Broadcasting anti-IDF propaganda
Must Israel be constrained by moral, strategic and political considerations when confronted by an enemy that deliberately strikes civilians in the most brutal way?
The article discusses Israel's military doctrine of "self-restraint" (havlagah), first adopted by the Haganah in the 1930s, which opposed punishing innocent civilians for acts of guerrilla forces on moral, strategic, and political grounds. It questions whether Israel has maintained this policy in its conflict with Hamas following the October 7 massacre. Critics argue Israel has abandoned havlagah for recklessness, citing high civilian casualties in Gaza. However, the author contends that war is not judged solely by civilian deaths, emphasizing the importance of military objectives, target legitimacy, anticipated civilian harm, and precautions taken. The article highlights that Israel has shown significant restraint, often aborting missions if civilians are at risk and warning residents to evacuate, despite increased danger to its own forces. It criticizes media for propagating Hamas-invented casualty figures and for ignoring Hamas's deliberate use of civilians as human shields. The piece also refutes claims from the film "NAZA" about Israel's use of AI for targeting without regard for civilian lives, clarifying that humans make final targeting decisions. Ultimately, the author argues that while mistakes should be investigated, Israel's commitment to distinguishing between combatants and civilians remains, even when facing an enemy that deliberately targets civilians and seeks to maximize casualties for propaganda.
© All rights to the original article belong to the source. Din Online shows a headline, an excerpt and a link only. The objectivity rating is computed automatically and is an estimate only.
Discussion
No comments yet — be the first to comment.