WAC: “Beit Hanoun’s wounded at Ichilov Hospital”

by Nir Nader, Workers Advice Centre

Imad Abu Amara leads me through the corridors of the Ted Arison Tower of Ichilov Hospital, to the wounded victims of the massacre at Beit Hanoun. Imad, 50, is not among Beit Hanoun’s wounded. He is from Rafah, and already very familiar with hospital admissions. For 16 years he has been nursing his wife who was traumatized by shelling near their home which killed two and wounded dozens. But now a new slaughter has overshadowed the victims of the last shelling – who now remembers this killing?

On the fifth floor we meet Nahil Athamneh and Abed el-Hakim Athamneh, both Beit Hanoun residents in their forties. On Wednesday the 8th of November, at ten past five in the morning, they woke up in terror to the deafening sound of bombing. “They had never shelled our neighborhood before. The army has been bombing for two years already, but never near us,” Abed el-Hakim says. “The day before, they patrolled our neighborhood, entered houses to check for Qassam rockets, and even joked with us and smoked a narghile [hookah].” He stops talking abruptly and stares at the wall.

Five minutes, twenty killed

“At ten past five the first shell landed,” Nahil continues where Abed el-Hakim stopped. “Within a few seconds we heard shouts. I went outside and saw another shell land, and ran to see what had happened to the people living there. They are all members of my family. I saw them running down the stairs to escape, then a shell caught them, leaving chaos of blood and body parts.”

“I picked up my 12 year old cousin Muhammad Jamal Athamneh and saw that his hand was severed. I put him in a car that was going to the new Beit Hanoun hospital, which was opened just four months ago. Then I came back to pick up someone else, and saw my cousin’s hand on the ground. I ran to the car to put the severed hand in too.

“There was a minute of silence, with only the sounds of the wounded and dust in the air. I ran down the passage between the damaged houses with two friends, Sagar Adwan and Muhammad Athamneh, to take out the wounded, Sagar and Muhammad had already reached the entrance of the house when I suddenly heard the screech of a shell behind me. I crouched against the wall and the shell hit the entrance, killing nine people who were trying to escape, including my two friends.

“There was lots of dust and smoke. It was impossible to enter the houses. Then the first ambulance came. The shells continued to fall. The shelling lasted five minutes and killed 19 people [another died at Ichilov Hospital – N.N.]… Now nobody wants to live in that neighborhood. They are scared there will be more bombings. The neighborhood is empty – everyone has gone to stay with other members of their families,” Nahil adds.

A visit to Tel Aviv

Abed el-Hakim Athamneh came to Ichilov Hospital with his nephew Ahmed Masound Athamneh, 21, who has recently become engaged. He was sleeping when the first shell landed. In the minute before the second shell landed, he was unable to escape with the others and a wall collapsed on top of him. “That is what saved him,” says Abed el-Hakim. Ahmed’s father and three sisters were killed. His mother Jamila is hospitalized in the next room.

He continues “Before the shelling, Beit Hanoun was under curfew for five days. About 2000 men above the age of 16 were arrested from our neighborhood alone. They were handcuffed and blindfolded and taken to be interrogated in the school yard. For five days they questioned them one by one, and released only those whose interrogation was completed.”

Abed el-Hakim Athamneh worked for 14 years in construction in Israel, but since the Intifada he has not worked – six years without work. “They have locked us in a refuse to open the gate. We live off UN contributions. Once a month we get some basic necessities. Israel claims it is shelling because of the Qassams, but it is not us who fire the rockets. At five in the morning we are in bed. They shell innocent people while they sleep,” Abed el-Hakim says.

“It’s the workers who bear the brunt. Not only do they leave us without work – they bomb us too. I worked on many buildings in Tel Aviv. I know the city better than I know Gaza. I used to get up at four in the morning and return home at eight in the evening. I haven’t been in Tel Aviv for six years. I never thought I would return under these circumstances.”

Behind Ahmed’s bed, Tel Aviv’s old northern quarter lies, and in the distance the Mediterranean can be seen. These workers from Beit Hanoun, whom circumstances have reduced to poverty, are stuck in the Gaza Strip and punished by orders forbidding them to reach their places of work. Now the same state the shells them, kills them and wounds them has given them the opportunity to get a glimpse of one of the richest cities in the Middle East.

“He wants us to take him on a tour of the city,” Abed el-Hakim confides as he glances at Ahmed. “We told him to have patience, to wait until he gets better – you can’t leave your bed like that, we said.”

“There are many well-educated people and many workers in Beit Hanoun,” Abed el-Hakim continues. Today they are all unemployed and just want to work. But there is no work. People who once worked for the PA for 1500 shekels a month make do with 400 shekels if they can get it… I use my savings to live. I opened a clothes store three years ago, but a week and a half ago the army smashed the windows and threw hand grenades inside the store. Everything was destroyed. Seven years ago, when my child would ask me for a shekel to buy some candy, I would give him five shekels. Today when he asks for a shekel, I tell him that I’ll give him one later and hope he’ll forget.

“I can’t think of a solution. And there is nobody we can turn to or sue or demonstrate against. There is no PA, no Hamas, no Abu Mazen. We don’t know where all this will lead. We’ve got used to living without any government, without any work and without a solution.”

When Human Rights Watch Equates Aggressor with the Aggrieved

from the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights,

Three Palestinian human rights organizations (PCHR, Al-Mezan, and Addameer) sent the below letter to Ms. Sarah Leah Whitson (Middle East Director of Human Rights Watch) in response to the Human Rights Watch position against Palestinian civilians exercising their right of peaceful, unarmed resistance against the illegal demolition of their homes by Israeli occupation forces. The letter expressed rejection of HRW’s position in this issue, and exposed the inconsistencies, contradictions, and misinterpretation of international law.

The letter text is:

Ms. Sarah Leah Whitson,

HRW Middle East Director

Subject: Equating Aggressor and Aggrieved

Dear Ms. Whitson,

We are writing to you to express our reservations on the HRW news item of 22 November 2006 entitled: “OPT: Civilians Must Not Be Used to Shield Homes Against Military Attacks,” discussing HRW’s position on Palestinian civilians acting against the destruction of civilian homes by Israeli forces in Gaza.

The HRW news item is self-contradictory and full of inconsistencies. While pointing that Israeli army destruction of civilian homes is illegal in the absence of concrete evidence indicating that these homes are legitimate military targets, HRW claims that unarmed civilian protest and action against these illegal Israeli activities is a “war crime!” The published news item failed to label illegal action by an occupying power as war crimes, while doing so with regards to the reaction of the civilian victims of these crimes.

HRW equated the coercion and detention at gunpoint by the Israeli army of Palestinian human shields in their homes during military incursions with the voluntary, unarmed protests and resistance by Palestinian civilians against the illegal destruction of civilian property.

HRW failed to mention that the Israeli army uses US-made air-to-surface missiles fired by fighter jets at densely-populated areas. All strikes in these population centers have caused damage to nearby houses. Thus, civilians gathered to protest against targeted houses are in effect defending their own homes, which will be damaged when the targeted homes are destroyed.

The news item praises the Israeli army for calling off two strikes, while not condemning the Israeli army for the killing of two women when, in the same circumstances, the Israeli army fired at an unarmed civilian protest.

The HRW statement failed to prove or disprove the guilt of innocent civilians living in the targeted houses. Are all the inhabitants guilty to a degree that they must suffer homelessness, refuge, and the destruction of their houses and property?

In a 2-page statement, HRW failed to point even once to the fact that Israeli forces are an occupying power in international law; thus failing to point to the real context of the events in question.

We regret that the HRW news item in question smells of politicized, selective human rights advocacy. Over the past three weeks, HRW has failed to condemn any Israeli human rights violations, many of which are more grievous that the alleged “war crime” perpetrated by Palestinians. By protesting the destruction of their homes, Palestinians have not killed any Israeli civilian; whereas the praised restraint of the Israeli army killed 15 civilians over the same period.

Police Target Tel Aviv Anti-Occupation Rally

by aspiringnomad, December 4th

In Tel Aviv on Saturday, a peaceful rally of several hundred people demonstrating at the ongoing Israeli occupation of Palestine and the recent Beit Hanoun massacre was marred by the arrest of a 20-year old Israeli peace activist.

The rally began peacefully with the predominantly Israeli contingent creating a convivial atmosphere with drums and whistles as they marched to Rabin Square. Apart from a few missiles thrown by occupants of overlooking apartments and the odd heckle from angry passers-by, the rally demonstrated none of the hostility common to similar such rallies in the occupied territories due to the absence of a confrontational Israeli military presence.

The arrest occurred when a demonstrator attempted to attach an anti-war bumper sticker to the window of a McDonald’s restaurant. The police reacted to this by flinging the female demonstrator to the ground. Another demonstrator who came to her aid was subsequently beaten and apprehended by upwards of a dozen police.

Police at the scene alleged the protester had tried to break a glass window of the MacDonald’s branch and had assaulted an officer with a flag pole he was holding.

However, eye witnesses refute these grounds for arrest, backed up by video footage disproving the police’s version of events and furthermore showing excessive police violence during the protester’s arrest.

The arrested activist from Nahariya, sustained a black eye and head injuries in the course of his arrest. Onlookers and marchers alike were shocked at this display of police force, unused as they are to the daily violence meted out by the IOF in the occupied West Bank and Gaza.

Humanity lost

by Laila El-Haddad, November 29th

We stood and we waited and we cried and we returned back to Egypt yesterday, and again today. Us and thousands of others.

It was anguish. Anguish and misery and desperation personfied in every woman, man and child.

One hour turned into two, then three, then five, as we stood shielding our eyes from the piercing midday sun on Wednesday, when we were told the Crossing would be opening for a few hours.

Some wailed in exhaustion, others fainted, still others cracked dry humor, trying to pass the time. We stood, thousands of us, packed together elbow to elbow like cattle, penned in between steel barriers on one end, and riot-geared Egyptian security guards on the perimeter, who were given orders not to allow anyone through until they hear otherwise from the Israelis-and to respond with force if anyone dared.

Many of the people had been waiting for more than two weeks to cross back into Gaza, sometimes making the trip to the crossing several times a day upon receiving word of its imminent opening.

“We have been waiting for 15 days now. Only god knows when it will open-today, tomorrow, the day after?” said 57-year-old Abu Yousuf Barghut, his shrapnel-riddled arm trembling by his side.

His tearful wife, Aisha, added: “God knows we only went to seek treatment for him and to come right back. And now we are stuck and waiting us in Gaza are my four children. This is the most basic of rights-to be able to return to our homes, and we are even denied that.”

“The only way anyone will actually pay attention to our plight is if one of us dies here, and even then, I’m not sure the world will care,” stammered one young man, Isam Shaksu, his eye heavily bandaged after having received an corneal implantation in Jordan.

In July, seven Palestinians waiting to be let into Gaza from Egypt died waiting to cross Rafah.

After the hours and the sun, one would have thought the black steel gates ahead of us were the gates to Heaven, but in fact they only led to more masses, more waiting, more hell.

There is something you feel as you stand there, and sometimes squatted, for hours at a time, waiting to be let through the Egyptian side of Rafah Crossing. It is something of your humanity slowing drifting away. It is gradual, but unmistakable.

And you are never quite the same again.

There were mixed Israeli orders-first to open the crossing for three days, starting Wedneday, yesterday; then breaking news at 11pm retracted that order, and by Wednesday morning, another about-face saying that the border would in fact be opened. By the time we arrived, it was 11am, and already somewhere around 2000 has amassed in front of the gates. And no one was budging.

Yousuf waited along with us, asking incessantly “When would the crossing open??”, and begging me to pose the same quetion to the Egyptian officers manning it. Everytime he’d see the gate budge open he would get excited and yell “Its open!! Its open!!”. And everyone would heave a heavy sigh.

When we finally did make it inside the “Second sector” of the Egyptian side, the relief was overwhelming-we had moved 50 metres!! And we could wait another four hours if it meant we’d finally be allowed through. But instead we faced yet another uncertain wait; it was like some sadistic game with no certain ending.

As we waited, we saw members of the Palestinian athletic teams heading to the Asian games after a two week delay.

We also saw Ismail Haniya on his way out to his Arab tour. He stopped to mingle with the desperate crowds, some hailing him, some complaining about how long they had waited.

We finally learned that the crossing had been closed this entire time, and the Egyptians were only allowing people through to give them some hope to cling on to-and to prevent the masses from rioting, which has happened before.

We thought once he’d passed, we’d be allowed through. But it is then we learned that Mahmud Zahar had crossed earlier that morning-carrying suitcases full of $20 million.

The European Monitors were not pleased. How could he not declare the money, and how could he have the audacity to try and bring in money to feed his peole in the first place??

They filed a “complaint” with the Israelis, who immediately told them to shut down the crossing, without giving a reason, leaving thousands-including Yousuf, my parents and I, stranded.

My mother and Yousuf had gone ahead of my father and I-and our bags-into the terminal, and Yousuf fell asleep in the mosque. It was then that the officers had informed us the crossing was no longer operational-and everyone who was inside, even those who had already made it as far as the Palestinian side, would have to go back.

We pleaded with an Egyptian Officer: “It took us 6 hours to get as far the inside of the terminal, please let us through”.

“Big deal-it took me ten hours to get here from Cairo,” he retorted, as I reminded myself they get paid a measly 180 Egyptian pounds a month and couldn’t care less.

Another officer was more sympathetic.

“What you lot have to understand is that no one gives a damn what happens to you-you could sit here and suffocate for all they care. You are simply not human enough for them to care.”

When is it that we lost our humanity, I wondered? And when is it that the humanity and desperation of a people, waiting desperately to be let through to their homes, was less important than the call of duty? And that a government was made to choose between feeding their own people, or giving them passage to their homes?

Inside the terminal, the scenes were dizzying. Already disoriented form lack of sleep and little food, I looked around in awe. It was nothing short of an interment camp, and I lost myself somewhere between the silent anguish of old men, aching, teary eyed-women on the verge of collapse, and children, some strewn across the floor in exhaustion, others who were sick, in wheelchairs, wailing…

We returned to Arish, exhausted and sleep deprived, only to find that all of the apartments were occupied by returning passengers. The only flat we found was one without hot water and leaky ceiling pipes, but we couldn’t care less. By 9pm we were all out.

The next morning, we left again to the border-where we had left our suitcases-despite word from taxi drivers that the crossing would not open. We waited again, this time for only 5 hours, until we decided it was an exercise in futility.

Everyone was looking for answers-some answers, any answers. When would the crossing open? Was there hope it would open today? If so, what time? Should we wait, should we return to Arish? Nobody knew.

Every now and then someone would make a call to some secondary source they knew in Gaza or on the border, and rumors would spread like wildfire across the masses. “At noon-they say at noon there is a possibility it will open! Patience, patience!”.

And then we wait some more.

One man, frustrated, took his bags and began to push them back on a trolley and out through the throngs of exhausted passengers.

“Where the hell do you think you’re going??” bellowed one of the Egyptian officers.

“To Jerusalem! Where do you think??” he snapped.

It was nearing the end of our long day, and overcome by exhaustion, we didn’t know whether to laugh or cry.

A friend in the UN told me the Europeans had left their posts after yesterday’s “incidents” and thus the Palestinian side of the crossing has shut down indefinitely now.

And so now, we return to square one. Back in Arish, waiting, as ever, for the border to open.

Nonviolent Resistance is not Illegal: HRW Should Retract Statement

On Sunday, Nov. 19, hundreds of Palestinian civilians crowded into the building where the family of Mohammed Baroud and a number of other families live in Jabalya refugee camp in the Gaza Strip. Israeli military forces had warned that the building would be attacked. The planned Israeli attack was deterred by this action. Two hours later, the scene was replicated at the family home of Mohammed Nawajeh, with the same results.

The International Solidarity Movement (ISM) applauds the people of Jabalya for their courageous and effective use of nonviolent resistance, and we express our full solidarity with their actions, which are positive initiatives in the struggle to defend Palestinian rights. We encourage international volunteers to participate in these actions, as did Father Peter Dougherty and Sister Mary Ellen Gundeck of the Michigan Peace Team.

We note with disappointment that Human Rights Watch (HRW) chose to condemn these actions, suggesting that they could constitute a “war crime.” In a November 22, 2006 press release entitled, “OPT: Civilians Must Not Be Used to Shield Homes Against Military Attacks” HRW Middle East Director Sarah Leah Whitson said, “There is no excuse for calling civilians to the scene of a planned attack. Whether or not the home is a legitimate military target, knowingly asking civilians to stand in harm’s way is unlawful.”

HRW’s press release is factually, legally, and morally flawed.

HRW based its statement on contested factual information. HRW claimed that “Palestinian armed groups” and Mohammed Baroud encouraged civilians to gather around the homes. However, while some press accounts mention Baroud’s role, numerous other press and participant accounts from Gaza suggest that the mobilizations resulted from calls by civilian leaders and a groundswell of popular anger against Israeli home demolitions.

As just one example, Eyad Bayary, a head nurse at Jabalya Hospital who went to Baroud’s home with another twenty of his neighbors, told ISM that he did not hear a call from Baroud asking people to protect his home. He and his neighbors went to support Baroud and his family and to protest the shelling out of their own volition. “I live next to Mr. Baroud’s family home. If his home is shelled at best my home would be damaged. My wife is in the six month of her pregnancy. God forbid, a shelling of the house next door could endanger her and the child she is carrying. All our children would be affected. We went to the Baroud family house because we were scared and angry. No one asked us to come.”

In addition to this factual weakness, we believe that HRW’s position reflects serious errors in the interpretation and application of international humanitarian law (IHL), in two fundamental respects: (1) HRW’s position explicitly rejects considering the legitimacy of the target as relevant to the legal analysis; and (2) HRW’s position erroneously places the burden of protecting civilian lives on the population being attacked instead of on the belligerents carrying out the attack.

According to HRW, “In the case where the object of attack is not a legitimate military target, calling civilians to the scene would still contravene the international humanitarian law imperative for parties to the conflict to take all feasible precautions to protect civilians from the effects of attack.” IHL clearly makes target legitimacy central to the determination of lawful vs. unlawful conduct. Protocol I of the Geneva Convention, Article 51(7) provides that “Parties to the conflict shall not direct the movement of the civilian population or individual civilians in order to attempt to shield military objectives from attacks or to shield military operations.” Article 52 of the same Protocol makes clear that a civilian home is a civilian object and not a military objective. Even if Mohammed Baroud and Mohammed Nawajeh are military commanders, their families, their family homes and the homes of other families in the same buildings are not military objectives.

Therefore, the Geneva Convention’s prohibition on the use of civilians to shield military objectives does not apply to the voluntary gathering of Palestinian civilians to protect civilian objects like the homes of Baroud and Nawajeh from a pending Israeli attack. Rather, Israel’s targeting of these homes constitutes a violation of numerous provisions of IHL that proscribe attacks on civilian property, and of Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, strictly prohibiting the destruction of property for the purpose of collective punishment.

While IHL places obligations on all parties to a conflict to take “all feasible precautions” to protect civilians from the effects of attack, HRW does not cite support for its claim that encouraging civilians to defend their homes from military strikes constitutes a violation of this imperative. In fact, Protocol I, Article 57 relating to precautions in attack, specifically places the obligation to protect civilians on “those who plan or decide upon an attack.” (Protocol I, Art. 57(2)(a)). Furthermore, providing warning does not absolve Israel of its responsibility not to attack civilian objects, nor does it make the civilian objects legitimate military targets.

The error of HRW’s interpretation of IHL is even more obvious when we consider that HRW statements like “Civilians Must Not Be Used to Shield Homes Against Military Attacks” and “knowingly asking civilians to stand in harm’s way is unlawful” would proscribe many completely legitimate forms of nonviolent resistance in occupied peoples’ struggles. The Fourth Geneva Convention and its Additional Protocols were never intended to permit an aggressor to choose his targets at will, while putting the onus on the civilian victims to get out of the way. Nor were these laws created to prevent civilians from exercising their right to defend their property.

The condemnation of nonviolent efforts by civilians to prevent the destruction of civilian homes also represents a failure of moral judgment on the part of HRW. To condemn nonviolent actions in this way is to confuse civil resistance with the forcible use of “human shields” by military combatants, such as those documented by the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem in its November, 2002 report “Human Shield”. The report describes Israeli military seizures of Palestinian civilians, forcing them to walk in front of soldiers and sometimes placing them on the hoods of their vehicles to deter attacks against their military personnel. These Israeli military actions are clearly war crimes (though HRW failed to label them as such in its April, 2002 report, “In a Dark Hour: The Use of Civilians during IDF Arrest Operations”). It is a mistake to extend this principle to the courageous voluntary participation of unarmed individuals in mass nonviolent actions in defense of their human rights.

By condemning nonviolent civilian resistance in this way, HRW endangers those practicing it, and undermines the work of other human rights groups and the credibility of HRW itself. ISM calls upon HRW to retract its November 22 press release and to recognize the courage and the legitimacy of the actions of the Palestinian community in Jabalya.