Description

Photo:
Scene. Published by B'Tselem (The Israeli Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories)

Map of Great Return March demonstrations. Published by Haaretz
________

By Dr. Moustafa El Leddawi. Published by Tawwasal
Translation by Nour ElBorno.

Multiple Israeli media outlets discussed the events of the second Friday of the Great Return March. Many Israeli officials expressed their concerns should the Palestinian protestors go further with their threats and burn thousands of tires near the fence separating the Gaza Strip from the Occupied Territories of 1948. Some security officials announced that such act would harm the environment and cause great pollution in the area and would greatly damage the surrounding settlements of the Gaza Strip. Also, some analysts said that black clouds would cover the sky of the south, and black smoke would reach the towns of Bir al-Sabi’ and Negev, leading to several cases of suffocation especially among the elderlies and patients with heart or lung diseases. Therefore, they asked the settlers to close their windows and stay away from the smoke clouds.

The Israelis, then, called upon the World Health Organization to prevent the Palestinians – who had placed thousands of tires near the Eastern borders, appearing to be zones ready to be set into flames – from executing their threats. They asked the WHO to exercise pressure on the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and speak with the Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to issue his orders and prevent his citizens from burning the tires. The WHO should, according to the Israelis, warn the Palestinians about the dangers of going further with such a harmful step to both the environment and the Palestinians. They also called upon Egypt and the friends of Palestinians around the world to pressure and advise them not to.

Israeli security and military officials threatened Hamas in particular, and the Palestinians in general if they take part in such a huge crime against the environment. They also warned them that the soldiers will respond to the actions of the protestors fiercely and will stop them from affecting the security of the settlers and their safety. Avigdor Lieberman, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, stated that the orders to shoot the protestors have not changed, so the Palestinians should be wary of the Army’s response to their actions.

The logic of the Israeli occupation authorities is strange. They want to prevent the Palestinians from complaining, speaking up and showing their pain. They demand the Palestinians remain silent and bottle up their sufferings. In fact, they pressure them to stop protesting and expressing their anger at a time when the Israelis killed tens of Palestinian youth and shot with their machine guns hundreds of young men and women. What they want is for the Palestinians to accept being treated unjustly – to hand in their future and fates to their murderer, to hand their lives to the tyrant to make them suffer, and to hand their bodies to the bloodthirsty soldiers to reap their souls and tear their bodies apart. The Israelis act as if their actions do not require protesting nor rage.

Are not the Palestinian protests peaceful? Civilized and humanitarian? Do they not reflect awareness and reason? They do not indicate any signs of insanity, violence, nor attempts to clash. The instructions of the March leaders are very clear and explicit: They do not want to clash with the Occupation Army. They even prevent the protestors from getting near the fence and insist that they do not do anything that would be seen as an attempt to breach, throw stones, or plant explosives. They do so to prevent the Occupation from having any false arguments, and to avoid suspicion.

Haven’t the Israelis and the International Community noticed that none of the protestors carry a knife or a gun? That they neither carry rocks and bats, nor do they plant explosives and throw bombs? All the means the Palestinians use in the protest are peaceful and nonviolent. In fact, all international laws approve such ways and do not classify them as illegal. Quite the opposite, they align with the people’s traditions and nations’ means of protest. All rebellious peoples have used such means, and all colonial regimes have faced them as well.

Burning the tires is only a way to express anger and protest hoping the world would notice the sufferings of the Palestinians and know about their tragedies. The enemy must not rob us such chance and must not try to show how unjust this is before the countries of the world; as if its settlers would suffocate and inhibitors would die due to some black smoke that might not even reach them. They, however, approve throwing tear gas shells and other suffocating gas bombs on the Palestinians, knowing that such bombs hurt men and kill the healthy. How about children and the ill? The occupation soldiers intentionally throw such bombs on small and enclosed areas, in a direction where the wind would carry the smoke to harm the Palestinians. Then, they call upon the International Community to complain about the burned tires of a people suffering from injustice, and about smoke that might hurt the Palestinians themselves. Nonetheless, the Palestinians do so to convey their message and reflect their sufferings.

Whenever Riyad Mansour, UN Palestine Ambassador, complains about the practices of the Israeli army against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, the Israeli representative pours out his rage against him and accuses him of manipulation and deception, of falsification and distortion of facts, of intentional demonization of the occupation government, and of International Community incitement against them. He, the Israeli representative, even states that his government does not enforce any penalties against the Gaza Strip. It, in fact, seeks to cooperate with the USA and the International Community to alleviate the Palestinians’ sufferings, lift the siege partially, and help solve some of its problems. It is the President of Palestine, as he says, who punishes the Strip and its people.

We are a civilized people who come from a great nation. We have a great culture and are completely aware of the surroundings. We are enlightened and aware enough of what is harmful and what is not. We know what is good and what is bad. We do not need the advice of the enemy or the directions of a friend. We also do not care about the threats of the Occupation Army nor about the warnings of their leaders. What we seek is liberty and dignity. What we want is to end injustice and stop violence. We seek to lift the blockade and return to our homes. This is our right and our legitimate goal. No one is to stop us. No enemy is to prevent us from moving forward. No showoff is to think low of us. No utilitarian is to exercise power against us. No ignorant is to think less of our abilities. No fool is to incite against us.

Views expressed by the original author do not necessarily reflect the position of the translator or of Tawwasal.
_______

Why Israeli soldiers must refuse to fire at unarmed Palestinian protesters

by B'Tselem ((The Israeli Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories) Published April 3, 2018

Last Friday was a bloody day in Gaza as Israeli soldiers fired at Palestinians taking part in demonstrations within the Gaza Strip. Of at least 17 Palestinians killed that day, 12 were killed at the protests. Hundreds more were injured by live gunfire.

The use of live ammunition against unarmed persons who pose no danger to anyone is unlawful. It is even more blatantly unlawful in the case of soldiers firing from a great distance at demonstrators located on the other side of the fence that separates Israel from the Gaza Strip. In addition, it is impermissible to order soldiers to fire live ammunition at individuals for approaching the fence, damaging it, or attempting to cross it. Obviously, the military is allowed to prevent such actions, and even to detain individuals attempting to carry them out, but firing live ammunition solely on these grounds is absolutely prohibited.

Responses by Israeli officials clearly show that Friday’s grave outcomes were the expected, and indeed looked-for, implementation of a policy formulated beforehand. The military therefore enjoyed full backing for its conduct. As Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman clearly stated, “the IDF soldiers warded off Hamas military branch operatives capably and resolutely, just as we expected of them. They have my full backing.”

Given the open-fire regulations as reported (in part) in the media ahead of last Friday, the high number of casualties was predictable and expected. The military knew in advance of the demonstrations planned for Friday. However, in line with the instructions given the civilian leadership, the preparation by senior military officials did not focus on attempting to minimize the number of casualties. Quite the contrary. The demonstration was framed in advance as an attempt to harm the safety of the State of Israel, as if this were a case combat. Accordingly, Israel made far-reaching threats, including stating that soldiers would use live fire against anyone going any nearer the fence than some 300 meters. In addition, bus companies in Gaza were warned not to transport Palestinians to the demonstrations; and a video clip was released showing a Palestinian being shot in the leg as he approached the fence, by way of a warning as to what would happen to people taking part in the demonstrations. Israeli officials also eschewed in advance any responsibility for the demonstrations, declaring the responsibility lay squarely on Hamas in the event that the military killed or injured Palestinians.

The preparations for the demonstrations planned for this Friday are very similar. At first, it was reported that the military had stated that it did not intend to change its open-fire regulations. Later, it was reported that the regulations had been changed, stating that unarmed demonstrators would not be permitted to come any nearer than 100 meters to the fence. The Minister of Defense also emphasized that “anyone who attempts to approach the fence is risking their life.”

Contrary to the impression given by senior military officers and government ministers, the military is not permitted to act as it sees fit, nor can Israel determine on its own what is permissible and what is not when dealing with demonstrators. Like all other countries, Israel’s actions are subject to the provisions of international law and the restrictions they impose on the use of weapons, and specifically the use of live fire. The provisions limit its use to instances involving tangible and immediate mortal danger, and only in the absence of any other alternative. Israel cannot simply decide that it is not bound by these rules.

As Prof. Mordechai Kremnitzer wrote after last Friday’s events: “If, for instance, using live fire to prevent unarmed civilian demonstrators from even approaching or vandalizing the border fence is seen as justified, this order is highly unlikely to be legal. The fence, even when it marks a border is not more sacred than human life, and that includes the lives of Palestinians living in Gaza.”

An order that permits live gunfire at unarmed civilians is blatantly unlawful. As Justice Benjamin Halevy ruled in the Kafr Qasem case back in the 1950s, the illegality of such orders “is not a question of form, nor is it imperceptible, or partially imperceptible.” On the contrary, it is a case of “unmistakable illegality patently evident in the order itself, it is a command that bears a clearly criminal nature or that the actions it orders are of a clearly criminal nature. It is an illegality that pains the eye and outrages the heart, if the eye be not blind and the heart be not callous or corrupt.”

The responsibility for issuing these unlawful orders and for their lethal consequences rests with the policy makers and – above all – with Israel’s prime minister, defense minister, and the chief of staff. They are also the ones who bear the obligation to change these regulations immediately, before this Friday’s planned protests, in order to forestall any further casualties.

That said, it is also a criminal offense to obey patently illegal orders. Therefore, as long as soldiers in the field continue to receive orders to use live fire against unarmed civilians, they are duty-bound to refuse to comply.

Features