Peacekeeping Forces in Sinai In Danger (Republishing a 4 Year Old Report) Gaza Chaos Likely to Metastasize -- Are American/Multi-National Forces in Sinai Targets?

March 14, 2012:  Associated Press reported hours ago: 

Bedouins surround peacekeepers, some US, in Sinai
Uruguayan officials say some of their peacekeeping troops have been surrounded by armed Bedouins in the Sinai desert. And they say U.S. and Colombian troops may also be trapped. The standoff apparently began this week and is still continuing as hundreds of Bedouins armed with automatic rifles surround the peacekeeping force. The force's camp is in Egyptian territory near the border with the Gaza Strip.

[That's the 12-nation MFO peacekeepers, some 1,650 soldiers.  The U.S. contingent is the largest.]



January 27, 2008


Gaza Chaos Likely to Metastasize.  Are American/Multi-National Forces in Sinai Targets?

The pictures from the Gaza-Egypt border show tens of thousands of Gazans celebrating their “release” from the Hamas-controlled area. But the mass shopping spree may soon be replaced by a paroxysm of deadly terrorism. Consider the terrorist organizations and targets now in play.

• Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad are now relatively free to travel throughout the Sinai, including the long, lightly defended Egyptian-Israeli border. They are likely equipped with new weapons and explosives obtained from Hamas arsenals in Sinai. Those weapons no longer have to make the arduous route through tunnels into Gaza. Possible targets: All of Eilat and Israeli army positions and remote villages along the border. Exactly one year ago, in January 2007, a suicide bomber from Gaza infiltrated from Sinai and killed three Eilat residents.
• Egyptian resorts in Sinai are high on the terrorists’ target lists, particularly those that cater to Israeli and European tourists. Dozens of guests were killed in a Taba hotel bombing and beach camping areas in October 2004. Al Qaeda was suspected.
• Al Jazeera reported on Sunday that Egyptians arrested 20 armed Palestinians in Sinai. They were equipped with explosives and electronic devices to listen to Egyptian military transmissions. If true, the arrest suggests that foreign intelligence services may be playing a role in directing the terrorists. Best guess is Iranian, Hizbullah, and/or al Qaeda involvement.
• The 1,800 Multi-National Force and Observers (MFO) in Sinai are sitting ducks for the terrorists. The lightly armed soldiers come from 11 nations, but by far the largest contingent is from the United States. In recent days there were reports that the American forces withdrew from the El Gorah base near Al Arish. U.S.-led multi-national troops are at war with Islamic radicals in Afghanistan and Iraq. Chasing the Americans out of another base in the Middle East will be a great achievement for Nasrallah, Ahmadinejad, Bin Laden, and Assad. In August 2005 an IED was detonated near an MFO vehicle. In April 2006 a suicide bomber attempted to attack an MFO vehicle in Mansoura, Sinai.
• Today, January 27, the Fiji Battalion in Sinai reports that one of its three checkpoints is only 100 meters from where the Gaza security wall was breached. The unit, according to its commander, “is observing and monitoring the movement from Gaza into Egypt and out of the designated zone [emphasis added] of the MFO which we are part of.”
• That means that the tremors coming out of Gaza could spread across the Sinai and the Suez into Egypt itself. The Moslem Brotherhood does not require much to ignite riots in the streets of Cairo.

Sphere: Related Content

One If by Land, and Two If by Sea*Another Hostile Flotilla Attacked Israel, but This Time by Land

Lebanon staging point. Sign says
"Iran's Garden" (AP)

There are remarkable similarities between the Mavi Marmara flotilla in May 2010 and the Nakba marches from Lebanon, Syria and Gaza on May 15. The Israeli intelligence services seriously underestimated their threats, and IDF soldiers were unprepared for the violent ambush that awaited them. The media portrayed Lebanese, Syrians and Palestinians as unarmed civilians in both cases. The Israeli army's reaction was deemed by some as disproportionate and possibly in violation of international law.  And Lebanon's government copied a page out of Turkey's play book and screamed about Israeli war crimes.

In 2010 it took days for the world to learn the true belligerent nature of the Mavi Marmara's passengers.  They may have been in civilian garb, but they were determined combatants nonetheless. Such was also the case in the Gaza, Maroun al-Ras, and Majdal Shams invasions.

Many of the photographs of the May 15 Nakba incursions have not been published in the media, but they are posted on the news agencies websites for purchase. Almost 200 can be found on Yahoo's news photo website.  [Photos from Reuters and AP are presented here for illustrative and educational purposes and not meant for commercial use.]

Analysis of the pictures provides several important lessons.

All of the Nakba cases involved the illegal invasions of Israeli territory or areas under Israeli sovereignty.  Hamas was behind the attack at the Erez Crossing from Gaza, the Syrian government organized the recruitment and busing of hundreds of Syrian-Palestinians to Majdal Shams on the Golan Heights, and Hizbullah paid for and organized the assault at Maroun al Rus. These were not cases of a lost shepherd or tourist accidently crossing the border.  The IDF had every right to respond to the invasions with force.

Southern Lebanon is predominantly Shi'ite.  The Sunni Palestinians were bused in by the thousands from refugee camps around Lebanon.  "Lebanese activists also took part in the march, which counted Hizbullah among its organizers, the Beirut Daily Star reported on May 16.  Naharnet reported, "The organizers of the rally told AFP that Hizbullah had financed the events."

1. note the flags and the treeline.

Close inspection of photos show Hizbullah's involvement.  One of the men accompanying a wounded man in this AP photo (1) appears to be carrying unfurled Hizbullah banners.  But the picture at the top of this blog makes it very clear. The sign above the assault's staging area in Maroun al Ras bears Iran's symbol and the words "Iran's Garden."   

2. Cutting the fence

Pictures prove the hostile intention of the assaults.  This picture to the left (2) shows a man with wire cutters attempting to cut through the fence between Lebanon and Israel.  He has already passed other wire barriers.  Israeli soldiers stand on the other side of the fence beneath the trees.

The next photo (3) shows the "charge" of the mob to the fence. Israeli soldiers are beneath the trees

3. Charging the line

The next picture (4) shows men attempting to breech the fence and establish a "beachhead."  They're taking cover from Israeli gunfire.  Note the man in the striped brown shirt on the right top.  He later shows up in a Reuters photo (5) wounded on a stretcher hundreds of meters from the treeline, heading up the hill to the staging area of "Iran's Garden."

3b. Charging the fence - continued

4. Attempt at a "beachhead"

5. Brownshirt wounded

6. How it was done on the Syrian front

On the Syrian front, note how the attackers successfully scaled the fences (6) and then proceeded to attack an IDF jeep. (7)
 

7. Attacking an IDF jeep

There were reports that some of the mob on the Lebanese front were killed by Lebanese soldiers, but it appears from the pictures that the Lebanese inflicted a few bruises at best.  To reach the Israeli border, the Maroun al Ras mob actually had to pass a company of Lebanese soldiers.  In picture (8) the soldiers can be seen above the black fold in the larger flag.  In photo (9) the soldiers are successfully blending in with the vegetation. Again, the treeline is Israel, and the Lebanese soldiers just stood there hundreds of meters away.

8. Army company grouped above the black fold of the top flag.

9. How did they get past the army?

10. Naughty, naughty!

There are several almost comical photographs of Lebanese soldiers trying to restrain a few rock-throwers with their batons. (10)  Meanwhile, the mob behind them is attempting to breech the fence.

Is there anyone in Washington still serious about providing weapons to the Lebanese army?

View the pictures of the UN peacekeeping forces along Israel's border with Lebanon and Syria -- UNIFIL and UNDOF -- trying to stop the incursions and protect the peace.  Oh, wait, there are no such pictures because the force mandated to keep peace was nowhere to be seen when Israel's sovereignty and security were under attack.  So much for the idea floating around Washington to meet Israel's security demands in a peace agreement with the Palestinians by providing a foreign peacekeeping force on the West Bank.

·         * "One if by land, and two if by sea" was the signal for warning lanterns posted in a church steeple to warn of the British approaching Boston in 1775, part of the story of Paul Revere’s famous ride.

Sphere: Related Content

Gaza Casualties: The NY Times Sticks By Its Story. Is There a Bigger Subtext in the Paper's Gaza Coverage?

Hamas funeral

It comes down to who you believe. The Palestinian Ma'an News Agency says  that three Gaza dead were fighters, not civilians.  The Times' reporter in Gaza, a man whose father was tragically killed by an Israeli bomb in the 2009 Cast Lead operation, appears to be the one claiming they were civilians.

Yesterday's posting raised the question of the number of Gaza civilians killed in the latest round of the Hamas-Israel war.  The Times claimed "about half" of the 18 dead were civilians.  In response, and after researching the background of each casualty, this blog concluded that only five were civilians (and at least four of them were in close proximity to rocket launches). The other 13 were fighters. [April 14: another Hamas fighter, Mahdi Jumaa Abu Azara, died of the wounds he suffered in Rafah last week, bringing the total number of fighters to 14 out of 19 killed.]

In response, the New York Times correspondent, Isabel Kershner, emailed today:

"You appear to base your assertion that four of them were Qassam fighters on a report from the Maan news agency. Our Gaza correspondent reported at the time that three of them were in fact non-combatants, but civilians collecting gravel from the old airport.There were two incidents of Israeli fire in the area that afternoon, one which killed a Hamas fighter, and another that killed the other three men."

"Our Gaza correspondent has re-checked his information and says that the three are widely regarded in Gaza as having been non-combatants. No militant group has claimed them as members, which would be highly unusual if they indeed belonged to one. I personally have checked the Iz al-Din al-Qassam Arabic website, where fallen 'resistance fighters,' or Mujahadin, are honored. Only one is honored as having been killed on April 7 -- Saleh al-Tarabin."

To reiterate yesterday's posting, the Palestinian news agency Ma'an stated they were "resistance fighters" of the Al Qassam Brigade.  The ages of the three - 18, 23, and 25 -  also suggests that they were fighters, not gravel scroungers. 

The first Ma'an article stated, "[Israeli] raids hit targets in the southern cities of Rafah and Khan Younis. The strikes killed four, identified as resistance fighters affiliated with Hamas. A statement from the Al-Qassam Brigades identified those killed as leader Salah Tarabin, 38, Musab al-Sufi, 18, Muhammad Almanmom, 25, and Khaled Aldbari, 23."

The second Ma'an article, reporting on their funeral, stated, "In Rafah, Al-Qassam members Saleh At-Tarabeen, 38, Mus’ab As-Sufi, 18, Mohammad Al-Mahmoum, 25, and Khaled Ad-Diyari, 33, were marched from the Abu Yousef An-Najjar Hospital in Rafah, toward their homes, and then to the Ash-Shuhda Cemetery for burial."

Problematic Reporting from Gaza

Presumably, the "Gaza correspondent" Kershner has been checking with is the Gaza reporter, Fares Akram, who has been filing stories for the Times.

Writing for a western publication, particularly one as well-known at the New York Times, must be a very difficult assignment for a Palestinian reporter in Gaza.  Last month Reuters' offices in Gaza were raided by Hamas security forces, reporters were beaten and computers were smashed.  "Severe harassment by Palestinian Authority and Hamas security forces targeting Palestinian journalists in the West Bank and Gaza has had a pronounced chilling effect on freedom of expression," the Human Rights Watch warned on April 12.

NY Times' Fares Akram

Akram, writing in 2009 for the British Independent, wrote of his father's tragic death at the start of the Cast Lead operation in an article, "The death and life of my father." Here are some poignant and telling excerpts.

A bomb had been dropped on the house at our small farm in northern Gaza. My father was walking from the gate to the farmhouse at the time. It was our beloved place, that farm and its two-storey white house with a red roof. ...Israeli ground troops and tanks invaded Gaza in the name of shutting down Hamas rocket sites, the peace of that place was shattered and my father's life extinguished at the age of 48....The house was reduced to little more than powder, and of Dad there was nothing much left either.

The Israelis may say there were militants in the area of our farm, but I'll never believe it. The most advanced point for rocket-launchers is 6km south. Up at the border, it is just open farmland with nowhere to hide. My father, Akrem al-Ghoul, was no militant. Born in Gaza and educated in Egypt, he was a lawyer and a judge who worked for the Palestinian Authority. After Hamas took over, he quit and turned to agriculture. Dad's father, Fares, who had been driven out of his home in what is now Israeli Ashkelon in 1948, had bought the land in the 1960s.

My grief carries no desire for revenge, which I know to be always in vain. But, in truth, as a grieving son, I am finding it hard to distinguish between what the Israelis call terrorists and the Israeli pilots and tank crews who are invading Gaza. What is the difference between the pilot who blew my father to pieces and the militant who fires a small rocket?

After the experience of local stringers distorting news coming out of Gaza and the West Bank during hostilities, it must be asked: Is the Times' reporter in Gaza not under constant Hamas threats? Is his reporting influenced by the tragic loss of his father?

The Times had to deal with this issue last year

The New York Times was faced with a serious dilemma last year when it was revealed that its Jerusalem Bureau Chief Ethan Bronner had a son serving in the Israeli army.  The Times' public editor, Clark Hoyt, discussed whether Bronner's coverage of Israel involved a conflict of interest and recommended that Bronner be reassigned.  The paper's executive editor, Bill Keller, rejected Hoyt's advice and kept Bronner at his post.  Here's Keller's explanation:

"My point is not that Ethan’s family connections to Israel are irrelevant. They are significant, and both he and his editors should be alert for the possibility that they would compromise his work.... I do know he has reported scrupulously and insightfully on Israelis and Palestinians for many years. And I have no doubt that if a situation arose that presented a real conflict of interest, as opposed to an imaginary or hypothetical one, we would discuss it, and he would not hesitate to recuse himself."

The Bronner-Akram predicaments could help formulate a journalistic axiom: Reporters who are critical of Arab regimes risk their lives.  It would be surprising if their reporting were not distorted.  On the other hand, Israel-based reporters who are critical of Israel and its government are admired by their colleagues and know they will never be punished by Israel. 

Was there a fraction of the sturm und drang over Akram's hiring as there was over Bronner's? Maybe there should be.

Post Script: Kershner's Criticism

Ms. Kershner was critical of yesterday's blog posting.  "I respect your and our right to dispute the figures," she wrote, "and thank you for drawing attention to an important issue, but it is unfortunate that everything was made so public before I even had a chance to check the information at our end and respond to you."

Everything made so public?  And the New York Times' goldstoning of Israel and describing the school bus attack as having taken place in Gaza are not public?  The Times' fact-checking of such a contentious issue should have been done before publication.  The response to the Times' original article was meticulously researched and sourced.  Ms. Kershner's defense of the "about half" civilian claim is based on a Gaza correspondent's impressions and on the absence of three names on a Hamas casualty list. Hardly proof, especially when a Palestinian publication states differently.

Sphere: Related Content

The New York Times Goldstones Israel Again. Doubles the Number of Civilian Casualties in Gaza

There in the middle of an article about Justin Bieber's visit to Israel, The New York Times' Isabel Kershner goldstones Israel. 

"Last Thursday, a 16-year-old Israeli boy was critically wounded by an antitank missile fired by Hamas militants at a school bus in [SIC] Gaza.* That triggered days of intense exchanges of fire, during which 18 Palestinians, about half of them civilians, were killed."

So how much is "about half" of 18?  How many dead civilians? Eight? Nine? Ten?

Actually, the real number of civilians killed is five.  It's relatively easy to find out just by looking at Arab sources in English.  And according to Arab sources, four were in close proximity to terrorists firing missiles at Israel.

   ---  Late Breaking: See Ms. Kershner's response below  and a newer second response ---


A list of the 18 dead can be found below and on the site of Muslim News. Next to the names, I identified them as "fighters" or "civilians."  That determination is based on linked articles in the Muslim News, the Palestinian Maan News Agency or Human Rights Watch.

1. Mahmoud Al Manasra, 50, Al Shijaeyya. Civilian
2. Mohammad Al Mahmoum, 25, Rafah.  Fighter
3. Mosab Al Sufi, 18, Rafah.  Fighter
4. Saleh Al Tarabeen, 38, Rafah.  Fighter
5. Khaled Ad-Dabary, 23, Rafah.  Fighter
6. Mo’taz Abu Jame’, Khan Younis.  Fighter
7. Abdullah Al Qarra, Khan Younis.  Fighter
8. Nidal Qdeih, 21, Khan Younis.  Civilian
9. Najah Qdeih, 48, Khan Younis.  Civilian
10. Talal Abu Taha, 55, Khan Younis.  Civilian
11. Raed Shihada, 27, northern Gaza.  Fighter
12. Bilal Al ‘Ar’ir, 23, Al Shijaeyya.  Fighter
13. Mahmoud Al Jaro, 10, Al Shijaeyya.  Civilian
14. Ahmad Ghorab, northern Gaza.  Fighter
15. Mohammad Awaja, Rafah.  Fighter
16. Taiseer Abu Sneima, Rafah.  Fighter
17. Ahmad Al Zeitouniyya, northern Gaza.  Fighter
18. Zuheir Al Bir, Al Zeitoun neighborhood – Gaza.  Fighter

According to Human Rights Watch, "Kamal al-Manasra, a relative of Mahmoud Al Mansara (number 1), who lives next door, and Sami Harazen, said that about 3 p.m. they heard what sounded like a small rocket being launched from somewhere in or near the neighborhood.... 'Two minutes after the rocket, I heard a shell hit my uncle's [Mahmoud's] house,' said Kamal al-Manasra. 'My uncle and his son and brother went over to check on the house, and while they were returning another shell fell on my uncle and killed him.' Harazen gave a similar account, though he believed the Israeli response occurred less than one minute after the rocket launch."

In the case of Nidal (8) and Najah (9) Qdeih, Nidal's uncle Fayez Qdeiah told Human Rights Watch that "he heard three mortars fired by Palestinian armed groups from somewhere nearby."

Human Rights Watch also places another civilian next to a rocket-launching terrorist. "Residents of Shajaiya told Human Rights Watch that members of the armed wing of Islamic Jihad fired mortar rounds from a cemetery in the middle of the neighborhood.... Shortly after the mortar attack, at around 7 p.m., an Israeli strike hit the cemetery but caused no casualties, residents said. About 10 to 15 children from the area ran into the cemetery to look at the strike site. Five minutes later, residents said, a second strike hit the area, killing one of the children, Mahmoud Wael al-Jaro (13), and a member of Islamic Jihad named Bilal al-Areer (12).

View the rocket in the cemetery in this video released by the Israel Defense Forces.

I am thankful for Ms. Kirshner's rapid response:

The school bus in Gaza was obviously an editing error, and I have asked for it to be corrected.

As for the civilian casualty figures, our reporting of the numbers has been based on the information provided by our correspondent in Gaza. I can already see a discrepancy in that your list has all the men killed in Rafah as fighters, whereas he identified three of four killed there on the first day as civilians collecting gravel near the old airport, if I remember rightly.  Anyway we have asked for a thorough check and hope to have results soon.

The Times' reliance on local Palestinian stringers and reporters is a serious problem for the western press in general.  During the second Intifada, it meant that many reports and dispatches were not factual, to say the least.  I responded to The New York Times correspondent:

The listing of the four Rafah men as “fighters” is based on this Maan news report. Notice the pictures of the military funerals, as well. It appears pretty conclusive.

Thursday's Gaza dead laid to rest

Published Friday 08/04/2011 (updated) 09/04/2011 12:00

GAZA CITY (Ma'an) -- Thousands marched in Rafah, Khan Younis and Gaza City after Friday prayers, carrying the bodies of seven men killed by Israeli fire the day before. Six of the dead were Al-Qassam fighters, and a seventh a 50-year-old civilian. In Rafah, Al-Qassam members Saleh At-Tarabeen, 38, Mus’ab As-Sufi, 18, Mohammad Al-Mahmoum, 25, and Khaled Ad-Diyari, 33, were marched from the Abu Yousef An-Najjar Hospital in Rafah, toward their homes, and then to the Ash-Shuhda Cemetery for burial….

We are looking forward to the Times' "thorough check."

* The Times corrected the location of the bus attack: "Last Thursday, a 16-year-old Israeli boy was critically wounded by an antitank missile fired by Hamas militants from Gaza at a school bus in Israel. That triggered days of intense exchanges of fire, during which 18 Palestinians, about half of them civilians, were killed."

Sphere: Related Content

Rachel Corrie Trial Restarts. Key Questions Need Repeating

The Rachel Corrie trial restarted in Haifa yesterday. Her parents, Craig and Cindy Corrie, are using the civil trial to confront and vilify Israel. It is perfectly in character: in May Craig Corrie blessed the naming of one of the Gaza flotilla ships after his daughter Rachel. She had been a member of the Palestinian-led International Solidarity Movement, and the radical group was of the sponsors of the Gaza flotilla.

[Later this week ISM founder Adam Shapiro will be speaking at Stanford University. He is touted as a "co-founder of the International Solidarity Movement (along with this wife, Huwaida Arraf), Board member of the Free Gaza Movement, and organizer of the U.S. Boat to Gaza project."]

1. Where did the Rachel Corrie bulldozer incident take place?

Few people recall that the IDF's ground-clearing operation was carried out only 50 meters from the Egyptian border -- near the infamous Philadelphi road. [See map and diagram. All graphic material is from IDF sources.] Up until Corrie's death, the IDF had uncovered more than 40 tunnels from Egypt used to smuggle weapons and terrorists into Gaza. In recent years, after the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, the number of tunnels approached 1,000.

Why was the ISM trying to block the bulldozers seven years ago? Presumably, they were attempting to protect Hamas' tunnels.

2. Couldn't the bulldozer driver see or hear Corrie?

The noise generated by the bulldozer is deafening, and Corrie had a megaphone only at an earlier confrontation with the Israel Defense Forces. It was not with her the afternoon she died.

The field of vision on the armored bulldozer is exceptionally limited (as the chart on the left indicates), and the driver could not see her.

Corrie's comrades claim that she was standing in front of the bulldozer -- and she was not -- but even if she were, the driver's line of vision is limited as the diagram shows.


The fact is, witnesses at the time of the incident reported that Corrie was sitting.

“When the bulldozer approached a house today,” wrote the New York Times, “Ms. Corrie, who was wearing a bright orange jacket, dropped to her knees.”

“The bulldozer drove toward Rachel slowly, gathering earth in its scoop as it went,” an ISM friend stated in 2003. “She knelt there, she did not move.” Another ISM colleague related: “She did not ‘trip and fall’ in front of the bulldozer. She sat down in front of it, well in advance.‎“ [Emphasis added.]

3. Was there a deliberate attempt by the IDF to kill Corrie, as her parents claim?

Indeed there was a plan to escalate the confrontation between the bulldozers and the "peace activists." But it was the ISM members who decided to escalate, as described by Newsweek writer Joshua Hammer in a lengthy article in Mother Jones. Why? One possible reason was because of the sexual tension that was hurting their relations with the local Palestinians.

"An anonymous letter was circulating," Hammer reported, "which referred to Corrie and the other expatriate women in Rafah as 'nasty foreign bitches' whom 'our Palestinian young men are following around.' That morning [of Corrie’s death], the ISM team tried to devise a strategy to counteract the letter’s effects. 'We all had a feeling that our role was too passive,' said one ISM member. 'We talked about how to engage the Israeli military.' That morning, team members made a number of proposals that seemed designed only to aggravate the problem. 'The idea was to more directly challenge the Israeli military dominance using our international status,' said the ISMer."

4. But why was Corrie singled out?

She wasn't. At least two ISMers had to be pulled out from under the bulldozers' blades after they started acting in accordance with their more aggressive policy. Newsweek’s Hammer reported on “Jenny’s” close call: "An Irish peace activist named Jenny was nearly run down by a D9. 'The bulldozer’s coming, the earth is burying my feet, my legs, I’ve got nowhere to run, and I thought, ‘This is out of control,’ she told me. 'Another activist pulled me up and out of the way at the last minute.'”

5. Does anyone believe this story that the ISMers were suicidal?

They should believe that the International Solidarity Movement is homicidal. The ISM has a long record of putting its members, particularly young Western women, into harm's way. Some are unbelievably naive and just plain dumb. Like Corrie, they were encouraged to confront the Israel Defense Forces. Not surprisingly, some were injured and killed:

* On 2 April 2002, Australian Kate Edwards was shot and wounded in Beit Jala near Jerusalem from where Palestinians were firing on the Jewish neighborhood of Gilo. She and other volunteers marched on Israeli lines to protect their Palestinian friends. The clearly logic-challenged Edwards complained, "I never thought for a moment that they would fire live ammunition at us."

* In April 2002, Irish ISM member Caomhe Butterly served as a human shield in Yasir Arafat's compound in Ramallah during the intifada. Later, on November 22, 2002, she inserted herself as a human shield again and was wounded during an IDF operation in Jenin. One of her admirers described how Butterly "would walk up to a tank and place her hand over the muzzle." Butterly was an organizer and spokesperson aboard the 2010 Gaza flotilla.

* April 13, 2003, ISM member Thomas Hurndall was shot and killed when he challenged an Israeli tank force in Gaza.

* On April 24, 2010 Bianca Zammit, a Maltese national, joined a group of Palestinians who charged the security fence between Gaza and Israel. That area of the fence has often seen terrorist attacks. Zammit was shot through the thigh by a sniper, but was back to her comrades an hour later (pictured, right).

* On May 31, 2010, Emily Henochowicz, an American Jewish ISMer, lost her eye after she was hit by a tear gas grenade that ricocheted off a highway divider during a violent demonstration near Qalandia in the West Bank. She had been a regular at Palestinian demonstrations at Sheikh Jarrah, Bilin, Nilin and Nabi Saleh.

As the Haifa trial proceeds, it is clear that the International Solidarity Movement should be the one on trial for reckless endangerment. Yet, when young Western women are injured, arrested or killed, the media pays attention.

Maybe Rachel Corrie wasn't so dumb, after all. She wrote to her mother about the possibility of an American activist’s death as a propaganda tool: "You just can’t imagine it unless you see it, and even then you are always well aware that your experience is not at all the reality: what with the difficulties the Israeli Army would face if they shot an unarmed U.S. citizen."

Sphere: Related Content

Is the Palestinian Authority in Violation of American Law?

Originally published in Pajamas Media

On Thursday, May 27, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will travel to Paris to formally accept the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s invitation to Israel to join the ranks of the world’s leading economies.

But Israel’s accession to the OECD would not have happened if the Palestinian Authority had its way, and the PA’s attempt to block Israel’s economic achievement could theoretically backfire and endanger American military assistance to the would-be state of Palestine. What’s at stake? Approximately $100 million that was appropriated for 2010 to train and equip the PA’s elite presidential guard and security forces.

During the deliberations of the 31 OECD members earlier this year, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki lobbied all the foreign ministers of the OECD countries, calling for the vote to be delayed because, he charged, Israel infringed on Palestinians’ human rights and violated OECD values, Ha'aretz reported.

Israel complained that Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad also called many of the leaders of OECD countries to argue against Israel’s acceptance, the Ha’aretz report continued. “Fayyad’s efforts to thwart Israel’s participation in the organization,” said Industry, Trade and Labor Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer (Labor Party), “are extremely grave, and even more so during a time when Israel wants to begin proximity talks in order to reach an agreement and a reconciliation between the nations.”

The formal Palestinian leadership, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), was also mobilized to block Israel’s joining the OECD, according to the Palestinian Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions National Committee (BNC). “In the run-up to the OECD decision,” a press release stated, “the BNC coordinated with the PLO, unions and other civil society actors in all thirty OECD member states as part of an intensive campaign to oppose Israel’s membership for its persistent and systematic violations of the rights of the Palestinians.”

On a basic level, the Palestinian attack on the Israel-OECD deal just doesn’t jive with the peace negotiations U.S. mediator George Mitchell is attempting to kickstart.

On another level, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas launched a campaign this month to boycott products made in Israeli settlements. Fines and even jail time await Palestinians who use the enemy products or work in neighboring Jewish communities. While Abbas claims that the boycott is not directed against Israel “with whom we have relations,” it is difficult to prevent a boycott of settlement goods from sliding into a boycott of all Israeli goods which may use components or ingredients made in Judea/Samaria a few miles away.

The boycott was also declared at a time when Israel is opening checkpoints and encouraging economic development in the West Bank. This week, Tony Blair’s Office of the Quartet Representative in Jerusalem welcomed Israel’s decision to implement a package of measures to ease movement and access restrictions in the West Bank. OQR Head of Mission Robert Danin welcomed the development, saying, “Some of these steps are significant and should improve the economic and living conditions of the West Bank Palestinian population.”

Some 25,000 Palestinians work in the Jewish communities in the territories, most in the settlement blocs, which will be kept under Israeli control if a peace agreement is reached. The boycott will not only cost them their jobs, but may also deep-six the prospect of joint economic projects in the future.

When President Mahmoud Abbas visits Washington next month, he will certainly be quizzed by congressmen and senators about the OECD attack and the boycott, particularly since they challenge American law on the boycott. The 2009-2010 Omnibus Appropriations Act, State Department Appropriations section, states:

The Arab League boycott of Israel, and the secondary boycott of American firms that have commercial ties with Israel, is an impediment to peace in the region and to United States investment and trade in the Middle East and North Africa; all Arab League states should normalize relations with their neighbor Israel. … The President and the Secretary of State should continue to vigorously oppose the Arab League boycott of Israel and find concrete steps to demonstrate that opposition by, for example, taking into consideration the participation of any recipient country in the boycott when determining to sell weapons to said country.

Ultimately, the boycott of Israel is also damaging to the Palestinians, foreclosing the possibilities of cooperation with one of the world’s most dynamic economies.

Perhaps the tragic example of thousands of Israeli hothouses in Gaza should be remembered. When Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, the bountiful hothouses were purchased by well-meaning, peace-making tycoons, including Bill Gates, Mort Zuckerman, James Wolfenson, and Leonard Stern. They planned to turn the $200 million enterprise over to the Palestinian Authority. Within days of Israel’s withdrawal, the hothouses were pillaged and destroyed. The tools for a better Palestinian future became targets for wanton destruction. Today, the Palestinians economic attack on Israel will have little impact on Israel’s burgeoning economy, but it will destroy the trust and cooperation needed for better future.

Sphere: Related Content

ElBaradei "Outs" Himself

Mohamed Mostafa ElBaradei served as the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for 12 long years (1997-2009). He was supposed to be the UN's watchdog guarding against illegal and dangerous nuclear violations around the world.

So what did he do to stop the development of the Iranian bomb? Nothing. Nada. Bubkis. Actually, he gave cover to the Iranians by claiming that there were no nuclear violations in the Islamic republic.

ElBaradei is loved in Tehran where he declared last year that "Israel was the biggest threat to the security of the Middle East."

Lo and behold, soon after ElBaradei's retirement, the IAEA released a real, well-researched report stating that it had "extensive" and "credible" information and "concerns about the possible existence in Iran of ... current undisclosed activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile," and "concerns about possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear program.''

Since retiring, ElBaradei threw his hat into Egyptian politics, looking to replace President Hosni Mubarak. As part of his campaign, he came out of the closet this week revealing himself as the Israel-hater many observers believed him to be while he was serving at the IAEA.

First, ElBaradei denounced the deep metal barrier Egypt is building along its border with Gaza in order to block Hamas tunnels and smuggling activity. According to the Daily News of Egypt today, "He also said that Israel only understands the language of force, and that the Arabs should back their peace proposals with the language of force and defiance. 'We have been talking about peace for the past 20 years but no progress is witnessed in the Palestine cause,' he said."

ElBaradei served his Iranian buddies well for 12 years, turning a blind eye to Iran's massive efforts to build the Bomb. Now ElBaradei is apparently turning his sights on leading Egypt and the Arab world into war with Israel. He's a dangerous man.

Sphere: Related Content

The Upcoming Rachel Corrie Trial: Go After Her Real Killers

Reprinted from Pajamas Media
By Lenny Ben-David

Jerusalem — Craig and Cindy Corrie, I welcome you to Israel where, I understand, you plan to bring a civil suit before an Israeli court on March 10 “to put on public record,” the British Guardian wrote, “the events that led to [your] daughter Rachel’s death in March 2003.”

I thank God for the well-being of my children and grandchildren, and I cannot imagine the pain and anger you feel over the loss of your daughter, Rachel.

My sons have served as combat soldiers, and may have actually fought on the very ground where your daughter died. The area was laced with tunnels to smuggle weapons and explosives for use against Israelis. My children are Israelis who ride in buses and eat in pizzerias, and by the grace of God they have been spared attacks by the suicide bombers your daughter championed.

Some may see the irony in your using the courts and the free press of Israel in your attempt to pursue and denounce the nation your daughter loathed. I see the tragedy in your allying with the International Solidarity Movement — the very people and organization who led and, in a sense, really pushed Rachel to her death.

According to news accounts, Israel will permit four of Corrie’s colleagues from the International Solidarity Movement (ISM) to enter Israel to give testimony on what occurred that day. Actually, I believe it’s a good decision to permit the four into Israel’s jurisdiction where the ISM members could and should be arrested for reckless endangerment, fraud, manslaughter, aiding terrorists, and a host of other charges. The public may also discover who paid for your lawsuit and the expenses of bringing you and ISM witnesses to Israel.

Mr. and Mrs. Corrie, three pictures relating to your daughter are etched in my memory.

The first is a very agonizing photo of your daughter broken and crumpled and bleeding in a Gaza field — with her ISM friends attempting to help her:

(Photo attribution: Right to a Sustainable Future blog)

But I am troubled by the pictures. Who took them? Someone from ISM, according to the organization’s literature. Why wasn’t that person aiding your daughter? (God, I hope they were not posing her for a better shot!) What would motivate a person to not drop everything to help a wounded colleague? Is the ISM hatred of Israel so strong that his first priority was to document the scene? Was Corrie just an expendable foot soldier of an evil organization that used her for the photo-op? Apparently so. Her ISM colleague and handler Joseph Smith, who also goes by the name Joseph Carr, took the picture, actually one of many (!), and later eulogized Rachel with these horrifying words:

The spirit that she died for is worth a life. This idea of resistance, this spirit of resisting this brutal occupying force, is worth anything. And many, many, many Palestinians give their lives for it all the time. So the life of one international, I feel, is more than worth the spirit of resisting oppression.

The second photo is that of a very angry woman surrounded by a mob of children as she burns an American flag at a pro-Saddam Hussein rally:

The rage is palpable. What did she hate more, Israel or the United States? I suspect the former, because she justified the use of terrorism against Israeli civilians. She imbibed the ISM philosophy, as stated by one of its leaders during an interview with Al-Jazeera: “We recognize that violence is necessary and it is permissible for oppressed and occupied people to use armed resistance and we recognize their right to do so.”

That radical belief is clear in a phone message Rachel left you, Cindy, with instructions on how to speak to the press:

Please think about your language when you talk to them. I think it was smart that you’re wary of using the word “terrorism,” and if you talk about the cycle of violence, or “an eye for an eye,” you could be perpetuating the idea that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a balanced conflict, instead of a largely unarmed people against the fourth most powerful military in the world.

Rachel spoke those words in 2003 after Israel had buried 1000 civilians killed in Palestinian suicide bomber attacks.

And the third picture is of your earlier visit to the region to see where your daughter lived and died. You were met and honored by Yasser Arafat.

That is where you should have realized that you daughter was his pawn, another young idealist brainwashed into hating Israel. Arafat regaled in his “shahids,” the suicide bombers who blew up Israeli civilians. The New York Times documented the training of 25,000 Palestinian teens in the summer prior to launching the September 2000 intifada. Your daughter Rachel was another impressionable youth recruited for the Palestinian cause. I’m sure that is hard for you to believe, but read what her ISM buddy Joseph Smith believed:

“We knew there was a risk,” Smith said, “but we also knew it never happened in the two years that we (the ISM) have been working here. I knew we take lots of precautions so that it doesn’t happen, that if it did happen it would have to be an intentional act by a soldier, in which case it would bring a lot of publicity and significance to the cause.”

According to another account:

“Her death serves me more than it served her,” said one activist [unclear if the speaker is an IMS activist or a Hamas activist] at a Hamas funeral. “Going in front of the tanks was heroic. Her death will bring more attention than the other 2,000 martyrs.”

And Corrie herself discussed the possibility of an American activist’s death as a propaganda tool:

"You just can’t imagine it unless you see it, and even then you are always well aware that your experience is not at all the reality: what with the difficulties the Israeli Army would face if they shot an unarmed U.S. citizen."

Finally, who sent your daughter into Gaza? The International Solidarity Movement, a Palestinian-led group, founded in August 2001 by Huwwaida Arraf, Adam Shapiro, Ghassan Andoni, Neta Golan, and George Rishmawi.

In July of 2004, the San Francisco Chronicle reported:

Rishmawi said the ISM’s main purpose is to increase international awareness of Palestinian suffering through the involvement of foreign activists, who pay their own way to the West Bank, where they are trained in various methods of nonviolent direct action.

“When Palestinians get shot by Israeli soldiers, no one is interested anymore,” Rishmawi said. “But if some of these foreign volunteers get shot or even killed, then the international media will sit up and take notice.”

Mr. and Mrs. Corrie, leave Israel with our deep condolences. It may be easier for you to live with the belief that Rachel was an idealistic fighter for peace. Maybe she was, but she was also used as a tool and discarded. ISM actually tried to market her as the “new Anne Frank.” Her life was wasted by a cruel, opportunistic, radical movement for whom the ends justify the means.

Sue them.

Sphere: Related Content

Thoughts on the Situation, Part 3 -- J Street Defends the Letter of 54

Today’s Jerusalem Post carries an Op-Ed column by officials from J Street and Americans for Peace Now.

They defend the recent letter they sponsored with 54 Members of Congress to President Barack Obama which “express[ed] concern for Israel's security, for the humanitarian conditions in the Gaza Strip, and for the urgency of reaching a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

But that was not the reason for the letter. Read the letter here. The Members themselves state, “We write to you [Obama] with great concern about the ongoing crisis in Gaza.”

Note that for the Jerusalem Post, J Street and APN argue that first they were concerned for “Israel’s security,” but the text of the letter indicates that Israel’s security is of little concern. More than 90 percent of the letter deals with the “collective punishment of the Palestinian residents” of Gaza and easing their plight. This accusation of Israel’s “collection punishment” helps explain why J Street failed to condemn the Goldstone Report.

This is not a letter from “pro-Israel” sources, but from “pro-Gaza” sources. And in the case of Hamas-occupied Gaza, the two are mutually exclusive.

Don’t miss Rep. Eliot Engel's comments about J Street, also in today's Jerusalem Post: Engel, a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee and a staunch supporter of Israel in the House, said J Street takes “positions in Washington I have difficulty with.” Engel said J Street’s statements “over-emphasize” what the organization feels Israel is not doing, “rather than putting the blame squarely where I think it belongs – the Palestinian attitude of denying Israel the right to exist as a Jewish state.”

Sphere: Related Content

Going Left on J Street

First appeared in National Review Online

When 54 congressmen sent a letter to President Obama on January 21 asking him to press Israel (and nominally Egypt) to lift the blockade on Gaza and provide “immediate relief for the citizens of Gaza,” I looked for J Street’s fingerprints. Since its inception two years ago, the well-heeled PAC has rarely missed an opportunity to attack the policies of the Olmert and Netanyahu governments: It criticized Israel’s military operation in Gaza, held out the option of negotiating with Hamas, called for freezing all Israeli building in east Jerusalem as well as in the West Bank, refused to support sanctions against Iran, and more. But, lo and behold, there was nary a word about the Gaza relief letter on the J Street website or in the press materials of the supposedly “pro-Israel, pro-peace” organization.

Others, however, did credit J Street with supporting the letter, and even with sponsoring it. According to Ha’aretz, “In addition to members of Congress, several leftist organizations also signed the letter, including Americans for Peace Now and J Street.”

Wrote Michael Rosenberg, one of Israel’s harshest critics, “The [54 members of Congress] deserve our thanks as does J Street and Americans for Peace Now which pushed the letter.”

And who appears first on the Minnesota Independent’s list of the letter’s backers? “Among the groups supporting the letter: J Street, The Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation (HCEF), The American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP), The American Near East Refugee Association (ANERA), The Methodist Church, The Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL), and Rabbis for Human Rights.”

With the exception of the rabbis, none of J Street’s colleagues on the letter are known for their fraternal feelings toward Israel.

Is that why J Street avoids claiming credit for the letter or publicizing the fact that it trucks with some unkosher characters? Perhaps the “pro-Israel” group wanted to avoid appearing “pro-Gaza” on the eve of launching its national grassroots operation last week. Or perhaps J Street got burned over the last year when it was revealed that a large portion of its PAC funds (possibly close to 10 percent) were coming from individuals never known for being “pro-Israel.” Indeed, the most recent Federal Election Commission records (for the last quarter of 2009) suggest that the J Street PAC donors with ties to Saudi Arabia — the tarnished National Iranian American Council and the Arab-American Institute — didn’t like the publicity and are keeping their checkbooks closed.

What Commentary’s Jennifer Rubin found interesting about the letter was “the extent of the overlap between the pro-Gaza blockade lifters and the roster of J Street–supported congressmen” recently published by J Street. “At least we know the sort of congressmen that J Street supports and the sort that are only too glad to accept J Street’s largesse,” Rubin states.

And now we also know that J Street continues to try to hide its fellow travelers, just as it tried to hide the backgrounds of some of its PAC contributors, its George Soros donations, and its decision-making process.

The “word on the street” now is that several members of Congress are disassociating themselves from their letter, much the same way members pulled out of J Street’s national conference in October 2009.

Sphere: Related Content

Israel Defense Forces: Skillful in Saving Lives — and if It Must, in Taking Them

This article first appeared in Pajamas Media
by Lenny Ben-David

Almost all Israelis and Israel’s supporters burst their buttons with pride when they saw the reports of the Israel Defense Forces’ emergency army units in Haiti rescuing trapped victims and treating hundreds of wounded.

“Legendary,” “the Rolls Royce of emergency medical care,” and “amazing” were some of the glowing terms used by U.S. network correspondents. Their reports described the efficiency, enthusiasm, speed, planning, and compassion of the 220-member Israeli team.

Unfortunately, the afterglow will quickly die. This week marks the three-month deadline given by the UN General Assembly for Israel’s response to the Goldstone report on the Gaza war, which charged Israel (and nominally, Hamas) for serious violations of international and humanitarian law. Israel will attempt to defend itself, but it knows that little justice or sympathy will be found in the UN’s kangaroo court or in the media that will sully Israel’s reputation and tarnish the tributes Israel earned in Haiti.

How is it, then, that Israel, so skillful in saving lives, stands accused by the UN of “war crimes, crimes against humanity, willful killings, and willfully causing great suffering”? Israel’s critics acerbically ask how Israelis can fly halfway around the world to help victims but not help Palestinians in Gaza an hour away. Some sick commentators even suggested Israeli doctors were harvesting organs.

Something just doesn’t compute with the images from Haiti.

First, let’s look at the background of the IDF team in Haiti. That was my unit. As an IDF reservist, I served as a medic on the medical rescue team, and we trained hard working with the engineers who lifted slabs of cement while we practiced inserting infusions [into each other] and assisting doctors performing emergency operations in the dark, dusty conditions [pictured: that's me during a 1995 exercise in Israel]. Over the years, the unit was dispatched to natural catastrophes in diverse places such as Turkey, India, and Mexico City, and assisted in rescue efforts after the terrorist bombing of the American Embassy in Nairobi, Kenya, in 1998. [Unfortunately, I did not participate in those missions.]

The unit was originally formed after the first Lebanon war when an explosion in November 1983 pancaked a seven-story building in Tyre used by Israeli forces. Seventy-five Israeli soldiers were beneath the rubble, and the IDF was unequipped to rescue them. (Within a year, Hezbollah car bombs in Beirut brought down American and French barracks, killing some 300 soldiers.)

In my unit’s case, we were training for a contingency that we prayed would never come: Scud missiles raining down on Israeli cities. During the Gulf War 19 years ago, my unit was mobilized for the month-long war and bivouacked in an ambulance center. Whenever the sirens wailed, we threw on our chemical warfare gear and ran to the ambulances. Basically, our mission was: “If it’s bleeding, tie a tourniquet; if it’s breathing, stick it with atropine (to treat nerve gas), and then ‘scoop and run’ the victims to the hospital.” Our “front” was the Jerusalem area. No missiles fell in our sector, but 40 did fall, mostly on residential areas of Tel Aviv and Haifa. I will never forget the sense of terror while climbing into my ambulance and watching a Scud pass over my head as it headed toward Israel’s Ben Gurion Airport.
At home my wife responded to the sirens, scurrying the children into the shelter while putting gas masks on the older children and bundling the baby into a special sealed plastic coop. One son, who was in Jerusalem’s Old City at the time of one attack, recalls to this day the whistles and yelps of joy by Palestinians celebrating the fall of Saddam’s missiles on Israel.

Every Israeli over the age of 20 remembers the terror of the missile attacks. The trauma may be old, but it’s deep. The fear, abhorrence, defiance, anger, and shock resurfaced when Hezbollah unleashed its month-long barrage of missiles against northern Israel in the 2006 Lebanon war, and when Hamas fired 8,000 Qassam/Katyusha missiles which finally led to Israel’s 2008 Gaza campaign. Those Lebanese and Gazans who unleashed or gave cover to the savage and indiscriminate attacks against Israeli civilians and then found themselves on the receiving end of Israeli fire will find little relief or sympathy within Israel today.

I recall 20 years ago meeting dozens of Palestinian doctors and nurses from Gaza and the West Bank who were attending an Israeli ulpan for the intensive study of Hebrew. They sought the language to facilitate their on-the-job training in the Israeli hospitals, which accepted them with open arms … until the Palestinians unleashed their intifadas against Israeli civilians.

By nature, Israelis will go the end of the earth — literally — to save lives, and it doesn’t take an earthquake to send Israeli medical teams around the world. Save a Child’s Heart is an Israeli-based group of pediatric heart surgeons who have saved more than 2,000 children with congenital heart defects. The children come from 36 countries, including Iraq, Jordan, Sudan, and the Palestinian Authority. The Israel Forum for International Humanitarian Aid (IsraAID) sent additional medical units to Haiti, besides the vaunted IDF field hospital. The group swung into action after the tsunami in 2004, providing on-the-ground assistance and health care to Sri Lanka. Israeli medical teams teach local African surgeons in Swaziland to perform circumcisions on men to reduce their risk of contracting AIDS, and Israeli eye doctors restore sight to patients in places like Vietnam, Uzbekistan, and Palau.

Frankly, saving lives is a mitzva (commandment) Israelis do as part of their national and religious ethos. But when threatened, such as in the latest rounds of fighting with Iran’s proxies in Gaza and Lebanon, Israelis can respond sternly. Soldiers and their commanders on the way to the front passed through towns and cities which were under fire. Israeli families were fleeing or in shelters. Because of Israel’s collective traumas and the indiscriminate attacks on Israel’s weakest, the IDF will do just what its name suggests — it defends with force, force that is incredibly accurate and lethal. The targets may be terrorist headquarters in a refugee camp, a camouflaged nuclear facility in Syria, or a master terrorist driving in his car.

Yet even in war, those Israeli soldiers uphold a code of saving lives. They abort missions if enemy civilians may be harmed, they hesitate and weigh their actions when enemy combatants are ensconced in civilian schools and hospitals, and they investigate and judge when tragic mistakes are made. This is an army that drops leaflets and calls Gaza residents on their phones, warning them of an imminent attack on Hamas terrorists hiding in their midst. During the Gaza war, the IDF set up its medical unit at the edge of the battlefront to treat Gazan residents; Hamas forbade any resident to make use of the hospital services.

The search and rescue unit was created to respond to attacks upon Israel’s homefront. They train for World Trade Center-type attacks on Israeli cities, or for a major earthquake, or an Iranian nuclear device that could deliver devastation on the scale of Haiti’s earthquake to hundreds of thousands of Israelis.

War may be the cruelest of man’s creations, but the IDF has harnessed its medical rescue unit for peace. If only it could be mobilized permanently for that purpose.

Sphere: Related Content

Gaza and NATO’s Guidelines on Civilian Casualties in Afghanistan

The Rules 41 Nations Are Supposed to Abide By

“Militants deliberately target innocent civilians and it is they who must be held responsible. Militants deliberately force civilians into situations where they are either killed or are at risk of being harmed. Militants’ tactics are to launch attacks from civilian areas, retreat to civilian areas and use civilians as human shields.”

The above quote is not from the Israel Defense Forces’ spokesman’s office in the aftermath of the Gaza operation. It appears in an unclassified NATO document drafted in October 2008, available on the Internet. It is fascinating reading, and indicates that NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) has to deal with the same kind of problems Israel faced in Gaza. But in the case of Afghanistan, various members of the media and the NGO community do not work in tandem with the Taliban to demonize NATO and ISAF. [Pictured: ISAF soldiers on the left; IDF soldiers right]

Entitled, “NATO in Afghanistan – Master Narrative,“ the document was prepared for spokesmen “who play a part in explaining the situation in Afghanistan and the International Security Assistance Force.” That force consists of some 56,000 soldiers from 41 nations.

Here are excerpts from the NATO/ISAF document:

* Militants deliberately target innocent civilians with suicide attacks and IEDs (improvised explosive devices).

* Militants forcefully oppose efforts to improve the life of the Afghan people and it is they who must be held responsible for bringing violence to the Afghan people.

* Militants deliberately force civilians into situations where they are either killed or are at risk of being harmed by NATO/ISAF or coalition forces in order to undermine support for NATO/ISAF in Afghanistan and in the International Community.

* Militants’ tactics are to launch attacks from civilian areas, retreat to civilian areas and use civilians as human shields.

* Militants want civilians caught up in the fighting, because they think this will undermine support for NATO/ISAF in Afghanistan and in the international community and weaken the legitimate Afghan government.

* Civilian deaths caused by militants have escalated significantly, reflecting their increasing use of indiscriminate tactics such as suicide bombs and IEDs.

* ISAF Troop Contributing Nations make every effort to minimize the risk of any damage, injury or loss of life to civilians in the course of their operations in Afghanistan. However, ISAF reserves the right to protect its own personnel.

1. Airpower in Afghanistan is used:

- in support of ground forces, with specific need and in specific situations
on positively identified enemy firing positions

- upon request and approval by the ground commander.

2. Airpower is vital to the defence of Afghanistan because:

- it provides speed, maneuverability and range
- the terrain impedes maneuver of troops and supplies
- the remoteness of locations hampers the use of ground forces
- it provides the most precise power projection available.

3. Airpower is employed by ISAF under the strictest possible restrictions—if there is any reason to believe there are civilians present a strike will not occur.

Some Perspective Is Needed

In August 2008, an American C-130 gunship attacked a site in Azizabad believed to be the hideout of a Taliban leader and his men. The Pentagon announced that five civilians were killed, but subsequently, "an investigation by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) found that some 90 civilians, including 60 children, were among those killed during military operations in the strife-torn nation’s western Herat province.”

In July 2008, an air strike on a wedding party in Afghanistan left 47 dead including 30 children, according to the UN. In November 2008, an air strike in Kandahar Province killed some 35 civilians and injured a further 37. Some 2,100 civilians were killed last year, many at the hands of the Taliban and others because of errant bombs.

War is hell wherever it takes place, and innocent civilians are tragically killed. The “good guys” make the utmost effort to minimize the suffering of innocents.

Israel already demands of its army the highest standards to protect civilians in enemy territory. How well do the 41 nations in the Afghanistan force stand up to their standards? At the very least they should understand what Israel faced – and may face again -- in Gaza.

Sphere: Related Content