charges are dropped if you
go to traffic school? The Beeb quotes Iyad Nasr, the Red Cross staffer
teaching the class: "They also have to realise they have responsibilities.
Legal ones. And if they don't keep them, they can be prosecuted under
international law. And that comes as quite a surprise to these guys, most of
whom have always viewed themselves as the victims."
Judging by Abu Khaled's comments, that message doesn't seem to have taken. And
as a practical matter, is Hamas really at risk of prosecution under
international law? YNetNews.com reports on a test case:
ZAKA, a volunteer organization committed to the recovery
and identification of human remains, in coordination with
the municipality of the rocket-battered city of Sderot,
may be on to a new method for combating Hamas: The
International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague.
In a lawsuit against Hamas politburo chief Khaled Mashaal,
ZAKA's directors Yehuda Meshi-Zahav and Dudi Zilbershlag
and Sderot Mayor Eli Moyal argue that Mashaal is responsible
for numerous murders and crimes against humanity and war
crimes.
In the suit Mashaal is blamed for the killing of 176 civilians
and the wounding of hundreds in Hamas-sponsored terror attacks
and suicide bombings that took place since 2002. Attacks on
military targets were not included in the lawsuit.
Will this effort succeed? That would be great, but color us skeptical.
YNetNews notes that "the Israeli government does not officially recognize the
Court in The Hague," and of course the U.S. doesn't either. As targets No. 1
and 2 of terrorism, you'd think Israel and the U.S. would have more of an
interest than anyone in strong international-law enforcement. But of course
their leaders rightly worry about being targeted for antiterrorism efforts.
International legal institutions too often end up protecting those who violate
the law flagrantly at the expense of governments that are trying to do their
duty to protect their own civilian populations. Is international humanitarian
law an experiment that has failed?
Thirty hooded gunmen sit at desks around a flip chart, pen
and paper in hand, listening to a lecture on the laws of
war by the international Red Cross.
All the Palestinian armed factions have signed up to the course,
though they are being taught in individual groups.
The head of Gaza operations for the Red Cross, Anthony Dalziel,
said the course was part of his organisation's worldwide effort
to teach international humanitarian law to all parties in armed
conflict.
Are the lessons catching on? It would appear not:
Abu Khaled is a local factional leader in Gaza. He told me his
fighters were told to take the Red Cross course to show the
world they are not as many see them.
"People think we are terrorists," he said. "But actually the
Islamic law we follow is far stricter than international law
in its rules of how to protect civilians and prisoners in war..."
I asked Abu Khaled about the rockets fired at Israel by his
faction and others, with the aim of killing ordinary Israelis.
"They are responsible," he insisted. "You can't expect the
victims to respect the laws alone. If they stop targeting our
civilians, they will see we are open to leaving theirs alone."
Then came a threat not entirely in keeping with the Red
Cross class going on around us.
"If they keep hurting our civilians they should know--today we
may be targeting their people in Sderot, tomorrow and in the
future, with new technology, our resistance will spread further.
"Our missiles will reach deeper inside Israel."
Is this a little like when you get a ticket and the charges are dropped if you
go to traffic school? The Beeb quotes Iyad Nasr, the Red Cross staffer
teaching the class: "They also have to realise they have responsibilities.
Legal ones. And if they don't keep them, they can be prosecuted under
international law. And that comes as quite a surprise to these guys, most of
whom have always viewed themselves as the victims."
Judging by Abu Khaled's comments, that message doesn't seem to have taken. And
as a practical matter, is Hamas really at risk of prosecution under
international law? YNetNews.com reports on a test case:
ZAKA, a volunteer organization committed to the recovery
and identification of human remains, in coordination with
the municipality of the rocket-battered city of Sderot,
may be on to a new method for combating Hamas: The
International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague.
In a lawsuit against Hamas politburo chief Khaled Mashaal,
ZAKA's directors Yehuda Meshi-Zahav and Dudi Zilbershlag
and Sderot Mayor Eli Moyal argue that Mashaal is responsible
for numerous murders and crimes against humanity and war
crimes.
In the suit Mashaal is blamed for the killing of 176 civilians
and the wounding of hundreds in Hamas-sponsored terror attacks
and suicide bombings that took place since 2002. Attacks on
military targets were not included in the lawsuit.
Will this effort succeed? That would be great, but color us skeptical.
YNetNews notes that "the Israeli government does not officially recognize the
Court in The Hague," and of course the U.S. doesn't either. As targets No. 1
and 2 of terrorism, you'd think Israel and the U.S. would have more of an
interest than anyone in strong international-law enforcement. But of course
their leaders rightly worry about being targeted for antiterrorism efforts.
International legal institutions too often end up protecting those who violate
the law flagrantly at the expense of governments that are trying to do their
duty to protect their own civilian populations. Is international humanitarian
law an experiment that has failed?
--
It is simply breathtaking to watch the glee and abandon with which
the liberal media and the Angry Left have been attempting to turn
our military victory in Iraq into a second Vietnam quagmire. Too bad
for them, it's failing.
It is simply breathtaking to watch the glee and abandon with which
the liberal media and the Angry Left have been attempting to turn
our military victory in Iraq into a second Vietnam quagmire. Too bad
for them, it's failing.