We've all heard of an "own goal". What about an "own-goal war crime"?
Israel managed to, as a headline said, “While attempting to commit a war crime, instead committed a tragedy”. That might be a bit harsh, but only a bit. Three Israeli hostages managed, somehow, to approach the Israeli lines, shirtless and waving a makeshift white flag, should “help”. They were gunned down and killed.
Yes, it is a tragedy. But this cannot be the only such case. The difference is that this suggests that there have been other events just like it, but happening to Palestinians, who seeking protection or surrender, were probably gunned down by Israeli soldiers bent on revenge against any and all Palestinians. Certainly, there were cases in Iraq and Afghanistan of “unarmed civilians” pretending to surrender while carrying explosives with the goal of reaching enemy lines and killing themselves and occupiers at the same time.
These killings do not happen in a void. This happens when the opponent has been dehumanised and when, through actions and/or words, leadership makes it perfectly clear that the committing of war crimes is acceptable.
But if we are to believe Israel’s own statements, these were shirtless individuals waving a white flag. If they were combatants, then it was a war crime to murder them in the act of surrendering. If they were civilians seeking protection, then murdering them was a war crime. If they were shirtless, then the “easy” thing to do would be to allow them to approach to a safe distance and have them lie down until it was safe enough to determine that they actually were unarmed and not carrying explosives or other weapons. That would also have given the three the chance to speak to their compatriots in Hebrew or in terms that would have been understood by the Israeli soldiers.
What happened was a war crime, plain and simple. It will be “investigated” by the very criminals who have ordered or condoned such war crimes, and it will be found that a tragic mistake occurred, so sad.
But none of the other cases will be investigated, not by the Israeli authorities or by any other authority that would be recognised. Israel doesn’t work that way, and it is not held to any international norms that other countries are held to. War crimes committed by instruments of the state of Israel are ignored, and the state suffers no consequences, such as the curtailment of visas, sanctions, or even the slightest reduction of “aid” money that will be used to bolster exactly those instruments of the state that are perpetrating the war crimes.
The double standard is sickening.
But again, to say so is to invite being labelled “antisemitic” and potentially to suffer other consequences. Authoritarian states, and in this I include the United States, are very good at not-so-subtle coercion and restriction of free thought or speech. The easiest way is to label someone and then ignore that you did. The label will stick with just enough people to become a stigma, a stain not easily washed off.
Meanwhile, those in power, in fear of being labelled, continue to vote for money and protection to and for a state that flagrantly violates international norms, engaging in ethnic cleansing on a massive scale. And those in power need the stigma of “antisemitism” to be available to stick to any opponent as a way of negatively labelling those who would hold them to account for their support of war crimes and genocide.
What happened in Gaza is made possible by proven absolute "immunity" and the ongoing demonstrations of active support for the instruments of the state of Israel by those who fund that state.
The instruments of the state of Israel engage in war crimes because they know they can. This time they committed a war crime against themselves, and even that will go unpunished.
