Expected Upsurge in Gaza Violence by Richard Kemp

Expected Upsurge in Gaza Violence by Richard Kemp May 13, 2018 at 1:30 pm

The true and malevolent purpose of Hamas's plan is to incite violence in such a way that the IDF has no choice but to respond with lethal force, killing Gaza civilians.

If that happens, the UN and EU, human rights groups and many Western media organizations will have helped bring it about.

The UN, EU and a range of human rights groups and media organizations have devoted their efforts to unjustly condemning Israel's actions. If there was genuine concern for human life and human rights among these people, rather than a fixation on unfairly vilifying Israel, they would harshly condemn Hamas.

I predict a riot — and much worse. The Palestinian terrorist group Hamas is orchestrating a 'demonstration' at the beginning of this week of up to 200,000 people on the Gaza border with Israel, and is intent on turning it into an orgy of death and bloodshed. If that happens, the UN and EU, human rights groups and many Western media organizations will have helped bring it about.

Hamas, which governs the Gaza Strip, is planning the bloody culmination of six weeks of violence along the border that has so far led to the deaths of around 50 of their own people and wounding of hundreds more. Now they intend to pile the bodies higher still, exploiting what they see as a perfect storm. It is the seventieth anniversary of the creation of the modern State of Israel — a date that Palestinians revile as 'Nakba' or 'Catastrophe' Day. It coincides with the opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem, a move abhorrent to those who consider the existence of the Jewish State illegitimate. And it is the beginning of the Islamic festival of Ramadan, a time when violence throughout the Muslim world often spirals.

Hamas claim that the purpose of their 'demonstrations' is to break through the Israeli border en masse, march through the country and reclaim the homes that they say their people were thrown out of when Israel was formed — exercising the strongly disputed 'right of return'. But they know they cannot achieve that in the face of the formidable Israel Defence Force.

So the true and malevolent purpose of Hamas's plan is to incite violence in such a way that the IDF has no choice but to respond with lethal force, killing Gaza civilians. This makes Hamas the first government in history to deliberately lure its enemies to kill its own civilian population. Why does it wish to sacrifice its people so barbarically? To bring down upon Israel the vilification of the Western world. To isolate and criminalise the country and cause condemnation by political leaders, the UN and the EU, human rights groups, academics and the media.

Hamas has followed this strategy many times in the past, firing rockets at Israeli civilian communities and constructing under the border sophisticated attack tunnels from which fighters would storm into the heart of Jewish communities and carry out mass murder and abduction. Thousands of Palestinians have died, including human shields that are so central to Hamas's strategy, as the IDF has been compelled to forcefully defend its people. The world has often reacted with horror and outrage, blaming Israel for the bloodshed provoked by Hamas — just as intended.

If anything, Hamas's current plans are even more effective. Rockets and attack tunnels look like what they are — engines of war. But political leaders, international organizations, human rights groups and the media — the primary targets for Hamas's lethal propaganda — find it hard to understand how demonstrations, falsely portrayed as peaceful, like they might see in their own cities, can pose a sufficient threat to warrant the use of deadly force.

The price paid in Palestinian blood of stopping border penetrations has so far been high and is likely to increase sharply this week. But imagine the consequences if the IDF failed to stop these crowds breaking through the fence. The nearest Israeli communities are just a few minutes dash from the border by armed terrorists intent on mass murder. In this scenario, with gunmen indistinguishable from unarmed civilians, who themselves often also pose a violent threat, it is hard to see how the IDF could avoid inflicting far higher casualties in defence of their territory and people.

To prevent this catastrophic scenario becoming reality, the IDF has adopted a graduated response. They airdropped thousands of leaflets and used SMS, social media, phone calls and radio broadcasts to warn the people of Gaza not to gather at the border or approach the fence. They even contacted Gaza bus company owners, asking them not to transport people to the border.

When these appeals were nullified by Hamas's coercion of the civilian population, the IDF used tear gas to disperse the crowds that approached the fence. Next, they fired warning shots overhead. Finally, only where absolutely necessary and lawful, they used ball ammunition aimed to disable rather than kill. Several died as a result of this gunfire and many more were wounded. Of the 50 people Palestinian authorities claim were killed up to now, Israel assesses that 80% were terrorist operatives or individuals associated with them.

I have heard many armchair experts arguing that Israel should have acted differently, but not one credibly explain how. Instead, the UN, EU and a range of human rights groups and media organizations have devoted their efforts to unjustly condemning Israel's actions. If there was genuine concern for human life and human rights among these people, rather than a fixation on unfairly vilifying Israel, they would harshly condemn Hamas. Instead, their criticism of Israel plays directly into Hamas's hands and validates the use of human shields and the strategy of forcing the killing their own civilians.

Pictured: Palestinian men in Gaza prepare to launch a firebomb attached to a kite, over the border fence to Israel. (Image source: AFP video screenshot)

Richard Kemp commanded British forces in Northern Ireland, Afghanistan, Iraq and the Balkans. He has spent time on the Gaza border in recent weeks, observing the Hamas-orchestrated violence and Israeli military reactions.

Follow Richard Kemp on Twitter

Colonel Richard Kemp debunks "Disproportional Response"

Former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, Colonel Richard Kemp, explains the concept of proportionality in war and how the term is being misused to criticize Israel.

A common criticism made against Israel is that during last year’s war against Hamas in a battle known as Operation Protective Edge, the Israeli military used “disproportionate response.”. During the war, Hamas fired thousands of rockets at civilian targets mainly in Israel. Despite their best efforts to kill and maim innocent civilians, Israeli casualties were minimal. In response, and in accordance with international law, Israel fired at military targets in Gaza, killing a large number of terrorists. It is important to note that Israel took extraordinary measures to protect innocent lives in Gaza by dropping leaflets, phoning residents and sending warnings to civilians before attacking a Hamas target.

Hamas committed a double war crime: they fired from behind innocent Palestinian civilians while firing indiscriminately at innocent Israeli civilians. By doing so, they were directly responsible for the deaths of innocent Gazan and Israeli civilians. Because of Hamas’ war crimes, numerous innocent Palestinians were killed. Many human rights activists and governments pointed to the number of killed on each side and came to the mistaken and wrongful conclusion that the higher number of deaths on the Palestinian side meant Israel was using disproportionate force in Gaza. In fact, this is not true at all. And according to Colonel Kemp, this is not how one measures disproportionate response.

When Hamas fires a rocket, Israel has to assume the worst. It could hit a school and kill children. That means the threat of the rocket attack must be neutralized, ideally before the rocket is fired. When Palestinian civilians are killed in such a case, does this make it a war crime? Colonel Kemp provides us with the very clear answer. Now, it’s up to all of us to SHARE this video. No more demonizing of Israel!

MUST-SEE SPEECH: Col. Richard Kemp on the 2014 Hamas-Israel War

Col. Richard Kemp: Israeli Pilot Aborted Gaza Strike 17 Times to Protect Civilians; Jewish People Should be Proud of the State of Israel (INTERVIEW)

Having just returned from another tour of Sderot and discussions with Israeli soldiers at the staging area near Gaza, Col (ret.) Richard Kemp, the former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, sat down for an interview with TheAlgemeiner.

Deborah Danan: Why do you think the international community expresses such vociferous objection to IDF actions in Gaza?

Col Richard Kemp: Well, the starting point for so much of the world’s media, opinion-makers, political leaders, NGOs, human rights groups, will always be that whatever Israel does is wrong. It’s seen as oppressor of Palestinians, illegal occupiers – even of Gaza despite the withdrawal nine years ago – then already your starting point is at a disadvantage. Then add that to the fact that the Israeli military operations against Hamas inevitably include civilian casualties. The reason for that is because Hamas use as a key element – possibly the key element of their strategy – human shields. They want to lure and force Israel to kill civilians. And so you see images of dead babies, dead boys on the beach, women screaming about their children, and no reality can overcome those images. It’s understandable in a way, because it is heart-wrenching, I’ve seen firsthand what shrapnel can do to a baby, and it’s horrifying, and the problem is that there’s no reference, no open-mindedness to the fact that the only reason that these children have been killed is because of Hamas’ aggression towards Israel.

DD: Do you have any recommendations as to what Israel could do to change these perceptions?

RK: Israel is doing to a large extent what it can; obviously it’s got to have efficient and slick media operations to counter the distortions that are so common in the international media. But of course Israel is at a disadvantage there too because while Israel might understand the need to come out with a rapid rebuttal or message of the truth of what’s happening in the conflict, it still has to be utterly faithful to facts and cannot afford to get it wrong, or to exaggerate. Hamas, on the other hand, can say whatever they want and it doesn’t get challenged and if it does get challenged it doesn’t matter for them because they’re not accountable to anyone.

To me, the most important effort that Israel can make is not with the masses, rather it’s with the decision makers, the world leaders, after all, it’s their attitude and their understanding that will shape the way the West sees Israel.

DD: What specific steps do the US and the UK take to avoid civilian casualties?

RK: They have restrictive rules of engagement in conflicts where there is a risk of civilians getting killed, for example in Iraq, Afghanistan and Northern Ireland. They take strenuous efforts to ensure the minimum loss of life of civilian populations, including surveillance to verify the presence or absence or civilians, using appropriate munitions – that is, not dropping massive bombs if there’s a risk of killing nearby civilians, and sometimes the army might choose to go in on the ground to avoid the collateral damage from  airstrikes. Or for example, if you would attack an objective with all guns blazing, but you think that there might be civilians in the area, you might choose not to fire until you’re sure there is a positive enemy target, which of course puts your troops at a disadvantage, but it’s a risk you take to preserve human life.

Three days ago I spoke to an Israeli pilot that told me that the same morning he had aborted an enemy target a total of 17 times because there were civilians in the target zone, and eventually he abandoned the operation. I asked him, was that not frustrating? His answer was simply no. And that to me, is one of the best things about the IAF – that the last very thing they want to do is bomb a target and have that on their conscience for the rest of their lives. And it was the same thing with infantry soldiers. I spoke to soldiers who have been fighting in Gaza, and several of them said to me: ‘We know what the rules of engagement are but even without them, it is always on our minds that we cannot kill civilians.’ See for them, this has nothing to do with orders, it’s just always there at the forefront. We’re talking about [reservists who are] simply artists, metal-workers, musicians, they are not killers. They have absolutely no desire to kill civilians. In fact, in terms of civilian casualties, the attitude of IDF solders is the exact mirror image of the way they’re portrayed to the world.

DD: Tell us some more about the civilian to combatant ratio in conflicts since the Second World War.

RK: Since WWII, the average has been 3 civilians dying for every fighter killed. In some conflicts that number is higher, 4 or 5 civilians dead for every combatant. In Operation Cast Lead and Pillar of Defense it was 1-to-1 – and that’s a figure that has been agreed upon by the Palestinians as well.  Obviously, I can’t tell you what the ratio will be of this operation because it’s not at the end. What is discouraging though, is the willingness of media to simply report the number of civilians killed in Gaza and how many are children – figures which only come from Palestinian medical authorities which are controlled by Hamas. I don’t know if they’re true or not, but you have to make an assumption given Hamas’ track record for falsification of the numbers of casualties. It is however, quite possible that when this conflict ends we will see that the ration is more than 1-to-1, and if that is the case it is likely to be attributed to two things, one is what Hamas learned in Pillar of Defense and Cast Lead in the way to better protect and hide their fighters and weapons from Israeli airstrikes, including in underground tunnels, and number two, they know from Pillar of Defense just how much traction you get from killing civilians – and of course they want to capitalize on that.

DD: In your estimation, how much damage has Hamas inflicted from rockets that fall short and end up within Gaza’s borders?

RK: I don’t know – I couldn’t possibly estimate what it amounts to in total. But obviously, we’ve just seen that rockets fired by Hamas have landed on Al Shifa hospital and Al Shati refugee camp. There’s no doubt that their munitions falling short are causing significant civilian casualties.

DD: What’s the British attitude to the war with Gaza and do you think it’s changed over the last few operations?

RK: I think that the people in Britain have been heavily influenced by the photographs of dead children, by Hamas propaganda which incidentally includes of course, falsified photos of dead children – including photographs of dead Israeli children who are portrayed as dead Palestinian children. The Fogel family was attributed as a Palestinian family. To show you the stupidity of the people that do it, in the picture you can actually see a menorah. That sort of stuff influences the British people, plus the strident voices of many of the Muslim population in England who are outraged by the number of their Muslim brethren being killed in Gaza – yet who seem to have no outrage by the 190,000 killed in Syria. No protests, no outrage there, nothing. The attitude of the British public as a whole is negative. However, the attitude of the prime minister [David Cameron] has been much more supportive than we’ve seen in the two other conflicts in Gaza. However, I think that the British abstention in the vote of the resolution of the UNHRC in condemning Israel and investigating war crimes is an act of moral cowardice by Great Britain, and one which undermines the otherwise strong support given by the government to Israel. When political leaders tell Israel to take more steps to reduce civilian casualties – thereby inferring that Israel is not doing enough and is somehow happy to cause civilian casualties – that kind of message encourages Hamas to continue their strategy of human shields and furthermore, encourages other extremist groups around the world to follow the same strategy. And that leads to the death of innocent people. Ban Ki Moon is guilty of this, David Cameron is guilty of it, Barack Obama is guilty of it.

DD: How has the British army in Afghanistan gained from the Israeli army’s expertise?

RK: There are a number of elements that Britain has taken from the Israeli army. One of which is methods of reducing civilian casualties that we’ve seen in operation since Afghanistan, where Britain has adopted tactics like leaflet dropping on targets with potential civilians in the area. British soldiers lives have also been saved by Israeli battlefield medical technology and also by Israeli counter-bomb technology, that is, technological equipment that stops or detects improvised explosive devices like roadside bombs. British soldiers’ lives in Afghanistan have been saved and are being saved by that technology. Beyond that, British and Israeli intelligence cooperation is extremely tight and that has saved the lives not just of soldiers but of British civilians as well. By the way, British soldiers and ex-soldiers strongly support Israel and the IDF because unlike many civilians, they understand the threat that Israel faces they understand the tactics used by Hamas and they understand what the IDF have to do to deal with Hamas because those same tactics are used by the Taliban and in response, British soldiers have to use the tactics of the IDF to fight them.

DD: Finally, do you have a message to the Jewish People?

RK: I would say that the Jewish people should be extremely proud of the state of Israel, they should try their best to disregard the terrible anti-Israeli propaganda that is designed solely to contribute to the conspiracy to exterminate the state of Israel – I myself, am personally outraged by the shocking anti-Semitic violence and verbal attacks that have been triggered by this conflict against Jews, especially in Paris and Germany, but also in Britain and other countries – it’s absolutely despicable and should be fought by authorities as vigorously as possible.

Israel is the one country in the western world today that is standing up for its morality and for its values against the onslaught of international jihad.

'IDF does more than any other army to prevent civilian deaths' - Israel News, Ynetnews

INTERVIEW: Colonel Richard Kemp, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan, talks to Ynet about Israel's military and moral superiority over Hamas, and says Israel should hit Gaza harder and faster.

Attila Somfalvi

Published:  07.24.14, 11:52 / Israel News

Israel's military makes more effort than any other army to prevent civilian casualties, but should be more aggressive in Gaza, says Colonel (ret.) Richard Kemp CBE, the former commander of the British armed forces in Afghanistan and fierce international advocate for the IDF.

• Follow Ynetnews on Facebook and Twitter 

 
"I would like to see the IDF operating much faster, going in perhaps harder and faster, that's what I would like to see," Kemp told Ynet on Wednesday.


"But having said that, I recognize - as you recognize - the pressures on Israel from all around the world to absolutely minimize the number of civilian casualties they're causing", he added. "I believe that on the basis of everything that I've seen, that everything the IDF does to protect civilians and to stop the death of innocent civilians is a great deal more than any other army, and it's more than the British and the American armies."
 

צלמים: אריק אלון ואורי דוידוביץ'

Colonel Richard Kemp

Kemp, who was a strong advocate for Israel in the wake of 2012's Operation Pillar of Defense in Gaza,  said he had come to Israel now "to get as close of a vew as I can of the current conflict, so I can make my own assessment of what's happened, to contribute to the international commentary that's taking place on Israel."

Richard Kemp Analysis: The war crimes have been committed by Hamas | The Jewish Chronicle

Tears in Gaza: a Palestinian girl weeps during the funeral of her brother who was killed during a raid by the Israeli Air force this week (Photo: Getty Images)

No decent person could remain unmoved by the images of children bleeding in the street and dead babies on the mortuary slab. I have seen such sights in the flesh and feel the horror as much as anybody.

The deaths of these children and of innocent men and women is nothing short of a war crime. But contrary to the distorted views pedalled by Hamas supporters, media commentators, human rights groups and political leaders, it is not a war crime perpetrated by Israel but by Hamas.

Hamas started this war by missile attacks against Israeli civilians. They have specifically targeted a nuclear installation and fired at Ben Gurion international airport prompting airlines to suspend flights in and out.

Some have called these rockets fireworks. Last week I visited a house in Ashkelon that had taken a direct hit one hour before. The terrified 17-year-old girl who was at home told me she made it to the internal shelter with seconds to spare. If she had not she would certainly have been killed by blast, shrapnel, debris or lethal shards of flying glass.

Israel had no choice but to react to this as it did. No country in the world would sit back and take this unprovoked, lethal aggression against its civilians and its critical infrastructure.

As he rightly launched drone strikes against Islamist terrorists among the civilian population in the Pakistan tribal areas, President Obama told Israel to take greater steps to protect the lives of civilians. His words have been echoed in the UN and in capitals around the world — including London. But no-one has said what those greater steps should be. That is because Israel has been doing everything possible to minimize loss of civilian life, short of sitting back and allowing Hamas to terrorise its civilians with impunity.

Comments such as Obama’s, as well as Ban Ki Moon’s recent characterization of IDF operations as atrocities, play into the hands of Hamas. Hamas’s main reason for using human shields is not to protect their military installations but to force the IDF to kill innocent civilians.

Described by Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard as the ‘dead baby strategy’, the intention is to compel world leaders to repudiate Israel’s action and bring about unendurable international diplomatic pressure. A key element of the strategy is to stir up anti-Israel hatred among western populations. We have seen this manifested in recent days with mass protests in Europe’s capital cities.

Those who condemn Israel’s necessary and just war give succour to Hamas, a proscribed terrorist group. They encourage Hamas to keep fighting and to continue using human shields. They encourage extremists everywhere to follow this murderous policy. And such encouragement leads to further loss of innocent lives.

Firing rockets at civilians and using human shields are not the only war crimes Hamas have committed and planned. They have used protected locations and vehicles — schools, mosques, hospitals, ambulances — to store munitions and facilitate attacks.

They have constructed attack tunnels to massacre civilians and equipped them to abduct, drug and bind innocent Israelis. They have breached agreed humanitarian cease-fires intended to bring respite and relief to their suffering civilians.

Though not specifically a war crime, Hamas have also been using child “soldiers” to attack IDF troops. These tactics are only too familiar to British soldiers because they are used extensively by the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Israel’s responses have been lawful under the Geneva Conventions. Every IDF air attack is designed to destroy military objectives while minimizing civilian casualties. But with Hamas’s way of fighting, such casualties, tragically, are unavoidable.

Hamas have learnt many lessons from their defeat in the two previous Israeli operations in Gaza. They are better at concealing their rocket launchers and have developed a vast complex of concrete lined underground tunnels using resources that could have been spent on alleviating the plight of their hapless civilian population.

These tunnels protect their munitions from air attack and allow rockets and launchers to be moved about the battlefield immune from air attack. Their commanders also skulk underground while their fighters and civilians die in the mayhem above.

Because of this, only so much can be achieved from the air. The current Israeli ground assault is restricted to locating, clearing and destroying attack tunnels that threaten civilians across the border. If Hamas do not agree to cease their rocket fire, the IDF may well have to expand the operation to take on the network of rocket launchers and command bunkers deep inside the Gaza Strip.

I have spent time in the last week speaking to IDF soldiers on the Gaza border. Their job is extremely dangerous and they know it. Yet, like their British counterparts whom they so closely resemble, every one was stoical, good-humoured and ready to close with the enemy to defend their families at home.

I pay tribute to the more than 30 soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice. They have made the greatest contribution to their country that is possible. We owe them our support. Not just out of respect for their courage and sacrifice but because their war is our war, too. They are fighting the 21st century scourge of Islamist terrorism at democracy’s front line.

Col Richard Kemp was Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan

Colonel Richard Kemp: Israel's Right to Exist

Former British Armed Forces Commander Speaks About the IDF

Last night, Col. Richard Kemp, former Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan, spoke in Tel Aviv to a group of young professionals and soldiers:

“First of all, please allow me to say what a great honor it is for me to stand in the same room as those of you in IDF uniforms. You might think that you’re simply defending your country, but in fact you are defending mine, too. You are fighting for the whole Western world, and you are at the front lines of the battle.”

Col. Richard Kemp

“Although not quite a lone voice, mine was certainly a very lonely voice among the many dozens of speeches endorsing Goldstone and repudiating Israel that were made over the two days of that hearing. This is what I said to the UN Human Rights Council:

“‘During its operation in Gaza, the Israeli Defense Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare.’

“What was behind my comments?

“Apart from basic decency and humanitarian considerations, the commanders of the Israeli Defense Forces knew how vital to a counterinsurgency conflict is winning over the hearts and minds of the people, especially in a conflict where they could be sure that killing innocent civilians is exactly where the enemy would be trying to lure them to do.

“Because Hamas (like Hezbollah in Lebanon, like the Taliban in Afghanistan and like Al Qaeda and the Shia militias in Iraq), use their own people as both tactical and strategic weapons of war.

“They used them on the tactical level as human shields, to hide behind, to stand between Israeli forces and their own fighters, sometimes forcing women and children to remain in the positions that they would use to launch attacks from.

“Hamas used their people too on the strategic level, luring IDF troops to attack and kill them. Their own people; deaths to be callously exploited in the media as a means of discrediting Israeli forces. (Exactly as happens almost daily in Afghanistan.)

“In these most difficult circumstances, the IDF commanders took unprecedented measures to minimize civilian casualties. When possible, they left at least four hours’ notice to civilians to leave areas designated for attack, an action that handed a distinct advantage to Hamas.

“Attack helicopter pilots had total discretion to abort a strike if there was too great a risk of civilian casualties in the area. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza, and even unilaterally announced a daily three-hour ceasefire knowing this would give Hamas vital time and space to re-group, re-equip and re-deploy for future attacks. (This, of course added to the danger to their own troops.)

“The Israelis dropped a million leaflets warning the population of impending attacks, phoned tens of thousands of Palestinian households in Gaza urging them in Arabic to leave homes where Hamas might have stashed weapons or be preparing to fight. Similar messages were passed on in Arabic on Israeli radio broadcasts.

“But despite Israel’s extraordinary measures, a number of innocent civilians were killed and wounded. This was inevitable. Let us not forget: Hamas was deliberately trying to lure the Israelis to kill their own people.

“Many have contradicted my assertion about the IDF. But no one has been able to tell me which other army in history has ever done more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone.

“In fact, my judgments about the steps taken in that conflict by the Israeli Defense Forces to avoid civilian deaths are inadvertently borne out by a study published by the United Nations itself, a study that shows that the ratio of civilian to combatant deaths in Gaza was by far the lowest in any asymmetric conflict in the history of warfare.

“The UN estimate that there has been an average three-to-one ratio of civilian to combatant deaths in such conflicts worldwide. Three civilians for every combatant killed.

“That is the estimated ratio in Afghanistan: three to one. In Iraq, and in Kosovo, it was worse: the ratio is believed to be four-to-one. Anecdotal evidence suggests the ratios were very much higher in Chechnya and Serbia.

“In Gaza, it was less than one-to-one.

“This extremely low rate of civilian casualties flatly contradicts many of Goldstone’s original allegations, and the bleating insistence of various other human rights groups about Israel’s alleged crimes against humanity.

“And last month, even Judge Richard Goldstone changed his mind.”

…

“As with Operation Cast Lead, the tragedy of the Gaza Flotilla incident, one year ago, has been widely exploited as part of the conspiracy against Israel.

“There is every reason to believe that the activists on board the ship Mavi Marmara set out deliberately to provoke the Israeli boarding party into an attack that would cause bloodshed to be exploited in the world’s media. The Turkish humanitarian group IHH was prominent among the organizers of the Flotilla, and had purchased the Mavi Marmara for that purpose.”

“As well as being a genuine humanitarian aid group, the IHH is a radical Islamic organization. The IHH is vehemently anti-Israeli and anti-American, and has extensive connections with international jihadist groups, including Al Qaeda. According to a French investigative magistrate specializing in terrorism, the IHH played an important role in an Al Qaeda plan to carry out a mass-casualty attack at the Los Angeles International Airport on the eve of the millennium.”

…

“Many who should know better have stridently proclaimed that the Gaza blockade itself is illegal. But does not the government of Israel the right – no, the duty – to protect its citizens against the re-arming of Hamas and other jihadist groups in Gaza, which continue even in recent days to attack the civilian population with rockets, and undoubtedly desire to expand their conflict in line with the proclaimed objective of destroying Israel as an entity?”

…

“Today, Israel faces a conspiracy of delegitimization,  which aims to give validity and justification to attacks on Israel by groups such as Iran’s proxies Hamas and Hezbollah, allowing them to strike at Israel with impunity, and encouraging the view that any retaliatory or defensive measures by Israel are by definition disproportionate and should be criminalized.

“The more traction this objection is allowed to gain, the greater the instability between Israel and her neighbors. And the less chance of any lasting peace, the more that blood will be shed on all sides in the region.

“The most powerful weapons in this conspiracy are legal, diplomatic and media. Fundamentally, we are talking about a war of words, words that are given unprecedented potency by the internet, by the globalization of the 21st Century.”

During the questions that followed his address, Col. Kemp was asked what prompted his extraordinary showing of support for the Jewish state. Col. Kemp responded with the following:

“Aside from my experience actually working with the IDF (which alone would have been enough for me to testify as to its character) there are two incident in particular that stand out.”

“The first happened when I was Commander of British Forces in Afghanistan. Suddenly, we were confronted with an enemy whose many tactics included suicide bombings. We had never before had to confront suicide bombings, and we had no strategy with which to combat them.”

“I telephoned an Israeli contact of mine, who arranged for a Brigadier General in the IDF to meet with me in London. This man (at the time, serving as a full-time commander of an operational unit) took the time to fly to Britain within two days.  For four hours, we sat in a lobby in a London hotel. He spoke; I took notes. And it was from that meeting that the entire counter-suicide-bombing strategy used by the British army was devised.

“The second incident happened a couple of years later, after the terrorist attacks in London on July the 7th, 2005. We in the UK were left deeply shaken by the attacks, and I remember that the first ones to call to offer help – for some time, in fact, they were the only ones to call – was the IDF. It was then that we knew who our real friends are.”

Richard Kemp

British Colonel: "The IDF Did More to Safeguard Civilians Than Any Other Army"

Col. Richard Kemp, Former Commander British Forces in Afghanistan, spoke at the conference, "Hamas, the Gaza War, and Accountability under International Law," hosted by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.
Col. Kemp reviewed the difficulties of any kind of warfare, but emphasized the challenges faced by Israel when fighting a terrorist organization that purposefully rejects and defies international law.
http://www.jcpa.org


HAMAS, THE GAZA WAR AND ACCOUNTABILITY UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW
18 June 2009
International Law and Military Operations in Practice
Colonel Richard Kemp CBE

I will examine the practicalities, challenges and difficulties faced by military forces in trying to fight within the provisions of international law against an enemy that deliberately and consistently flouts international law.

I shall focus on counter-insurgency operations from the British and to some extent the American perspective drawing on recent British experience generally and my own personal experience of operating in this environment.

Soldiers from all Western armies, including Israel's and Britain's, are educated in the laws of war.

Commanders are educated to a higher level so that they can enforce the laws among their men, and take them into account during their planning.

Because the battlefield - in any kind of war - is a place of confusion and chaos, of fast-moving action the complexities of the laws of war as they apply to kinetic military operations, are distilled down into rules of engagement.

In the British forces, rules of engagement normally regulate military action to ensure that it remains well within the laws of war giving an additional safety cushion to soldiers against the possibility of war crimes prosecution.

In the most basic form these rules tell you when you can and when you cannot open fire.

In conventional military operations between states the combat is normally simpler and doesn't require complex and restrictive rules of engagement.

Your side wears one type of uniform, the enemy wears another; when you see the enemy's uniform you open fire. Of course there are complexities. The fog of war, sometimes literally fog, but always fog in the sense of chaos and confusion means that mistakes are made. You confuse your own men for the enemy.

The tragedies that have ensued from such chaos and misunderstanding are legion throughout the history of war. We call it blue on blue, friendly fire or fratricide.

And there are other complexities in conventional combat that make apparent simplicity less than simple. Civilians perhaps taking shelter or attempting to flee the battlefield can be mistaken for combatants and have sometimes been shot or blown up.

Enemy forces sometimes adopt the other side's uniforms as a deception or ruse. But in the type of conflict that the Israeli Defence Forces recently fought in Gaza and in Lebanon, and Britain and America are still fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, these age-old confusions and complexities are made one hundred times worse by the fighting policies and techniques of the enemy.

The insurgents that we have faced, and still face, in these conflicts are all different. Hizballah and Hamas over here, Al Qaida, Jaish al Mahdi and a range of other militant groups in Iraq. Al Qaida, the Taliban and a diversity of associated fighting groups in Afghanistan. They are different but they are linked.

They are linked by the pernicious influence, support and sometimes direction of Iran and/or by the international network of Islamist extremism.

These groups, as well as others, have learnt and continue to learn from each others' successes and failures. Tactics tried and tested on IDF soldiers in Lebanon have also killed British soldiers in Helmand Province and in Basra.

These groups are trained and equipped for warfare fought from within the civilian population.

Do these Islamist fighting groups ignore the international laws of armed conflict? They do not. It would be a grave mistake to conclude that they do. Instead, they study it carefully and they understand it well.

They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses.

Their very modus operandi is built on the, correct, assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules.

It is not simply that these insurgents do not adhere to the laws of war. It is that they employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. Their entire operational doctrine is founded on this basis....