Many anti-Israel commentators insist that Israel is to be condemned because it is inflicting a “disproportionate” number of casualties on Hamas and the people of Gaza. Some seem to think the principle of proportionality means that Israel is entitled to kill and wound only the number of casualties it suffered — that is, 1,400 civilians killed, 4,229 wounded, and 241 hostages kidnapped. What does that mean? Can Israel kill exactly 1,400 Gazan civilians but no more? Can it rape and torture some of them — just as many as Hamas raped and tortured? Does Israel have a right to kidnap and hold hostage 241 Gazan civilians? Is Israel in the wrong because “only” 1,400 Israelis, mostly civilians, were killed, whereas Hamas claims that 10,000 Gazans, whom Hamas assures us are mostly civilians (we have reason to believe otherwise), have died and therefore, ipso facto, Israel is in the wrong and must be condemned? Much of the world now seems to think so.
An Israeli expert on the law of war has written a short guide on the definition of “proportionality” in the law of war that is included in an article by Dr. Eado Hecht that can be found here.
Proportionality:
One of the topics that many anti-Israel commentators focus on is the principle of “proportionality” in international law. Supposedly, because Hamas killed “only” 1,400 Israelis, Israel’s response, which resulted in far more deaths, is disproportional.
This is a distortion of that legal concept. Proportionality in international law does not mean that if someone slaps my face I am only allowed to respond by slapping his. It means that my action must be proportionate to the need to prevent that person from slapping me again. If a counter-slap is sufficient, then that is proportionate. If kicking him is required because a slap won’t stop him from doing it again, then that is proportionate.
The following was written for me [Dr. Eado Hecht] by a legal expert:
Israel’s right to self-defense under international law following the attack by Hamas on October 7 is beyond question, but many take a mistaken view of the limits placed on that right by the principle of proportionality in the international law of armed conflict.
Proportionality in this context does not mean, as many suppose, that defensive military action must be limited so as to cause “only” proportionate harm to the enemy. Thus, the number of casualties or the damage caused to non-military targets is not in itself an indication of disproportionality.
What the principle does require is that the military action, when targeting a particular military target, should not proceed if the information available indicates that the probable collateral damage to civilians and non-military targets would be excessive in relation to the military advantage expected from the military action.
This is therefore a more nuanced and fact-sensitive equation than is commonly understood.
Thus, for example, the warnings to residents in Gaza to remove themselves to the south are highly relevant given the need and legal right to target and destroy Hamas assets which have been embedded in residential and civilian environments.
Application of the correct definition of proportionality in international law is therefore of the utmost importance in assessing the legality, and indeed the morality, of current Israeli military action and any further action that is undertaken in the future.
Israel will continue to inflict casualties on Hamas, and will try, but knows it cannot always and everywhere succeed, to minimize the number of civilian casualties. Like the person who is slapped and is allowed to inflict as much pain on the slapper as is necessary to keep him from repeating that slap, Israel has determined that it can only prevent a repeat of the pain inflicted on its innocent civilians — torture, rapes, beheadings — on October 7 by crushing Hamas as a military power. Israel can urge, but cannot force, Gazan civilians to move away from what is now the most dangerous area in Gaza, in the north around Gaza City. It did drop 1.5 million leaflets imploring civilians in the north to leave. Israel also warns civilians away from sites about to be targeted, even if this allows Hamas combatants to escape; it performs this task through messaging, telephoning, and the “knock-in-the-roof” technique. But the IDF has no way of ensuring that those Gazans will act on its warnings. The fact that Israel has carried out attacks — mostly airstrikes — on 12,000 targets, and according to Hamas 10,000 Gazans have been killed (Hamas wants us to think they were mainly civilians, but the IDF believes that a majority were combatants), means that on average, fewer than one person has been killed in each of those Israeli strikes — an unheard-of feat of minimizing civilian casualties.
Keep all this in mind, the next time you hear someone claim that Israel has been “disproportionate” in its response, and instead of becoming flustered, soberly supply the legal definition of “proportionality” in war.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Excellent questions!
Hoi Polloi says
Yes, that is the issue, and they’re clearly enamored of developing their own expressions and definitions without regard to just how heinous the idea is. Who now counts the victims, or assesses the physical damage done to them? Is there a formula that allows the target to retaliate by barbecueing a half each of two separate babies or gang rape each woman two fewer times and thereby spread the victim’s count among more men? How are people selected to perform this retaliatory islamic savagery when they’re not islamic? Must they be trained?
This savagery of Hamas will never merit discussion of what they did in any proportionate, rational sense. Anyone who speaks this way should go live in a cave and die in shame. Sorry; it’s just so appalling.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
+10
Hoi Polloi says
Ta.
CogitoErgoSum says
Hamas (and the people of Gaza who put Hamas in control of their government) do not consider anyone to be a civilian. Their army consists of every man, woman and child in Gaza (actually every Muslim in the world). Their enemy is every man, woman and child in Israel (actually every Infidel in the world). To win a war with people who think this way requires going all out. They have proven they will not show any mercy toward their enemy. Complete and total victory over them without giving them any mercy is the only way to defeat them. It’s not the way any civilized person would prefer to do it but sometimes it’s the only way stop even worse from happening in the future. Truly, it’s something they force upon us.
tim gallagher says
I agree, CogitoErgoSum. When fighting against completely barbaric scum of the earth such as hamas, who plant themselves right in the middle of civilians, it is impossible to fight them in some civilised way. As you say, the scum from hamas, and I’d say that almost every Gazan backs hamas, force this type of warfare on the Israelis. Huge numbers of other evil scum around the world, the Muslims and the left wing fascist scum, back hamas and its completely barbaric ways. I find them loathsome people. “Proportionality”. What a load of absolute bullshit.
Raghu says
What a skwed thinking on the part savages & their supporters? Tragedy is the so-called civilized & intelligents falling for such stupidities . Have these people selfish to garner the riches these ” savages in human form”. What these stupid forget is they will otbe alive to enjoy the bounty.
Hoi Polloi says
‘Proportionality’ In War,’ and Restorative Justice must come from the same diseased minds. There is no rational basis for asking a victim to do what Restorative Justice asks, nor any real promise of restoration. Likewise these individuals trying to turn Hamas’ demonic behavior back onto Israel by allowing Hamas to set the standard for war. Start a war, get a war.
Paul says
Proportionality is being confused with symmetric
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Maybe, but symmetric would mean what Hugh asked above: Israel would have to send terrorists (which they don’t have, notwithstanding the squad’s description of the IDF) into Gaza to rape & behead Palestinian women & infants. Can these cretins guarantee that they would not condemn Israel were that to hypothetically happen?
Alena says
And even it happens, in my view, the proportionality must be achieved by attacking every time to achieve the exact numbers. If the exact numbers are not met, then that should be considered as a failed attempt, so a fresh attempt should be made to match the numbers. Hence we could wait in patience to achieve Statistics match, and that would be the rule of proportions in my view.
Jerry says
Since the majority of Gaza residents are Hamas or Hamas supporters, and since Hamas goal is to eliminate Israel and all Jews, then the majority of Gazans should be eliminated. That is a proportionate response.
Trouble is, 99% of Gazans are Islamic, and Muslims are urged to lie to protect themselves or Islam.
Reziac says
Proportionality: Beat the living crap out of whoever attacked you, until they slink away too cowed to ever consider doing it again.
Because otherwise, it WILL happen again.
Omer Causey says
The concept of proportionality is not consistent with the accepted military tactic of using overwhelming force to defeat an enemy.
The on-the-ground rules of war are set by the victors. The tiny nation of Israel doesn’t have the luxury of playing under rules set by theoreticians focusing on the “rights” of the vanquished.
When I was growing up, I was taught not to back away from a bully who had a size advantage. Just pick up a big board and lean in. That advice has always stood me in good stead.
“Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.”
Tiredof stupid says
I believe proportionality should work the attack killed 1/10 of 1 percent of jews worldwide so the proportionality should be 1.6 million muslims killed, 4.3 million wounded and 240,000 kidnapped and raped. After all it’s proportional isn’t it?
marc says
I am allowing this post, as I assume you mean this sarcastically, best to end such a post with /s to make that clear.