Goldstone report biased and unfounded

October 26, 2009 — by Mira Chaykin and Ben Clement

Hamas fires a rocket from a school black top, aimed arbitrarily at Israel, with no regard for whether the target is a military or civilian location. The Israeli military pinpoints the origin of the attack and fires back. What does mother UN do? Issue a report equating to a slap on the wrist for Hamas and a belt to the behind for Israel.

The report, named after the lead investigator Richard Goldstone, accused both Israel and Hamas of committing crimes against humanity during Israel’s defense operations in Gaza last winter. These allegations are preposterous and 100 percent biased.

This myopic report fails to make a distinction between the aggressor and the defender. Israel suffered multiple rocket attacks on a daily basis for months on end before being forced to defend itself. It is important to define certain standards; namely, a terrorist act can be considered an aggressive attack in which violence is employed against innocent civilians.

Firing rockets filled with metal bearings and intricately designed to shatter into the greatest amount of shrapnel arbitrarily toward towns possessing no military installations certainly falls under the category of terrorism. Israel, despite suffering such attacks for an extended period of time, is reproached for defending itself. It is galling, to say the least, to sit and watch while the U.N. vilifies Israel’s rational impulse toward self-defense.

Many proponents of the report cite this report as an end to Israel’s immunity from international law. However, Israel has never been immune to international law, and is in fact, subject to far greater international pressure than any other country. The fact remains that Israel has suffered more terrorist attacks than any other nation. If the United States had suffered terrorist attacks as consistently and brutally as Israel has, the whip of retaliation, (if responses to Iraq and Afghanistan aggression are any indication) would have stung far greater than Israel’s display of defiance.

Colored by the opinions of righteous UN politicians, the report was skewed in an unpleasantly familiar angle—condemning the Israeli military for not sufficiently investigating targets before retaliating. Based on the circumstances, it was Israel’s prerogative to respond to the terrorist threat by whatever means they deemed necessary. Thus, reports of incomplete investigation fail to take into account Israel’s authority in the matter.

Additionally, it is ridiculous to diminish Israel’s humanity by calling their acts of defense into those of cruelty and barbarity. Instead, note that Israel’s strikes require the precise location of a target before firing, as well as coordinates obtained by a spotter on the ground or via satellite or UAV. Both methods allow for easy confirmation as to whether the target, at the time of retaliation, is a military or civilian target. Whether that is still true by the time the round impacts is not the fault of the Israeli military, but the fault of Hamas, who negligently endanger their own civilians.

The rockets Hamas fired into southern Israel, in contrast, possess no targeting devices. These cannot ensure that the intended target is indeed hit, but since Hamas terrorists tend to bulls-eye civilians anyways, their crude and inhuman methods of intimidation are self-serving in all directions. When Hamas wants to hit a military target, then they use rockets with targeting devices.

Armies today no longer fight conventional opponents. In this global economy, one nation cannot get away with waging war against another for fear of serious economic repercussions. Terrorists, however, are not bound by such restrictions, as they serve no constituency, and widely take advantage of this by practicing some of the most abominable tactics of warfare.

With the publication of this report, terrorists around the world can sleep more easily, comforted by the fact that regardless of how cruel their acts may be, they will not be condemned or held accountable by at least some in the international community.

3 views this week