NGO Monitor
January 01, 2010
Nizar Rayan, a senior Hamas military commander, and members of his family were killed in an IDF airstrike on January 1, 2009. Rayan was involved in the planning of many deadly suicide attacks on Israel and was an architect of the Hamas take-over of Gaza in 2007. He sent his own son out on a suicide bombing mission in 2001 that killed two and wounded many. Journalist Jeffrey Goldberg called Rayan, “one of the more bellicose Hamas leaders I have known”. Rayan told him in a 2007 interview that the “only reason to have a hudna is to prepare yourself for the final battle . . . Israel is an impossibility. It is an offense against God."
Rayan’s home was part of a complex that served as a weapons storage site and command center for Hamas. Prior to the attack, the IDF issued several alerts that the buildings would be targeted including specific telephone calls and warning shots “13 minutes and 9 minutes before the strike.” Other residents heeded the warnings, but Rayan and his family decided to stay. After the strike, secondary explosions were observed, confirming the presence of a weapons cache in Rayan’s home. It is not known whether the initial IDF attack or the secondary explosions caused the resulting casualties.
Despite Rayan’s status as a leader in Hamas’ Qassam brigades and the weapons stockpile in his building, the European-government funded Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) called Rayan’s death a “heinous crime” and that its “perpetrators and their military and political leaders must be prosecuted.”
As the logistical organizer for the Arab League’s Gaza “Fact Finding” mission, PCHR also facilitated an interview with two of Rayan’s sons, one of whom dubiously claimed, “My father couldn’t imagine he would be targeted like this.” Even the Guardian noted, however, that “Rayan appeared to believe himself invincible. He refused to leave or allow his enormous family to leave their home in the Jabalia camp.”
PCHR continues to list Rayan as a “civilian” and “university professor” in its casualty statistics from the war – calling further into question the organization’s credibility.
B’Tselem also condemned the strike calling it a “grave breach of international humanitarian law” and incredulously stated that “it is hard to think of a definite military advantage that could have been achieved by bombing the house and killing Rayan” (emphasis added). Given Rayan’s status within Hamas and the weapons destroyed and command operations disrupted by the strike, it is actually quite easy to think of several “definite military advantages” that were achieved by the operation. In fact, many news outlets reported that the strike and Rayan’s death was “a severe blow to Hamas and its armed wing, Izzadin Kassam. Some Hamas supporters said on Thursday that Rayyan was more significant than Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh or senior Hamas leaders Mahmoud Zahar and Said Siam.”
Amnesty USA used the strike to issue a call for an arms embargo against Israel. The organization claimed that “[i]f we suspect [US] weapons are being used in attacks that are indiscriminately killing civilians . . . we must suspend all transfers of weapons and immediately open an investigation.”
NIF- and EU-funded Adalah used the Rayan strike as an example of an “indiscriminate” and “disproportionate” bombing, claiming it was a “war crime” and that “those who make such decisions and execute them bear personal criminal responsibility.” Adalah made several misrepresentations of international law including, incorrectly stating that international law “prohibit[s] the injury of civilians”. While civilian injury is tragic and regrettable, it is not per se illegal under IHL. Adalah also suggested, incorrectly, that “high numbers of casualties” and “massive destruction” proved Israel was engaging in “indiscriminate” attacks, even though this is not the legal standard.
The representative examples above illustrate the lack of credibility in both the factual and legal aspects of NGO coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict. They should serve as a reminder that NGOs need to be subject to the same scrutiny they demand of Israel.
-------------
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment