Hamas has intentionally sought and provoked Civilian Harm in Gaza
War is complex, and in our polarising age, an adequate approximation of the truth of any conflict is hard to come by. The war in Gaza has been reduced, in the popular discourse, to a reductionist parody of the immensely chaotic reality that prevails—swinging between assertions of genocide or of anti-Semitism, depending on where sympathies lie.
Broadly, however, it would be safe to say that the war of narratives—particularly among the ideologically uncommitted—is substantially being won by Israel’s adversaries, particularly as the death toll in Gaza approaches 44,000, with another nearly 1,04,000 people wounded.
Crucially, nearly 70 per cent of the dead are reported to be women and children, much of Gaza’s urban landscape—including hospitals, schools and residential buildings—has been reduced to rubble, almost the entire population has been displaced, in many cases more than once, into areas declared ‘safe zones’ by Israel, and then these areas have been bombed as well. Unsurprisingly, there is a rising crescendo of global protests against what is being described as Israel’s ‘genocide’ in the Gaza strip.
What is substantially ignored—except on the margins of the discourse on international humanitarian law—is the overwhelming employment of human shields by Hamas, the location of Hamas units and firepower in the most densely populated areas, including in or under hospitals, schools and mosques, as well as in overcrowded civilian shelters for the millions of displaced.
What is little noted in the popular discourse, moreover, is that the massive civilian casualties were part of a pre-meditated calculus. The carnage of October 7, 2023, in Israel was not, as most believe, simply an act of rage and retaliation by the oppressed Palestinians, intended to inflict pain on the oppressor. Its objective was precisely to provoke an Israeli response that would inevitably put civilian populations in harm’s way, as the entire military infrastructure and fighting force of Hamas was located in the densest civilian areas, often in underground warrens located precisely under sensitive locations such as schools, hospitals and places of worship.
Since all casualty reports in Gaza rely on the Hamas’ Health Ministry, the images and numbers projected are invariably of civilians, and particularly women and children. When prominent Hamas figures, or Hamas fighting units, are targeted, details of their location are glossed over. What is also missed is that Hamas uses intimidation, violence and the threat of execution to prevent civilians from leaving hostile areas, even when Israel provides prior warning of an attack.
Among the civilians dead, moreover, are at least 39 Israeli hostages, and possibly some of another 10 currently ‘unaccounted for’, who were also being held by Hamas fighters in the ‘civilian areas’ targeted by the Israeli Defence Forces. As Benjamin Netanyahu expressed it at the UN, in the context of the Hezbollah in Lebanon, no doubt with some exaggeration, “They put a missile in every kitchen, a rocket in every garage.”
The international media—relying overwhelmingly on sources in Hamas-held territory in Gaza—predominantly project harrowing images of civilian casualties, particularly of women and children. Seldom is it recognised that in most, though not all, Israeli attacks, Hamas fighters, leadership and weapons caches are also successfully targeted.
It is significant that at least 39 Israeli hostages have already been confirmed killed, and another 10 are unaccounted for, indicating that it is Hamas hideouts that are being targeted, even at the risk of Israeli hostage casualties. However, while Israel prevails on the ground, decimating the Hamas leadership and fighting force, it appears steadily to be losing the propaganda war, as its ‘human rights violations’ undermine the legitimacy of Israel’s very existence.
The use of human shields violates international humanitarian law. The Geneva Convention explicitly prohibits ‘shielding’, declaring, “The presence or movements of the civilian population or individual civilians shall not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations, in particular in attempts to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield, favour or impede military operations,” and this clause is reflected in international humanitarian war as well.
This does not, of course, exculpate Israeli forces of everything they have done or are doing in Gaza. The October 7 attack has been transformed into a justification of what has been described as the “Generals’ Plan”, to forcibly evacuate all of Northern Gaza, both by military attacks and blocking of essential supplies, including food and medicines. Significantly, international law also places obligations on the ‘attacking party’ “not cause excessive civilian harm when weighed against the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated…” This, of course, raises questions of what constitutes ‘excessive’ harm, and how ‘direct military advantage’ is to be calculated, taking the entire discussion into uncertain terrain.
The extremes on both sides are locked into irreconcilable positions, separately seeking uncontested control and ethnic possession of all the lands “between the river and the sea”. These extremes, on both sides, will have to be addressed. But it must be explicitly recognised that it is Hamas that has intentionally sought and provoked the civilian harm in Gaza, in order to advance its efforts to delegitimise the Israeli state. Israel must, of course, be held to account for its own excesses—but given the distribution of power in the world today, irrespective of the outcome in Gaza, this is unlikely.
Ajai Sahni
Executive Director, Institute for Conflict Management, South Asia Terrorism Portal
ajaisahni@gmail.com