Israel and hezbollah after the exploding pagers

[Gramsci]

The 2020 explosion killed 218 and injured over 7000 none of whom could be classed as combatants and few if any have been in Hezbollah. Total deaths from the Israeli attacks so far seem to be about 100 including a substantial number of Hezbollah members and around 3,000 injured.

Are civilian casualties are ok by you?

This kind of attack by a State on another State is fine?

 

[Gramsci]

Lebanon: Establish international investigation into deadly attacks using exploding portable devices

An international investigation must be established to hold perpetrators of the simultaneous mass explosions targeting electronic devices across Lebanon and Syria, which injured more than 2,931 people and killed at least 37, including at least four civilians, accountable, said Amnesty...

www.amnesty.org

An international investigation must be established to hold perpetrators of the simultaneous mass explosions targeting electronic devices across Lebanon and Syria, which injured more than 2,931 people and killed at least 37, including at least four civilians, accountable, said Amnesty International ahead of a UN Security Council meeting today to discuss the explosions.

the attacks were carried out indiscriminately, would be unlawful under international humanitarian law and should be investigated as war crimes. The attacks also violated at a minimum the right to life under international human rights law, which continues to apply in situations of armed conflict, and likely other human rights, depending on the various impacts of the attack on the Lebanese population and their daily lives.

I doubt this will happen.

Unless UN steps in and does an investigation.

An investigation is worth doing even if only to stop other states and Israel doing this kind of attack in the future.

 

[tim]

Are civilian casualties are ok by you?

This kind of attack by a State on another State is fine?

I was pointing out that what you were "hearing" didn't seem to be accurate given the statistics released by the Lebanese. I don't see how indicates that I support the murder of civillians or attacks by the Israelis. I think you should check facts before posting rumours and not react with innuendo when challenged about your posts.

 

[Gramsci]

I was pointing out that what you were "hearing" didn't seem to be accurate given the statistics released by the Lebanese. I don't see how indicates that I support the murder of civillians or attacks by the Israelis. I think you should check facts before posting rumours and not react with innuendo when challenged about your posts.

It's not how you phrased the your post.

You didn't simply give figures.

To me reading the way you phrased the post was unclear.

Thanks for clearing that up and that you don't support these attacks.

 

[Gramsci]

Were the Israeli Pager and Walkie-Talkie Attacks on Hezbollah Indiscriminate?

There is much that we still don’t know about the attacks that Israel has conducted against Hezbollah in Lebanon by detonating hundreds of pagers and walkie-talkies rigged with explosives. This type of attack is genuinely unprecedented – I can’t recall any sufficiently close analogue, but maybe...

www.ejiltalk.org

Loading…

lieber.westpoint.edu

Had a read of these two article on international law and pager attack

Both are making clear these are preliminary views. The assumption that it was attack by a state- Israel. Which is signed up to some international agreements on war.

Both seem to say what is termed a NIAC - non international armed conflict targeting Hezbollah fighters is allowed.

That armed conflict is taking place.

There are three issues in summary

1. This attack has little precedent. Is use of pagers lawfull?


The article by Boothby says these pagers count as booby traps are not not legal weapons to use.

He uses this to say they are unlawful.

Key prohibitions with regard to the use of booby-traps are to be found in Article 7, paragraph 2, which stipulates as follows: “It is prohibited to use booby-traps or other devices in the form of apparently harmless portable objects which are specifically designed and constructed to contain explosive material

And he says:

The pager is being adapted to convert it into a booby-trap of the sort addressed by Article 7(2) of Amended Protocol II and on that basis it would appear, considering what is currently known and assumed, to be an unlawful weapon.

2. Was care taken to ensure targets were military?

Boothby make point that this is not about what happened but what were the intentions and planning of those involved.

A distinction must be made between military and non military personnel. Hezbollah like Hamas is both a military and non military organisation. So targeting must be of military only.

There is argument within law about this. When a person counts as a combatant and when not. Particularly in a conflict such as this when at some point a member may have taken military action and at later time political non military role. These non state organisations cover both.

The first article by Milanovic says in summary:

In sum, from what we know today these attacks were most likely indiscriminate, that is, they failed to distinguish between Hezbollah fighters and civilians. This is, to my mind, a more important question than IHL proportionality. If Israel detonated the devices on the basis that all Hezbollah members are targetable, this would clearly be an indiscriminate attack. If, by contrast, Israel targeted only members of Hezbollah’s military wing, the attacks could potentially comply with distinction. But Israel would either have to have had reliable intelligence that virtually all individuals who had these devices were members of Hezbollah’s military wing, or would have had to do some kind of individualized targeting analysis for each person affected

3, Proportionality - Civilian casualties

The bombs were in pagers to close to the object of the attack. So in that case it could be proportional. However the planners of attack , looking at what happened , would not have been able to predict the circumstances of the triggering of devices.

So Boothby says

The targeting law concern will be more likely to centre on whether adequate consideration was given to the incidental injury and damage to be expected from these explosions, given, as is assumed to be the case, that those planning and conducting the operation cannot have known the circumstances that would pertain where each of the large number of explosions took place.

I take that to read that those planning the attack should be able to show that they have taken into consideration civilian casualties. And it looks like this was not possible given what happened.

Milanovic says:

But we don’t yet know the ratio of fighters to civilians among those who were harmed. This is important for understanding whether the operation complied with distinction. Second, it would be crucial to know how many civilian bystanders were harmed, and to what extent, from an exploding device in someone else’s possession. This is important for understanding whether the operation complied with proportionality.

Boothby is more sympathetic to the pagers being in possession of Hezbollah military wing.

So its not all clear cut. And this extraordinary attack needs investigation if only to further clarify international law and what is and was is not allowed.

The main issues seems to be that this is weapon material hidden in a common device. Which is then detonated in public place that is not part of known war zone. A place where civilians thought they were safe.

Confusingly Israel is signed up to some international agreements on how to conduct a war but not all.

 

[Gramsci]

Just to be clear about my above post.

Looks to me that those who know about International law and war see this action by Israel as at least questionable.

Israel is a state actor. Not an insurgent group.

In the past Israel has been forthright in defending its actions.

In this case its neither denying it or saying it did it.

Which leads me to think it knows its on shaky ground.

I'm not keen on seeing Israel as a rogue state.

It sees itself as part of the democratic West at the frontline of defending Western values.

It regularly defends its actions in the international arena

In this case it has avoided any justification or public repudiation.

The fact that western governments have had muted response on this speaks volumes.

If Hamas or Hezbollah had planned and executed an attack like this on Israel western governments would have been falling over themselves to condemn this as terrorism.

 

[Gramsci]

Another thing.

Looking at this attack by Israel and Im thinking the "left" or "extreme left" and its supposed obsession with Israel isn't the problem

Given the flagrant ways Israel just sticks two fingers up at international law. Ignores its allies whilst expecting support. Arguing its a democratic western state makes me think its supposed centrist supporters ( Biden, Lammy and Starmer ) are the problem. It's them who obsessed with Israel. With our Secretary of Foreign Affairs saying he is a Zionist. As part of a statement on government website. So not a off the cuff remark.

If my country stopped supporting Israel Id be quite happy not going on demos and emailing my MP. And doing other things in my life.

The obsession , despite what Israel does , by those who like to think they are sensible centrists is the problem.

 

[_Russ_]

This morning a US statement that it would do everything it could to prevent escalation

Oh so it's going to stop shipping over the hardware required to the conflict?....thought not

 

[teqniq]

Pretty definitive from a former CIA director:

 

[_Russ_]

"former"...... counts more than the drivel we post here but certainly not definitive

 

[nino_savatte]

It's not really indiscriminate unless Hezbollah were giving pagers away. If they had boobytrapped food or medical supplies or phones anyone could buy in a shop yeah you would have violated Geneva conventions
Boobytrapping enemy communication devices purchased by the enemy and given out to members of the enemy organisation. Probably hard to get any more discrimination than that.
Or escalating as they were already fighting.

Au contraire. When it kills non-combatants and civilians, some of whom were children, it's indiscriminate.

It's also an escalation on the part of Israel. Soz.

 

[Dystopiary]

Lebanese health ministry say over 100 people have been killed by Israeli airstrikes, and more than 400 have been injured.

Residents of south Lebanon have begun fleeing north in a renewed wave of displacement as Israeli warplanes pound wide-swathes of the country’s south.

The Israeli aerial assault is the most intense yet, killing over 100 people and wounding over 400 more, including women, children and paramedics, the Lebanese Health Ministry said on Monday.

Roads leading out of south Lebanon were choked with traffic as people fled the Israeli bombing. Areas that have served as safe zones for the displaced since last year have now found themselves within the crosshairs of the Israeli military.

link (Guardian)

 

[Pickman's model]

Au contraire. When it kills non-combatants and civilians, some of whom were children, it's indiscriminate.

It's also an escalation on the part of Israel. Soz.

the zionists don't like to discriminate

 

[Wkdloz]

"former"...... counts more than the drivel we post here but certainly not definitive

Like many terrorist organisations they're still not owning up to it - should have heard the Israeli ambassador this morning dodging questions about it.

 

[dylanredefined]

Sure there's a plan b and probably a plan c

I doubt it is an out-of-the-blue attack they also bombed a meeting of commanders. So it's going to take Hezbollah a while to retaliate if ever.

Au contraire. When it kills non-combatants and civilians, some of whom were children, it's indiscriminate.

It's also an escalation on the part of Israel. Soz.

It killed some civilians indiscriminate would be carpet bombing. This was targeted with some collateral damage.

 

[Pickman's model]

I doubt it is an out-of-the-blue attack they also bombed a meeting of commanders. So it's going to take Hezbollah a while to retaliate if ever.

It killed some civilians indiscriminate would be carpet bombing. This was targeted with some collateral damage.

Yeh you say that but given the way in which the zionists have killed people in leadership positions for decades it's imo likely that the decapitation of organisations has been anticipated and provision made for greater lower level autonomy under such conditions

 

[Knotted]

I agree with you re recent events, the exploding pagers, exploding walkie-talkies, airstrike on Hezbollah leader in southern Beirut - these attacks are all clearly an escalation on the part of Israel.

But what I suspect the media narrative is all about, when they ask if it will lead to an escalation, reading between the lines, is Israeli incursion into southern Lebanon, boots on the ground. I think that's probably loosely what they mean by 'escalation'.

I heard on the radio that there's effectively a buffer zone in the north of Israeli, south of the Lebanese border, where 60,000 Israeli homes are currently vacant, having been evacuated at some point.

It would probably help Netanyahu, on one level, if he can help those displaced Israelis return home. To which end, it would probably be preferable to Netanyahu if that buffer zone from Hezbollah rockets is on the Lebanese side of the border.

Although, of course, it will also be politically damaging to Netanyahu. At home and abroad.

But perhaps Netanyahu's willing to take that risk, at least for now, emboldened by the West's and wider international community's failures to halt the genocide in Gaza, he's possibly thinking he has a window of opportunity for an incursion into Lebanon. He's laying the ground for it by weakening Hezbollah's leadership and networks.

He's trying the patience of the UN, and world leaders, he's pushing their political will and boundaries, and he's going to literally push geographical boundaries in the process.

Expect a Lebanese landgrab, he's done it in Gaza - does anyone here really expect the Israeli troops will withdraw and the previous boundaries will remain the same?

Everyone's seen that series of maps, right? The ones that show the receding land that make up Gaza and the West Bank since 1948?

It's a geographical 'death by a thousand cuts'.

Fwiw I doubt very much the Israelis are interested in a land grab in Lebanon. Beyond creating a buffer zone that is

 

[Gramsci]

It killed some civilians indiscriminate would be carpet bombing. This was targeted with some collateral damage.

I've posted up on this

Post in thread 'Israel and hezbollah after the exploding pagers' Israel and hezbollah after the exploding pagers

I don't think you are correct on this.

 

[Spymaster]

I've posted up on this

You're only posting people's opinions.

 

[yield]

Fwiw I doubt very much the Israelis are interested in a land grab in Lebanon. Beyond creating a buffer zone that is

How big a buffer zone would Israel need if the Houthis are able to fire missiles at them from Yemen?

 

[Gramsci]

You're only posting people's opinions.

I was pulled up for not fact checking earlier on this thread.

So decided instead to look at what experts say on topic of legality of the pager attack. Read the articles and posted up the summary of them.

So no I'm not just posting up peoples opinions. I'm reading up and posting up info that may or may not be of interest to other posters here.

But to dismiss it as just posting peoples opinions is just a bit off to be frank,

And to add one of the reasons I do try to read up and then post is due to posters like you.

I know if I make one slip its going to taken apart.

 

[tim]

Fwiw I doubt very much the Israelis are interested in a land grab in Lebanon. Beyond creating a buffer zone that is

The South of Lebanon was controlled by the Israeli proxy militia the South Lebanese Army and then under direct Israeli control from the late 1970s to 2000. It wasn't a great success.I can't imagine even Netanyahu would be desperate to repeat them experience.

 

[Spymaster]

I was pulled up for not fact checking earlier on this thread.

So decided instead to look at what experts say on topic of legality of the pager attack. Read the articles and posted up the summary of them.

So no I'm not just posting up peoples opinions. I'm reading up and posting up info that may or may not be of interest to other posters here.

But to dismiss it as just posting peoples opinions is just a bit off to be frank,

And to add one of the reasons I do try to read up and then post is due to posters like you.

I know if I make one slip its going to taken apart.

But you're still posting opinion. You do this a lot (not just you, tbf). Find someone who's written something you agree with, then post it up as if it's proof that you are correct, when their views are no less debatable than your own.

 

[kebabking]

The Gaza would suggest - to me - that Netenyahu isn't interested in bufferzones.

And, to be fair, bufferzones haven't been particularly effective - simple geography is set against them. A buffer zone that you can mortar across isn't a buffer zone, and Israel/Palestine/Lebanon simply isn't big enough to host buffer zones that would be effective - and I'm talking about 500km bufferzones, like between Israel and Iran.

Netenyahu - and not without his own selfish, political and personal motivations - is going for something between outright destruction of the enemy, and degradation to the point where they can no longer pose a serious threat to Israel, with the threat of a great more of the same if they try again.

 

[agricola]

The Gaza would suggest - to me - that Netenyahu isn't interested in bufferzones.

And, to be fair, bufferzones haven't been particularly effective - simple geography is set against them. A buffer zone that you can mortar across isn't a buffer zone, and Israel/Palestine/Lebanon simply isn't big enough to host buffer zones that would be effective - and I'm talking about 500km bufferzones, like between Israel and Iran.

Netenyahu - and not without his own selfish, political and personal motivations - is going for something between outright destruction of the enemy, and degradation to the point where they can no longer pose a serious threat to Israel, with the threat of a great more of the same if they try again.

TBF I think that misreads Netanyahu a bit - what he needs is a permanent crisis, so a capable Hamas / Hezbollah (and even an enraged region) is more useful to him, arguably more so even than an absolute victory would be. Obviously the danger for him (and Israel itself) is that the idea is obviously crazy and relies on either the US remaining the dominant power on Earth or them getting support on a similar scale from whoever supplants the US.

As for buffer-zones, the Israeli state has usually tried to create them on "enemy" territory rather than that of Israel proper. I think going into Southern Lebanon (at least) is something they will end up trying, as is that horrifying scheme that is in the Israeli press about clearing Northern Gaza. If they were serious about protecting Israeli citizens they'd have them within Israel proper, but them doing that is apparently a justification for war or something.

 

[Petcha]

My former flatmate's friend's ranch has been blown up by the Israelis in the south apparently. He's booked fucking tickets to go back, something I think is not such a good idea considering how hard he has worked here in the UK to make a new life for himself and his wife. But he's pretty pissed off. To put it lightly. Lebanon is a wonderful place. Fuck you Israel, just.. fuck you.

 

[Gramsci]

But you're still posting opinion. You do this a lot (not just you, tbf). Find someone who's written something you agree with, then post it up as if it's proof that you are correct, when their views are no less debatable than your own.

As it happens I wasn't clear about the legality or not of the pager attack. I had posted up my views

As I had been taken to task for not fact checking I decided to do it on the pager attack.

So went out to find sources that might shed some light on the matter.

What the people whose articles I posted up views on Palestine/ Israel in the case your taking issue with I'm not aware of.

They are both experts on international law and war.

So no I was not trying to find something I agree with.

So this is one of your other lines of attack on a poster.

Previously I've had abuse from you. But then that's standard from you.

That didn't work so now your trying to discredit me as a poster because I educate myself on some topics.

 

[Spymaster]

As it happens I wasn't clear about the legality or not of the pager attack. I had posted up my views

As I had been taken to task for not fact checking I decided to do it on the pager attack.

So went out to find sources that might shed some light on the matter.

What the people whose articles I posted up views on Palestine/ Israel in the case your taking issue with I'm not aware of.

They are both experts on international law and war.

So no I was not trying to find something I agree with.

So this is one of your other lines of attack on a poster.

Previously I've had abuse from you. But then that's standard from you.

That didn't work so now your trying to discredit me as a poster because I educate myself on some topics.

Well I'm certainly disagreeing with you (specifically the way you present your arguments). If you want to consider that an attack then fair enough, whatever, etc; but what you're arguing here is discriminate v indiscriminate, which is subjective in this case and therefore opinion based. How difficult do you think it would be to find some "experts" who disagree with yours?

 

[agricola]

Death toll up to 492 now, according to the Lebanese Health Ministry. Nearly 1700 injured as well.

 

[Gramsci]

Well I'm certainly disagreeing with you (specifically the way you present your arguments). If you want to consider that an attack then fair enough, whatever, etc; but what you're arguing here is discriminate v indiscriminate, which is subjective in this case and therefore opinion based. How difficult do you think it would be to find some "experts" who disagree with yours?

No its not subjective. Its based on reading of international law as a case to answer.

Of course if Israel wants to acknowledge the attack and puts its justifications in public domain we would all be the wiser I assume.

It's arguing its bombing of Gaza is within international law.

It also argues that there is no legal basis to say its occupying West Bank.

But as Israel it seems is neither going to deny or say it did the attack I haven't seen others defend it within international law.