« Previous · Home · Next »

Of Course You Know, This Means War

By Charlie

Hamas official says suicide bombing legitimate

A Palestinian suicide bomber killed six other people and wounded at least 35 in a bustling neighborhood of Tel Aviv on Monday -- and the Palestinians' new Hamas leaders called the attack a legitimate response to Israeli "aggression," AP reported on the registration-restricted WALL STREET JOURNAL website Monday. Excerpts. #

"We think that this operation ... is a direct result of the policy of the occupation and the brutal aggression and siege committed against our people," said Khaled Abu Helal, spokesman for the Hamas-led Interior Ministry.
His message clashed with that of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, of the rival Fatah Party, who condemned the bombing as a "terrorist attack."

The Islamic Jihad group claimed responsibility for the bombing in a phone call to the Associated Press. Islamic Jihad has claimed responsibility for all six of the previous suicide attacks inside Israel since Hamas declared a ceasefire more than a year ago.

So, pretty much what we have here is a government of one state carrying out an asymmetric military attack on another state’s civilian population, and then claiming responsibility for it. Sure, the ties of the Hamas government DIRECTLY to whatever terror group(s) pulled this off are probably tenuous, but as a government, they have provided support to these groups by giving them sanctuary and allowing them to operate.

(Terminology check- if a government directs a group to execute a terror attack, they are state-sponsored. If a government only funds, trains, or allows the group sanctuary, and does not pick targets and give orders to the group, it is state supported. Those are the two categories of state involvement with terror groups: Sponsored and Supported)

Anyway, under the equally-tenuous “Geneva Convention” this attack (supported by a state) is a violation of said convention. This used to be called a “war crime” –but the term has been so watered down lately, actual war crimes that occur are glossed over in today’s world.

International Rules About Civilians
Both the fourth Geneval Convention and the two Additional Protocols extend protections to civilians during war time.
· Civilians are not to be subject to attack. This includes direct attacks on civilians and indiscriminate attacks against areas in which civilians are present.

This is categorically different from, say, Israeli counter-battery fire that takes civilian lives as a collateral damage. Why? Because the target is not civilian, it is military (a mortar team, whose position was detected by reading the radar signature of an incoming rocket/mortar round). In this latest suicide attack of a falafel stand, the target was not of any military value (say, if the falafel stand had been part of a field-feeding in a forward combat area). This particular falafel stand was selected for a reason, probably being a place where the maximum number of civilian casualties could be incurred from a suicide attack. Also, counter-battery fire is not indiscriminate- rounds impact within a blast radius of the grid square where the mortar/rocket firing position was pinpointed. An indiscriminate attack is lobbing rockets and mortars into populated civilian areas because they are populated civilian areas.

Before, a terror attack like this could be dismissed by the Palestinian Authority as the acts of unaccountable and uncontrollable terror gangs. Now that terror gang is in control of the government, and has just justified an act of war.

I’m waiting for the UN resolution condemning this with baited breath….

**John Says** Malkin has comprehensive (and somewhat grisly) coverage of the attack. Recommended.

TrackBack

Comments

Post a comment

Awards

Feedback

Military.com

Friends of OPFOR

Blogroll

Authors

Categories

Archives

Blogspot Archives

Search

Subscribe

Blogger Alliances

Data

Credits