We have seen during Operation Wall Guardian that the building housing the offices of the AP news agency and the jihadist Qatari channel Al-Jazeera was demolished. Israeli Foreign Minister Gaby Ashkenazi informed his Western counterparts of the reasons for the demolition, showing “hard evidence” that Hamas intelligence was operating from there and that war material was being accumulated there. In the past, in Protective Edge 2014, an Al-Jazeera journalist reported during a live broadcast that Hamas was firing from its building….. In short, this is not a new phenomenon. Did the journalists know that Hamas was co-renting?

US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken revealed on 5/18/2021 that Israel privately gave them “a justification” for bringing down the Al-Jalaa Tower, a 13-story building located in Gaza where they were the Associated Press and Al-Jazeera offices. The AP news agency defended itself by saying: “We have had no indication that Hamas was in the building or active in the building.” Tommy Vietor, the spokesman for the White House National Security Council under Barack Obama, said the building was known as a Hamas operational center.

It is a technique developed by Israel since Operation Protective Edge on 2014. According to it, a bomb is dropped on the roof of a house and the bomb does not explode, but it makes a lot of noise and shakes the foundation. It is a way of warning people to leave the house because it will be attacked. Civilians have seven to ten minutes to vacate the building from which military actions have been taken. Many times, Hamas forces civilians to stay in the area by using them as human shields. No army does this.

In recent years, every time a military confrontation occurs between Israel and someone, whether it is the Palestinians in the West Bank, the Palestinians in Gaza or Hezbollah in Lebanon, you hear the following canthole: “1000 Palestinians have been killed and only 12 Israelis…that proves that Israel violates international law and uses disproportionate force.” The cantoline is just that, a cantoline… and it is far from being supported by the law. The deaths of Palestinian civilians is a terrible thing and the first to worry about it is the Israeli army and not Hamas which doesn’t even build bunkers for its own.

The aggressors know that they are fighting against Jews and are assured of the solidarity of those who hate them or those who feed on shallow information, so they will throw thousands of numbers of dead on the air, stressing that they are all civilians. The journalist will not take the trouble to verify if it is true because if they started to investigate they would be immediately deported by those who enjoy impunity. Then, when names and surnames begin to appear, we learn that 50% of the dead were military personnel, a painful figure but widely surpassed in similar conflicts where Islamists use civilians as human shields.

For there to be a violation of international law for disproportionate use of force, it cannot be argued that X died on one side and X on the other. If we were to refer to numbers, then the Nazis were the good guys and the British the bad guys because seven million died in the second war on one side and only 500,000 on the other. What is ridiculous in the Germany-England comparison is ridiculous in the Israeli conflicts. What is important is who is attacking whom, who wants to protect their citizens and who wants their civilians to expose themselves to danger in order to victimize themselves.

The proportionality of the use of force is measured in one way: If Israel kills a Hamas leader, who was firing rockets into Israel then the potential damage it is causing is measured and whether these are “proportional”, not “accurate”, but understandable to the collateral damage it may cause. If so, then the use of force is legal. For that same reason Israeli airmen film their actions and a legal advisor confirms that such an attack is legal or illegal. For that same reason, many times, Israel quashes attacks against terrorists. Decide, law or quackery.

I’ll put it this way: If a Hamas Palestinian has a nuclear bomb, say, and he is prepared to use it to murder 3,000,000 people then his threat is obvious. If the air force strikes the terrorist from the air knowing that if he kills him then 20,000 non-combatant civilians will die then only then can we measure “proportionality”. In other words… Is the death of 20,000 innocents justified to save 3,000,000 people? If the collateral cost is disproportionate to the benefit of the action then there is a violation. Whether there is military error or was there intentionality is another issue.

Hamas often executes and promotes suicide bombings (they are illegal). The 1977 UN International Covenant states: “Whoever commits an offence, whoever unlawfully and intentionally delivers, places, throws or detonates a lethal explosive or other device in, into or against a place of public use, a public or governmental facility, a public transportation system or towards facilities and infrastructure: (a) With the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury; or (b) With the intent to cause significant destruction of such place, facility, or system, where such destruction results or is likely to result in great economic harm.”

There are those who surrealistically prefer to focus on Israel. The terrorist actions practiced by Hamas, both indiscriminate attacks against Israeli towns, villages and civilians, as well as the exposure of its own residents as human shields, are violations of international law and globally accepted humanitarian norms, specifically, the violation of the rule of distinction, which requires combatants to limit attacks to legitimate military objectives. As such, they constitute both crimes against humanity and war crimes, prosecutable before the International Criminal Court (ICC), as well as before municipal courts and tribunals guided by universal criminal jurisdiction.

In her article “Hamas’ Accountability under International Humanitarian Law” jurist Sigall Horowitz states: “…The use by Hamas members of the Qassam and Grad rockets, in connection with the armed conflict, may constitute a war crime under the Rome Statute. Accordingly, these acts may establish the individual criminal responsibility of Hamas fighters who committed, ordered, assisted, or otherwise contributed to their commission. These acts may also establish the individual criminal responsibility of Hamas military commanders and political leaders, under the principle of superior responsibility.”

The following Hamas terrorist acts constitute serious crimes to the international community: 1) Indiscriminate targeting of Israeli civilian towns and villages with rockets is prohibited according to the “Hague Regulations 1907”. Let us read Article 25: “It is prohibited to attack or bombard, by any means, towns, villages, dwellings or buildings which are not defended”. Furthermore, “Protocol I to the Geneva Convention 1977”, Article 48: “The parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants, and between civilian objects and military objectives, and accordingly direct their operations against military objectives only”.

Hamas’ stated “modus operandi” advocates and advocates terrorism against Israel as the means to achieve its ends. It regards every Israeli man, woman and child as a legitimate military target justifying its terrorist missile attacks, suicide bombings, assassinations and kidnappings. It openly admits its strategy of terrorizing Israel’s civilian population through the use of rockets and missiles indiscriminately aimed at Israeli cities and towns. Their leaders and spokesmen have publicly admitted their responsibility for these acts of terrorism. They view Israeli civilian casualties as strategic and tactical military successes.

The media legitimizes terrorism when they do not call it by its name or when they give it adulterated names. For example, the Spanish news agency EFE usually labels as terrorist all actions (even those that are not) carried out by ETA and its entourage, and also the actions and members of Al Qaeda are usually given that honor. In that case, they are qualified according to what they do, which is terrorism. However, when it comes to Hamas or Hezbollah (fighting against Israel) they are qualified as “militants”, legitimizing what they do.

When the media do not show rocket fire from civilian positions, when they do not film armed people disguised as civilians, when they do not show how civilian ambulances are used to transport armed men or when they do not show the use of civilians (especially children) as human shields or when journalists censor themselves because they fear that terrorists will expel them from the area… the media are partners and allies of terrorism. This was the case during Operation Protective Edge in the Gaza Strip in 2014, when journalists hit rock bottom by humiliating their profession. With the exception of specific cases…

When news agencies such as the Spanish EFE talk about ETA or Al Qaeda, they qualify the terrorists with that name, although, in the case of ETA, Basque terrorism is usually “personalized terrorism” which is less serious (from a military perspective) than that carried out by Hamas (suicide or indiscriminate terrorism). However, when they talk about Hamas or Hezbollah, they sweeten the title by calling them “militants” since they say that they belong to an armed militia. Some are judged by what they do and others by their membership. This is a way of legitimizing terrorism.

In July 2014, the EFE news agency published a news item that can be found in many newspapers… “Israel bombed, in two pre-dawn raids, at least 14 targets in the Gaza Strip, including training camps and facilities of Palestinian militants (Hamas), the army reported.” The Israeli army would never qualify Hamas with the adulterated moniker of militants so the quote already suffered from manipulation. By saying a fighter is a “militant” it is not clear that it is a combatant (which is a legal military target), one can be a political militant as well!

When the media takes at face value what terrorists state, especially Islamic terrorists who according to their ideology can lie (Taaqyya) without questioning the veracity of their claims… the media legitimizes terrorism. For example, when the media neither verify nor question the numbers of civilian casualties claimed by Palestinian Hamas spokesmen, when it is widely known that they themselves order their followers to lie and hide photos of armed people to make them look like civilians… Journalism, by such professional incompetence, favors and whitewashes terrorism.

As long as Hezbollah does not attack with its 150,000-200,000 rockets and missiles against Israel, the present conflict will remain between Israel and Hamas, ruler of Gaza. If the turmoil and physical violence spreads to the West Bank then we could be facing a kind of new Intifada where Israel fights Hamas and the Palestinian Authority at the same time. For the moment, Mahmoud Abbas is very happy that Israel is attacking the one who overthrew and humiliated him in 2007 by expelling him from the Strip. Another cause for escalation is if Hamas makes a strategic attack, for example, using attack tunnels.

El número de víctimas entre la población civil israelí fue bastante reducido, principalmente como resultado del uso efectivo de la Cúpula de Hierro (derribó 90% de los lanzamientos). Dos civiles extranjeros murieron mientras intentaban refugiarse del lanzamiento de cohetes. En total, 11 civiles fallecieron por el disparo de cohetes intencionados (incluido un niño de cinco años) y un soldado muerto. Israel contabilizó 357 heridos (según datos de Maguen David Adom) y se contabilizaron mucha destrucción de propiedades y edificios. 3573 cohetes pasaron la frontera hacia dentro de Israel y otros 500 explotaron dentro de Gaza, algunos mataron a civiles palestinos.

El triunfo de Hamás fue político interno. Gracias a la exactitud del ataque militar israelí, el número de víctimas palestinas fue bajo y la destrucción masiva de propiedades tampoco provocó que la población de Gaza condenase el liderazgo de Hamás. Militarmente, Hamás logro someter a los israelíes; en un radio de 40 KM; a sus refugios, pero no logró triunfos sorpresivos al fracasar elevar drones, túneles ofensivos o sus pequeños submarinos. Eso sí, el hecho que Hamás lograse no ser doblegado por Israel, aumentó su popularidad frente a la Autoridad Palestina, presentándose como el paladín de la defensa por Jerusalén.

Se contabilizaron 254 muertos palestinos en la Franja de Gaza. Israel asegura que, al menos, 180 eran militares de Hamás y Yihad Islámica. Entre las muertes palestinas, 67 eran niños (datos pocos confiables del Ministerio de Salud palestino, porque incluyen incluso muertos por disparos propios). Más de 5.700 heridos en Gaza, Judea y Samaria (donde también se produjeron tumultos). Túneles subterráneos que se usaban como búnkeres, cuarteles generales y túneles de asalto fueron destruidos en ataques puntuales israelíes. Siete vehículos aéreos no tripulados de Hamás del modelo Ababil fueron derribados y neutralizados y un buque no tripulado destruido (como UAV).

El 21/5/2021, 2 a.m., comenzó un alto el fuego sin condiciones previas, impulsado por Egipto. En contraposición a 2014 (Margen Protector); en donde intentó dar un golpe de gracia antes de entrar en vigencia el cese de fuego, Hamás inició el fin de los disparos de cohetes horas antes por temor a que Israel continuase atacando objetivos yihadistas. Israel deseaba seguir atacando lideres de Hamás y Yihad Islámica. El Primer Ministro de Israel aceptó el cese de fuego presionado por Estados Unidos, y el líder de Hamás Yahya Sanwar festejó el fin de la guerra como si fuese un triunfo.

Se puede interpretar la aceptación del cese de fuego por parte de Israel como un intento de fijar un buen comienzo en las relaciones entre la administración Biden (Estados Unidos) e Israel, cuando el estado hebreo está especialmente interesado en concentrar sus esfuerzos para sabotear un nuevo mal acuerdo nuclear con Irán. Otro factor es que no era del todo seguro que en el banco de objetivos de Israel mantenía blancos sustanciales. El Consejo de Derechos Humanos de la ONU aprobó una comisión de investigación sobre la conducta (solamente contra) Israel en la operación, que no contará con cooperación israelí.

Miles de alborotadores entre los árabes israelíes provocaron disturbios violentos, linchamientos, vandalismo e incendios provocados. Los centros de violencia se centraron en ciudades mixtas con residentes judíos y árabes como Haifa, Lod, Ramla y Acco. También se produjeron disturbios en localidades árabes y en muchas carreteras del Neguev y la Galilea. Los alborotadores judíos también se unieron a los disturbios por lo que han presentado acusaciones contra más de un centenar de alborotadores, especialmente árabes (20% de la población). El ministro de Seguridad Interna, Amir Ohana, y el comisionado Yaakov Shabtai, decidieron movilizar a los reservistas de la policía fronteriza.

En la noche del 11/5/2021 aumentaron los disturbios e incendios en Lod, con el asesinato de un judío y con otro gravemente herido. Los árabes también dispararon contra sus vecinos judíos. El 12/5/2021, en Bat Yam, la organización de extrema derecha “La Familia” encabezó una turba enfurecida que destrozó tiendas árabes, intentando linchar a Said Musa, un conductor árabe. Esa noche, un árabe de 25 años fue apuñalado en Jerusalén mientras que en Acco fue incendiado el hotel Effendi por los árabes, y Avi Har-Even, un ex director de la Agencia Espacial Israelí que se hospedaba allí, resultó gravemente herido.

El restaurante “Uri Buri” del chef Uri Jeremias también fue incendiado por los árabes. El 13/5/2021 se intentó en Tamra linchar a un judío que ingresó a la ciudad por error. El 14/5/2021, los disturbios se extendieron a Judea y Samaria, durante los cuales 10 palestinos murieron en enfrentamientos con las fuerzas israelíes. El 17/5/2021 un terrorista intentó atropellar a un soldado cerca de Huwwara, aledaña a Nablus. Los soldados lograron neutralizar la amenaza. Poco a poco, con la imposición del cese de fuego entre Israel y Gaza, los tumultos internos amainaron. No se registraban desmanes así desde octubre 2000.

Puede que una de las razones fundamentales para explicar las tensiones entre judíos y árabes dentro de Israel es la influencia de la rama más islamista dentro de la minoría musulmana en Israel. El movimiento islámico del norte de Israel, con mucha fuerza en Um El-Fajem y alrededores fue declarado ilegal hacía tiempo y no por eso ha dejado de tener influencia. También ellos fueron incitados por sus líderes en base al libelo “(Mezquita) Al-Aqsa está en peligro”. Paralelamente, se registraba un acercamiento serio de partidos árabes que sopesaban participar en gobiernos de Israel. Los tumultos contradecían tal tendencia integrativa.

No existió paralelismo en la cantidad y calidad de agresiones entre la mayoría (judía) y la minoría (árabe). Sin dudas, la violencia árabe fue mucho más grande e hizo retroceder a Israel a los días violentos que provocaron la muerte de 13 árabes al comienzo de la Intifada de Al-Aqsa (octubre 2000). Uno de los problemas sociales en Israel es que extremistas han logrado penetrar como diputados en la Knesset. Uno de ellos, de extrema derecha judía, Itamar Ben-Gvir, incitó a manifestantes contra los musulmanes durante el mes de Ramadan. Lamentablemente, el Supremo Israelí no anula la postulación de extremistas.