“In Gaza” or…. “against” Gaza?

Collaborator, instead of worker, overweight and not fat, terminal illness and not advanced cancer, surgical intervention instead of operation. Four examples of common euphemisms. Definition: a “soft or decent expression of ideas whose straight and frank expression would be harsh and rude” (Royal Spanish Academy).

It is a great euphemism, therefore, with the recurrent - and imprecise - reference: “war in Gaza”. Perhaps the most notable recent example of a double euphemism, crude and dramatic. And -tacitly- condescending to the criminal by diluting the substantive framework and origin of mortality.

The Israeli military action is based on and would explain why it would be an action against Hamas and its terrorist actions. The “war against Hamas,” however, quickly turns out to be one against Gaza. The world watches helplessly in the face of a sustained and ostensible war against Gaza that has been going on for six months and in which the “casualties” of the Israeli action have basically been civilians who lived in Gaza.

With the mortality already caused by the Israeli attacks on Gaza and, as this newspaper reported last Wednesday the 10th, in addition, 6 out of 10 buildings in Gaza are destroyed or damaged. After six months of Israel's devastating and systematic military offensive, it is clear that this is “against” Gaza.

There are three fundamental issues in this that cannot be ignored. On the contrary, they must be highlighted. First, the humanitarian disaster produced in Gaza by the troops sent by Netanyahu. Second, the impotence of international organizations to stop barbarism. Third, the responsibilities of the countries that continue to supply Netanyahu with sophisticated weapons.

Military objective: the civilian population

The main deceased victims: civilians. All in the name of – or “under the pretext of” – Netanyahu and Israel's fight “against terrorism.” The fundamental objectives - and the deaths - have been civilians. For the world to see, Israel's forces have left 33,000 civilians in Gaza in the last six months. Of them, 70% were children.

None of this is an “exception” in the course of this war nor do they seem to be isolated “errors” given the systematic repetition of attacks on civilians. One of the most recent “targets”: the criminal attack on the humanitarian mission of the NGO World Central Kitchen (WCK), organized by chef José Andrés, founder of that NGO. As is known, WCK has requested a neutral investigation to clarify the causes of the Israeli attack that last Monday killed seven collaborators of its organization.

Israel has apologized for the murder of the seven collaborators but nothing is known about the in-depth investigation of responsibilities.

However, the backdrop - beyond the “WCK case” - remains the same: the majority of victims in this war against Gaza are civilians. And much of this has to do with operational strategies and tactical guidelines and not with “errors” or “collateral damage” that could have occurred.

System designed to kill civilians

Israeli journalist Yuval Abraham has made dramatic revelations about how killing civilians is a constant ingredient and “part of the agenda” of Israeli military action. Very serious. He also revealed how and why the Israeli military forces use artificial intelligence (AI), it serves them a lot in these times; and to attack objectives not only military.

According to what Abraham revealed, AI is fundamentally useful these days to detect the leaders of Hamas. That, let's say, would be legitimate. In Abraham's revelation it would serve to detect the “targets” in Hamas. And annihilate them. In the design they should be, mainly, low-ranking Hamas militants. Being more vulnerable than the heads, they would be the most common targets because they are “accessible.” But Yuval Abraham's revelation does not stop there.

In the course of detecting the “human” target selected by the AI, the system detects his house to blow it into pieces. The available AI tool also reports, according to Abraham's revelation, about the number of civilians that are - or will be - in that house. And, consequently, how many family members - including children - will die from bombs. In addition to the “objective”.

Civilians, then, as a military objective. While it may not be the case of an “intermediate” leader, the news reports that this week at least three children and three grandchildren of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh were killed by Israeli bombings in a refugee camp in Gaza.

Very sophisticated tools - or sordid? - that in their very design violate current international treaties on International Humanitarian Law. For example, article 51 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions: “51.2 Neither the civilian population as such nor individual civilians shall be the object of attack.”

That the big ones let the systematic confrontation of this principle continue with impunity, using military equipment from two big ones (the United States or Germany), isn't it endorsing that action? Undoubtedly yes, by letting it continue.

Netanyahu against the world

At this point in time and after so many months of horror, rigorous decisions and pronouncements are proliferating in the international system aimed at stopping the horrors in the war against Gaza. But Israel ignores them, it puts itself “in profile.” And without their main international allies they "adjust" their policies or the modality of their articulation with Israel.

Various decisions and reports of the international community should have led Israel to end its logic and policy of aggression against Gaza. It hasn't been like that. Four examples:

One: Security Council. Nothing changes in Gaza after the Council agreed to demand an immediate ceasefire and the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages. In subsequent statements, UN Secretary General António Guterres said that not implementing the resolution would be “unforgivable.”

Decision of the Council that, of course, is mandatory as established in art. 25 of the UN Charter. Zero compliance to date, special responsibility of permanent members.

Two: the International Court of Justice, in response to the case presented by South Africa on the alleged genocide that Israel was committing in Gaza, issued a ruling in which it warned of the existence of a real danger of genocide. Nothing happened afterward.

Three: the UN Human Rights Council. Nor does anything change after two recent forceful reports and decisions adopted within the UN Human Rights Council. Two examples:

a) On April 5, it approved a strong resolution that condemns, among other abuses, “the practice of starving the civilian population as a method of war in Gaza.” The resolution was approved with 28 votes in favor, with 6 votes against, among them from countries that supply weapons to Israel such as Germany and the United States, calling for an end to the transfer of weapons to Israel “in order to avoid new violations of the International human right".

b) The report presented to the Council by Francesca Albanese (April), Rapporteur on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories. During the session before the Council she forcefully reported that there are “reasonable grounds” to believe that the threshold indicating the commission of the crime of genocide against the Palestinians as a group in Gaza has been reached.

He referred to precise aspects about three acts - which he described as genocide - that Israel had committed. And whose intention would have been “to cause serious physical or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group living conditions calculated to bring about its total or partial physical destruction; impose measures aimed at preventing births within the group.” There are plenty of comments.

The expert did not fall short. She stressed that “a minority of powerful Member States”, instead of stopping its momentum, “has provided military, economic and political support to the atrocity, aggravating the devastation it has caused in the Palestinians.” She concluded by asking for something core:

arms embargo

In this context, Albanese called on Member States to fulfill their obligations and impose an arms embargo and sanctions on Israel. Core point that refers, particularly, to the two main suppliers of military equipment to Israel: the United States and Germany.

Looking at the full picture - or “the movie” - at this point it is clear that only concrete steps aimed at, for example, cutting off the supply of weapons will be able to change the course of things. And that only in the course of this could conditions be found for compliance with the ceasefire agreed upon in the Security Council. Adequate framework for better conditions for peace and for the international community to pressure for the implementation of the Security Council resolution on ceasefire.

If the unstoppable supply of weapons and military equipment to Israel by the supplying countries does not stop and efforts are not intensified for Hamas and other armed groups to release all the hostages, within a few weeks, the situation will be much worse and There will be several thousand more deaths to mourn.

There are growing voices in the world calling for a suspension of the supply of weapons to Israel. Which now include dozens of US congressmen - who have already addressed President Biden - and even Nancy Pelosi, former speaker of the House of Representatives. All of these voices agree that providing Netanyahu with tools for more death and destruction must now stop.

And President Biden?

According to the New York Times, in his telephone conversation with Netanyahu, Biden would have told the Israeli that the weapons provision policy would change if Israel does not take action to protect civilians and aid personnel. Biden has the legal power to limit the delivery of weapons abroad, including those that have been previously approved by Congress.

Background: former senior Obama officials, such as former international policy advisor Ben Rhodes, have said publicly - as a "complaint" - that "the United States government continues to supply 1,000 kilo bombs and ammunition to support Israeli policy ”. This week, however, Lloyd Austin, head of the Pentagon, stated in the Senate that “there is no evidence of genocide” in Gaza.

In short, “genocide” or not: no less than 33,482 Palestinians dead and 76,049 wounded. All because of Israel's attacks since October 7, basically with military equipment provided by the US.

There is, therefore, a serious responsibility, which belongs to the US government, so the “ball” is in Biden's court. Very clear. It is up to Israeli society, for its part, in which there are many democratic and good-willed people and institutions, to adopt the steps and internal social mobilization that are necessary so that Netanyahu does not continue leading his country to this incessant - and growing - situation. war against the world.”

_