Finally, it is relevant to state that it has been hard to collect information, data and statistics for this report. A huge amount of sources have been used, including Israeli sources. But the disinformation on both sides has made the process of collecting information difficult. Some Palestinian human rights organizations and other NGOs, PA municipalities, Israeli and Palestinian media, and the Israeli Defense Ministry and the Israeli military spokesperson's office have issued inaccurate reports and sometimes deliberately false information as to the various incidents of violence throughout the Occupied territories.

Return to the Table of Contents

Firstly, there are some actions that do not have any military value at all and are therefore simply prohibited. For example, sadistic acts of cruelty, pillage and other private rampages by soldiers which, far from helping the military purpose of the army, tend to undermine professional disciplined behavior. In this respect, it is worth questioning the ongoing destruction of Palestinian agricultural land and theft of fruit and vegetables from occupied territory, which will be discussed in Chapter 3.

Return to the Table of Contents

c. Collective Punishment and Reprisals

Return to the Table of Contents

d. United Nations Resolutions

40 mm shells have been fired from grenade launchers underneath the M-16 rifle (M203). This is not a particular accurately weapon, but has been widely used against housing. See below for more details.

The Israeli Merkava tanks have as a main armament the 105 mm or 120 mm canons. The tank cannons fire FSDS dart rounds (an armored piercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot round), HESH (High Explosive Squash Head) rounds or HE (High Explosive) rounds. It has been used in the Bethlehem area, Rafah, Jericho, Khan Yunis, Ramallah, Nablus and Tulkarem. In Jericho, dozens of Tungsten Carbide FSDS round s have destroyed the Casino. This is a very heavy metal armor piercing ammunition, and can be dangerous to human beings if vaporized.

Further, old technology TOW rockets (TOW M114) have been used against Ramallah, Beit Jala, Nablus and Gaza, fired from armored personnel carriers.

Indirect fire weapons include artillery units equipped with either field guns (howitzers), or heavy mortars. Artillery is that part of an army that controls the bigger, long range weapons, formerly referred to as cannons. In battle, the artillery's role is to provide fire support for the infantry, cavalry, armor and other units. The projectile, rocket, missile, and bomb are the weapons of indirect-fire systems. Indirect fire can cause casualties to troops, inhibit mobility, suppress or neutralize weapon systems, damage equipment and installations, and demoralize the enemy. Historically, more combat deaths have been caused by indirect fire weapons than by any other means, hence the designation of artillery as the King of Battle.¹⁴ The Israeli army have denied the use of Mortars. But mortar carrier shells ranging from 40 mm to 90 mm have been found in several Palestinian cities. We have also found shrapnel from indirect high explosive artillery shells.

Return to the Table of Contents

b. Shelling of Civilian Homes and Infrastructure

The 5 500 residents of the camp have lived under heavy shelling since the outbreak of the intifada from Israeli army posts outside the Vered Yeriho settlement – south of the refugee camp. Most of the houses facing the Israeli military post had bullet holes made by 5,56 mm, 7,62 mm and the 12,7 mm “concrete buster” bullets. Several houses have been hit with more than 20 rounds. 40 mm grenades were found in the house of Zuhdi and Abdallah Khatib, together with shrapnel from 90 mm Mortar carrier shells and shrapnel from artillery. They have dug a bomb shelter in the garden to hide from the shelling at night. Several 120 mm tank dart rounds that have gone through 20-30 walls and exited on the other side of the building have destroyed the Casino in Jericho.

The shelling took place at night, and people were afraid to sleep there. They never know which side of the camp will be hit next, as the Israeli fire have been directed at all parts of the camp. The Israeli army's fire has sometimes been in response to Palestinian fire, but on other occasions the army has initiated attacks. In general, Israeli gunfire or tank rounds have targeted civilian houses regardless of the location of the Palestinian machinegun fire. Also, Israeli gunfire has continued after the Palestinian gunmen left the area. This strongly suggests indiscriminate firing by the Israeli army. The children in the camp could not sleep, thus schools started later in the day than usual. People of the camp went to sleep by the roadside or outside buildings closer to the center of Jericho, because any movement in the camp at night could trigger Israeli fire. People were also afraid of an event where the settlers would come to the camp, as they have no defense. They called upon the United Nations to protect them.

The main types of damage observed were destroyed walls, windows, doors, water tanks, electricity, furniture, and agricultural land. In one attack 15 000 chickens were killed when an Israeli shell hit the water tanks on a farm, drowning the chickens.

The settlement of Vered Yeriho is situated some 200 meters above the refugee camp. Below the settlement lies an Israeli military post. Palestinian machineguns are fired at random at the settlement. PHRMG was not allowed to enter Vered Yeriho to review the damages done by Palestinian gunfire.

The main area of clashes has been around Rachel's Tomb, were the Israeli army have deployed soldiers to give Jews easier access to the holy site. This military post is placed close to the center of Bethlehem, with the nearest Palestinian refugee camp located 200 meters away.

The areas targeted by Israeli shelling are mostly Aida and al-Azza (Beit Jibrin) refugee camps, Bethlehem city, along with the western villages of Houssan and Nahalin. The southern village of al-Khader has also sustained considerable damage. The villages of Beit Jala and Beit Sahour will be analyzed separately. Again, the main type of weapons have been light and medium machine guns, together with 30 mm shells from attack helicopters, tank rounds, grenades and TOW rockets.

The small Christian village of Beit Jala outside Bethlehem suffered from Israeli shelling almost every night from early October. It was bombarded by the Israeli army from locations at the Gilo settlement opposite to Beit Jala. The total number of shelled civilian homes and public buildings in Beit Jala is to this date 438, three people have been killed and 300 injured in the shelling.¹⁸

The official Israeli position is that Palestinian gunfire targeting the Gilo settlement from private houses in Beit Jala has triggered the Israeli army's extensive use of tank rounds, grenade launchers, 20 mm and 30 mm canon fire from helicopter gun ships and machinegun fire against the Palestinian village. Light and medium machinegun fire (also 12,7 mm bullets from sniper rifles) have been widely used. Gilo is situated approximately 900 meters away from Beit Jala, and using light machine guns have not had a great impact in many of the cases, except causing many stray bullets. However, some parts of Beit Jala are closer to Gilo than others. TOW rockets have also been used against Beit Jala, together with anti-tank rockets. Debris from heavy artillery was found.

It is obvious that the large numbers of homes and families that have been shelled are unlikely to have been involved in Palestinian shooting incidents. Further, our studies of the shelling of Beit Jala shows clear cases of indiscriminate fire. In several cases, Palestinian gunmen have fired three or four rounds against Gilo and run away. The Israeli army has responded to the fire for a long time after the gunmen left, also in those cases where the Israeli military spokesperson claim, “they positively identified the target and returned fire”.

Gilo is an Israeli settlements that lie on land that was seized from the Palestinian town of Beit Jala. It was built in violation of international law. On our field visit to the Gilo settlement, we observed a small number of bullet holes in the walls of the houses facing Beit Jala. Around ten windows were covered with sandbags for protection. We did not observe damaged windows, although Palestinian bullets probably smashed those with sandbags.

Along the roadside facing Beit Jala, the Gilo settlement is equipped with concrete barriers for protection against Palestinian gunfire. No such protection exists in Beit Jala. Further, the civilian houses of Beit Jala are situated far below the borders of the Gilo settlement from where the Israeli army is firing its shells. This makes it easy for the Israeli soldiers to hit their targets, while Palestinian machineguns are fired at random.

Civilian houses in Hebron have been fired at by Israeli military positions from military posts or settlements since the outbreak of the al-Aqsa intifada. These neighborhoods are specially targeted: Haret Abu Sneineh, Haret Al Shekh and Bab Ezzauwi. Regarding the heart of Hebron city, the Israeli gunfire and grenades have been launched from the three occupied schools, Tal Rumeida, Hadassa, Daboia, from the roofs of four settlement houses in central Hebron and from the Israeli military post on top of Haret el-Sheikh. Palestinian gunmen shoot from the streets and from houses toward Israeli military posts in the H2 area.

Evidence of indiscriminate fire has been collected. Normally, retaliation to Palestinian gunfire from one isolated place have come from all or many of the abovementioned Israeli military posts – firing on a wide area of Palestinian housing. Shots have also been fired at people moving in the streets, at cars and towards houses where lights have been turned on at night.

Two tanks at the military post at the Beit Hajay settlement have fired their light and medium machineguns towards Dhait el Seitun, Al Haraig area and Wadi il Hari. The woman Areej Sadeq al-Jabaly (19), living in Hazeitin area under Israeli control in Hebron, was hit by a bullet fired from the Israeli military post in Beit Hajay settlement on January 5, 2001. Ahlam Jibreel al-Jabaly (18) was seriously wounded in the same attack. The Israeli army's spokesperson stressed, “Palestinian gunshots fired from civilian sites endanger the life of local residents”. However, the two women were on their roof to collect the washing in the afternoon when the Israeli army opened fire. There was no shooting from this house. The women would not have gone to the roof if there was, given the experience with indiscriminate Israeli gunfire in the past.

Further, other neighborhoods are shelled from the Hajay settlement, and from Jabal Jachar. In Dura, in Khallet Sinjer, Fayzeh Mustafa Amro (26) was injured in her head by a 7,62 mm bullet during a shelling attack. The Israeli military post in Dura has been firing towards the town of Dura, Singer, and El Majnuneh.

The type of weapons used includes light machineguns (5,56 mm and 7,62 mm), medium machineguns (12,7 mm) and 30 mm shells and missiles from attack helicopters. 40 mm grenades have been widely used. The main armament of the tanks situated in the occupied school grounds has not been put to use yet (105 mm and 120 mm cannons).

A committee was formed to review the damages caused by Israeli shelling of civilian houses and infrastructure, consisting of The Hebron Municipality, the Ministry of Housing and Hebron Rehabilitation Committee. Their survey shows that 721 civilian private houses have been hit, together with 57 other public and private buildings. The estimated cost of damage is not as high as in for example Beit Jala. It might be explained by the wide use of 40 mm grenades, which spread a huge amount of small fragments, lethal to human beings but causing less damage to walls and furniture. The grenades are normally launched through windows. Also, the houses in Beit Jala have been built of more expensive material. However, water tanks and the electricity supply have been hit, with many uninhabitable homes as a result. And the scope of the shelling has been broad, spreading fear among large number of residents in the city. Some inhabitants have evacuated their homes, while around 300 people have left their homes to sleep in safer places at night – returning to their residence during the day. The municipality has provided new glass for the windows, but the repair to electricity and waterlines has been slow, due to the curfew and ongoing shelling.

Haroun Al-Joulani, Director of the Palestine Red Crescent Society in Hebron confirmed that one ambulance was targeted and destroyed by Israeli military forces at a checkpoint between the H1 and H2 areas in Hebron. The tires of the vehicle were damaged, along with other minor damage. Al-Joulani testified that it is not safe for the Red Crescent staff to move around in the city to help wounded Palestinian civilians.

Defense for Children International (DCI) in Hebron has initiated an emergency program because of the intifada and the bombardment of residential areas in Hebron. It was started in the beginning of October with a range of activities for children and their families. DCI gives lectures at schools to guide teachers in ways to observe the children and deal with those who have disorders because of the shelling. They also give lectures to parents in those areas where the bombing is severe on how to help their children (in Al Sheikh, Abu Sneineh and the Old City). They let the parents talk about their children's symptoms, and give them information and advice. In group activities for the children they organize “festivals” with drawing, face paint, music, plays, lectures and group meetings where the children can talk and express their feelings. Medical checks are performed during these festivals. Festivals have so far been held in Al Aroub and Al Fawwar refugee camps.

Return to the Table of Contents

5. Ramallah and Al-Bireh

In Betunia and Tiret Ramallah with its new housing projects further west of Ramallah, the Israeli shelling has taken another form. Here, civilian homes have been hit when there was no Palestinian gunfire from these buildings at all. There has been Palestinian shooting in the area, against vehicles on the by-pass road. Israeli tanks have been deployed close to this road.

Many of the buildings in the Ramallah area were exposed to gunfire and shelling several times on different days and nights. The extent of the of shelling has been heavy, but not of the same scope as against Rafah, Khan Yunis, Beit Jala, Beit Sahour, Hebron and Jericho. However, the cases of clear collective punishment like on October 12, 2000 point in the same direction as for the other areas. Anti-tank rockets have been used to answer Palestinian gunfire. Further, our observations of exchange of fire in the al-Bireh area close to City Inn hotel suggest strongly that both the Israeli and Palestinian fire in several cases does not target anything in particular. When fire is opened after dark, both sides keep shooting in the air – sometimes hitting a house or other installations. During daytime, however, the Israeli fire is aimed at buildings and installations in the area from which Palestinian fire is believed to have come. It is obvious that the Israeli army in many cases is not able to identify the Palestinian gunmen, but opens fire nonetheless.

The areas in Nablus targeted by Israeli fire are situated close to the checkpoints where Israeli snipers operate and where there have been many clashes in the last months. The areas with damage from Israeli machinegun fire and helicopter missiles and 20 mm bullets are al-Dahia, Askar (new camp), Jabal il-Shamali and Balata refugee camp. 

Samples of debris and shells from Nablus  Photo by: Glen Widing

Return to the Table of Contents

7. Gaza

The Israeli army has during this intifada for periods effectively divided the Gaza Strip into three or four sections – preventing movement from one section to another. North Gaza and Gaza City have been cut off from Rafah and Khan Yunis by roadblocks and Israeli military outposts. The Netzarim area constitutes a constant point of friction between the Israeli army and the Palestinians, and the Israeli army has been using RDX high explosive missiles in their shelling attacks on Palestinian police buildings. Netzarim junction is a key position for the Israeli army, controlling the main entry route to the Jewish settlement of Netzarim. The Israeli military spokesperson's office says that the violence that occurs at the junction “disrupts the daily life in the settlement”.²⁵

The area around Al-Nadah Towers/Al Shuhada junction has repeatedly been hit, and more than 40 houses damaged both by shelling and bulldozing. Also along the Salah El Din street leading to the Al-Matahen junction, where demolishing took place during October and November last year. Considerable damage has also been made in Dir el Balah refugee camp, close to Kfar Darom settlement and the settlement area of Gush Katif.

A cruel act of punishment happened when Israeli soldiers opened fire randomly as retaliation for an explosion at the Dugit Jewish settlement in the northern Gaza Strip on January 1, 2001 and killed the Palestinian farmer Sabri Awad Hader (52).

On November 20, 2000, the Israeli army launched a massive attack against Gaza as retaliation for the Palestinian bombing of an Israeli school bus carrying children and grown-ups from a nearby settlement. 76 mm high explosive rounds were fired from Reshef patrol boats (ZAR 4), and five Israeli IAF helicopters participated in the attack. Shells from a ship are extremely inaccurate. Used against the densely populated Gaza City, it clearly breaches the law about indiscriminate firing and protection of civilians. Further, since the Israeli army clearly stated “retaliation” as the sole reason for the attack,²⁶ this use of force was not justified by military necessity or according to the law of indiscriminate targeting. It was a clear case of collective punishment because of the killings of two Israeli soldiers in Ramallah. Dozens of missiles were fired with no prior warning at the headquarter of the Preventive Security Service, a Palestinian television relay, the headquarters of Fateh, training installations of PPS, three Force 17 buildings. The targets were located in Rafah, Gaza City, Khan Yunis and Dir el Balah. The attacks knocked out the electricity in much of the Gaza Strip. Several civilian houses took hits in the attacks, and one Palestinian was killed and 120 wounded, strongly suggesting indiscriminate fire.²⁷

Return to the Table of Contents

8. Khan Yunis Refugee Camp

The Israeli military posts are situated as close as 100 to 300 meters from the outskirts of the refugee camp in Khan Yunis. CCTV's in surveillance towers surround the whole area, and certain contact points throughout the city are unsafe even in the daytime because gunfire from the Israeli posts and surveillance towers come without warning. 

Destroyed house in Khan Yunis  Photo by: A.K. Brunborg

The Palestinians living in the area claim that the Israeli army shoot at anything that moves, so they stay away from the view of the military posts as far as possible. All the houses facing the military posts had holes and pockmarks from gunfire. Most of the shelling comes from the Israeli Ne've Dekalim and el Tufah outposts. House walls had been hit by everything from light machinegun fire, medium machinegun fire (12,7 mm “concrete buster”), and heavier caliber like 30 mm bullets from helicopters, 105 mm and 120 mm tank rounds, and grenades. Several houses were totally destroyed, while others had so many holes in the walls that they will have to be rebuilt. Windows were destroyed, water tanks and tens of electricity generators have been hit. The municipality tries to maintain the electricity network, but the repair work is slow due to the repeated shelling. Further, people do not feel safe working in the area. The average household in the area of Khan Yunis and Rafah has eight members. The camps are full of children playing outside in sandy streets full of barricades made of sandbags. They are constantly in danger of being hit by fragments. In the al-Amal quarter, as many as 100 Palestinians have been lightly or seriously injured by fragments from shells or bullets. The woman Safiyah Musallam Abu Ubaid (40) was hit in her arm by a fragment from shells shot from Neve Dekalim opposite Block G refugee camp. There was no warning before the attack, she was doing housework when 12,7 mm bullets hit her house.

There has been no Palestinian shooting from the houses in question in the al-Amal quarter. There has been shooting against the Israeli military post in the area. However, the shooting has sometimes taken place as far as 300 - 500 meters from the houses hit by Israeli fire, making the residents uncertain or not able to clarify if there was Palestinians shooting or not. More than 300 residents of the area leave their homes at night to sleep with relatives in safer areas, but return during the day to go to school, cook, trying to lead a normal life. They are to all intents and purposes homeless.

Return to the Table of Contents

9. Rafah

According to the records of the Palestinian Authority (PA) Ministry of Housing, a total of 163 houses were completely or partly damaged by the Israeli bombardment in Rafah District in Gaza in the weeks before November 17, 2000. The shelling has continued after this date, and our field researcher reports another 41 homes being hit.

The areas targeted by Israeli shelling in Rafah are Tal Sultan, Block O refugee camp, Barasil, Salah Eddin gate, the area around the Morag settlement, the whole area along the Egyptian border and Block Q refugee camp. There are four military towers surrounding Rafah, controlling every movement, armed with medium machineguns and sniper rifles firing 12,7 mm bullets. In addition, six military posts surround Rafah, each with 3- 4 tanks. Attack helicopters have been used once to shell Palestinian police quarters with 30 mm or 20 mm shells, but normally only tanks and light and heavy artillery have been used against the civilian areas. 40 mm shells from grenade launchers were found in the Rafah area. These are extremely inaccurate. Using them against civilian populated areas does not come under the Israeli army's “security needs” and cannot be justified by military necessity. Debris from mortar carrier shells was also found.

The use of tanks has resulted in several civilian casualties in the area close to the Egyptian border. In Block O refugee camp close to Salah Eddin gate, 15 year old Mustafa Akram Al-Ra'I was injured in his leg by fragments when a shell hit his family's house. Rafat Muhammed Abulibda (35) was hit in the chest by fragments from 12,7 mm bullets. Sometimes, the Israeli shelling has come as retaliation after Palestinian shooting, sometimes not. Palestinian gunmen are often not from the areas they shoot from, they come in cars – and leave after they have fired some rounds. However, the Israeli fire has often continued after the gunmen have left the area.

In Rafah, several houses have been hit repeatedly, and have marks from between 50 to 100 rounds of ammunition from light and medium machine guns. Some houses have more than 500 marks from machinegun fire. Houses close to the Egyptian border bear clear evidence of being used as “target practice”, with rounds clustered together in small groups on the walls (see picture). The Israeli soldiers are firing at this house from a post no more than 50 meters away. Other houses in Rafah bear the same type of bullet marks clustered together, suggesting a cruel act of terror against the residents in the area. Livestock has also been used as target practice, in one case we found 14 sheep hit by 5,56 mm bullets from machineguns.

The Israeli shelling of the center of Hebron as described above was very extensive. Three schools have been damaged,²⁹ the Othman Ibn Affan Mosque, Hebron Library, 31 stores, the offices of 2 private associations, 5 clinics, 1 pharmacy, 2 medical labs, 1 Union, 5 offices, 1 bank, 1 restaurant, the Chamber of Commerce and the Force 17 offices, along with 29 private cars. This suggests a widespread practice of indiscriminate fire. Of these examples, the Force 17 office is the only clear target. Alia Hospital was hit on three different occasions, a patient was wounded and electrical supply was cut off. Also Beit Jala, A-Dibs and French Hospitals were shelled in Bethlehem.

In al-Bireh, the Force 17 office, and several Fateh offices have been destroyed. The shelling of Al Bireh graveyard on November 8, 2000 cannot be explained. Further, there is considerable damage to PA ministries and local government buildings from the shelling attack on November 8. The al Bireh Islamic primary school was also hit that day.

In the Gaza Strip, Force 17 offices, police stations, Fateh offices, training premises for security officers, a college and mosques have been hit. The Force 17 offices in Khan Yunis were attacked three times with helicopters, the buildings were totally destroyed. Fragments of shells hit the nearby UNRWA elementary school, damaging the windows of the building on the side facing the Force 17 offices. There were no warnings before the attacks, where four people were injured. In Beit Jala, the Orthodox Club, one church and three schools³² have sustained serious to light damage. Bethlehem Tekoa High School has also sustained damage.

In Nablus, Ma'azouz al Masri Girls Basic School, Bassam al Shak'a Basic School, Qadri Tuqan Secondary School and Beit Wazan Mixed School and alQuds Open University have been hit by Israeli fire. All together, 21 schools and educational institutions have been hit, with estimated damage of close to $ 2 million. The damage caused to electricity networks and water installations has also been substantial, including a destroyed power plant in Qalqilia.

Return to the Table of Contents

d. Destruction of Commercial and Agricultural Property

Sheep used as target practice in Rafah  Photo by: A.K. Brunborg

Armored pile drivers and bulldozers have been observed all over the West Bank and Gaza Strip the past four months, sweeping cultivated land, uprooting olive and fruit trees and demolishing houses. During the al-Aqsa intifada we have seen a substantial increase in the demolition of agricultural land and commercial buildings by the Israeli army, as collective punishment. Day and night, bulldozers charge around, working on several sites simultaneously. There are several areas of the occupied territories that have been especially affected by sweeping of agricultural land and uprooting of olive trees, and the studies of Palestine Center for Human Rights (PCHR) show that mort of these areas are close to Israeli settlements, “by-pass” roads or Israeli military installations. PCHR reports that 25 000 olive and fruit trees have been uprooted, and 2 400 dunums of agricultural land demolished since the outbreak of the al-Aqsa intifada.³³

The areas with most damage are Netzarim Junction, Kfar Darom area, Rafah, Khan Yunis, and Dir el Balah in Gaza. In the West Bank, the Israeli army have been demolishing cultivated land and uprooting olive trees and fruit trees in Al Khader village, Beit Jala, Beit Sahour, Hebron, Tulkarem and Qalqilia. Israeli settlers have also engaged in the destruction of Palestinian private property. While the value of such damage is difficult to calculate, it is at least in the tens of millions of USD.³⁴ Palestinians who have resisted sweeping of their agricultural land has been fired at with live bullets by the Israeli army.³⁵

Article 53 of the Geneva Convention contains provisions concerning property, designed to spare people the suffering resulting from the destruction of their real and personal property. International law also prohibits the starvation of civilians as a method of warfare and consequently the destruction of their means of survival (Article 54). Demolition of agricultural land and houses has for a long period been a common measure used by Israel against Palestinian residents of the Occupied Territories. This punishment was generally exacted against homes of Palestinians suspected of attempting or committing violent offences against security forces or Israeli civilians. Article 53 prohibits the demolition of agricultural land, commercial buildings or houses as a punitive measure, and only allows demolition of a structure when the action is necessary for a military operation. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross' interpretation, a "military operation" is defined as "the movements, maneuvers, and other actions taken by the armed forces with a view to fighting. " These conditions do not exist in punitive house demolition or sweeping of agricultural land. International law also prohibits collective punishment of any kind, and demolition of agricultural land and buildings are a prime example of collective punishment against people who have no responsibility for the suspect's acts and were not charged with any offence. Finally, Article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention states that extensive destruction of property, not justified by military necessity, and carried out unlawfully and wantonly, is one of the “grave breaches” of the Convention, and is considered to be a war crime.

As we have seen from the findings of this report, a few Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza have been responsible for attacks on the Israeli army outposts and Jewish civilian settlers in the Palestinian occupied territories. According to international law, a general terrorist threat may justify certain emergency measures from time to time. However, the doctrine of military necessity has never been internationally recognized as an unqualified license to disregard the well being of an occupied people or as a pretext to undermine their sovereignty rights. For example from the case of Beit Jala, it is obvious from the extensive damages to private houses, cars, 400 water tanks and electricity installations that the Israeli army has deliberately targeted Palestinian civilians, civilian houses and infrastructure, regardless of the location of Palestinian gunfire. We have seen that the shelling of Gaza has been especially aggressive, and artillery has been used with the intention of hitting large residential areas where Israeli machinegun fire could not reach.

The damage to electricity networks, water installations, municipal buildings, police stations, schools, hospitals, clinics, churches and mosques has sometimes had serious consequences for the civilian populations these institutions are intended to serve. There is no excuse for targeting police stations, security installations or the offices of legal political parties. The Israeli revenge attack from the air on cities in West Bank and Gaza after the killing of two Israeli soldiers in Ramallah finds no excuse or legality in the laws of warfare, and comes clearly under the definition of collective punishment, a cruel act according to international law.

Our findings strongly suggest that the fire from the Israeli army in too many of the cases has been totally indiscriminate. Retaliation attacks have been disproportionate in force, and Israeli shelling of civilian areas has continued for long periods after any threat caused by Palestinian gunmen has been removed. Further, using extremely inaccurate grenade machineguns covering wide areas of civilian areas, as a response to machinegun fire or to quell demonstrations, constitutes a serious violation of international humanitarian law. It appears that there might be more professional army commanders in the Psagot settlement by al-Bireh than in for example Gaza or Beit Jala, as the military post in Psagot has mostly been firing at identified targets and sometimes holding their fire if identification was not possible. This could also have something to do with the Israeli army's own definition of Gilo as a Jerusalem neighborhood, while Psagot is a more “extreme” illegal settlement close to one of the biggest Palestinian cities in the occupied West Bank.

There are clear examples of collective punishment against the residents of Hebron. The number of houses hit, many of them night after night, suggest indiscriminate fire. However, the shelling of Hebron has more often than not taken place after Palestinian gunfire, in contrast to our other case studies. And in more cases, the Israeli fire has ceased after the Palestinian gunmen have left the area. Further, the main ammunition of the tanks (105 mm or 120 mm) has not been used. It might be explained by the presence of international observers in the city (The Temporary International Presence in Hebron, TIPH), but we have not had the chance to investigate thoroughly. This should, however, receive further attention by the relevant UN bodies and the International Fact Finding Commission, and would (if proven) strengthen the argument that UN observers are needed in the occupied territories.

As we can see from these case studies, there is an apparent link between Israeli bombardment of civilian residential areas, Palestinian shooting and the existence of illegal Jewish settlements on occupied land which cannot be overlooked in any analysis of the background and causes of the actions carried out. Israeli settlements in occupied Arab lands, which are condemned by the UN, are a violation of the Geneva Convention. According to the Israeli army's own statements, most of the shooting incidents from Palestinian gunmen are directed at Israeli military bases and outposts on occupied territory with the purpose of protecting the settlements, and not so often at Jewish settlements or civilians. However, one should not underestimate the lethal effect of a “few rounds from Kalashnikovs”. Israeli civilians have been killed and wounded by Palestinian gunfire. However, responding by using the whole range of light artillery, including tank rounds, the air force and navy, old Tow rockets and grenade launchers does not imply proportionality or discriminate fire. Military personnel would describe the circumstances around many of the cases in this study as “overkill”. Six findings are evident in this report:

1. Sufficient precautions have seldom been taken by the Israeli army in order to verify that the objects attacked are neither civilians nor civilian objects.

2. Precautions have not been taken in the choice of methods of attacks in order to avoid or minimize incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilian or damage to civilian objects.

3. Attacks have not been cancelled when it was apparent to the Israeli army that the objective was not military, but civilian institutions like schools, hospitals, ambulances, churches or mosques.

4. Heavy weaponry and excessive force have been used when threats to Israeli soldiers or civilians could have been prevented with effective machinegun fire from the many Israeli military posts.

5. The Israeli army has repeatedly failed to warn the Palestinian civilian population of attacks.

6. The Israeli army has attacked, destroyed or removed large quantities of objects indispensable to the civilian population, such as foodstuffs, crops, livestock and drinking water installations.

The Israeli army have routinely been citing “security concerns” for most of the actions they take, as the functional equivalent of military necessity. On this basis they justify a number of violations of international law, such as the heavy shelling of civilian residential areas and other civilian targets, land confiscation, sweeping of agricultural land and punitive measures against the Palestinian population such as restrictions on freedom of movement, harsh curfews, assassinations, demolition of houses and commercial buildings and other acts of collective punishment. The official Israeli army mission is “To defend the existence, territorial integrity and sovereignty of the state of Israel. …To protect the inhabitants of Israel and to combat all forms of terrorism which threaten the daily life. They [The Israeli army] will use force of arms only for the purpose of subduing the enemy to the necessary extent and will limit his use of force so as to prevent unnecessary harm to human life and limb, dignity and property, of both soldiers and civilians, with special consideration for the defenseless, whether in wartime, or during routine security operations, or in the absence of combat, or times of peace.”³⁶

Finally, arguments of military necessity or security concerns have no value in the cases where the Israeli army has used automatic grenade launchers against civilians in refugee camps. This weapon is used to kill soldiers in an open field. The effects of such artillery is indiscriminate, they cannot be targeted and generally cause casualties in a large area.

Return to the Table of Contents

b. Clear Cases of Collective Punishment

Israel seems not to have kept a sense of proportion in comparing the “military advantages” gained with the damage done. This would provide a basis for war crimes proceedings if Israel were to be tried at an international war crimes court. Article 6 (6) of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal describes “wanton” destruction as a war crime. Further, Article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention includes among the “grave breaches” liable to penal sanctions under Article 146, “extensive destruction …. of property, not justified by military necessity and carried out unlawfully and wantonly”.

Return to the Table of Contents

c. “Superfluous injury” and “Unnecessary suffering”. Suspected Israeli use of DU-ammunition.

The scale of the humanitarian problem resulting from living under siege cannot easily be measured. However, some indications can be given. Injury to civilians or to civilian objects may be direct or indirect. Direct injury or damage needs no further explanation, but indirect damage is often overlooked. For example electricity networks have been destroyed by air attacks and deprived the Palestinians of sources of power. This could lead to the deaths of many civilians (particularly those most vulnerable on health grounds) for a variety of reasons, from the inability of hospitals to carry out their normal functions to sewage appearing on the streets and resultant disease. Destruction of electricity installations serves no military goals as set by the Israeli army, but does function as a form of collective punishment of the people it affects. The same goes for the destruction of the al-Awda water channel in Jericho. Israeli helicopters have deliberately attacked clearly marked ambulances. Fire trucks have repeatedly been shot at. This has prevented them from providing acute health care or putting out fires in homes hit by missiles or rockets in Hebron, al-Bireh, Betunia, Ramallah, Jericho, Rafah and Gaza. Further, the situation of living under constant threat of bombardment without prior warning renders dangerous such essential activities as obtaining food, water and medical care and blocks relief activities on behalf of these populations. In addition, a cruel siege unlike anything imposed before, neither in the previous intifada nor in the days of occupation of the territories is now taking place.

Return to the Table of Contents

Many of the acts carried out by the Israeli army can be defined as war crimes. We can conclude that during this intifada, the well-established principle of distinction between civilian objects and military objectives has been rendered of little practical significance when some Israeli military “advantage” in the destruction of the object has been discernible. Add to this a political objective of attempting to persuade the PA leadership to take particular actions within its autonomous areas, and it becomes much easier to argue that anything that affects that government's actions becomes a military objective, wherever it is situated. In our case studies, there has in addition been no protection of the civilian population from air-delivered weapons. The fact that relatively few civilians have been killed or injured in these circumstances (compared with an indiscriminate attack using free-fall bombs or poorly guided missiles) is irrelevant. The use of grenade launchers and 40 mm grenade machineguns proves that no attention has been given international standards of discrimination between civilian and military targets. In the occupied territories, Israel has a clear responsibility to prohibit attacks on areas where there is a concentration of civilians. Israel's unjust and unconsidered retaliation against civilians has seriously breached international law and the rules of war. Further, the horrific nature of the recent actions has been made worse by the Israeli Governments refusal to own up to its responsibility under the Geneva Convention. The UN General Assembly and the Commission on Human Rights have repeatedly reaffirmed the de jure applicability to the occupied Palestinian Territories of the 1949 Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilians in Time of War.

25 civilians died and 729 have been wounded as a result of Israeli attacks against Palestinian civilian residential areas between October and December 2000. The killing of unarmed civilians in a deliberate manner in circumstances where they do not pose an imminent threat to the life of soldiers is wilful killing. Wilful killing is a grave breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention and is subject to prosecution under the principle of universal jurisdiction. Furthermore, it is particularly heinous to fire upon targets in civilian areas. The Israeli army's actions appear to have been intended to threaten the civilian populations rather than ensure their safety. More than one million Palestinians in various cities, villages and refugee camps have been living under the constant threat of having their homes bombarded. The unacceptably high number of killed in injured implies severe breaches of international law and cruelty against civilians in a situation of belligerent occupation. In our view, such a record suggests an Israeli attempt to subjugate the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza. Further, the character of the prolonged Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza challenges international law itself.

In this report, based on PHRMG field investigations in Israel and the Occupied Territories involving a large number of sources and statements from the Israeli army, we state that the available information indicates that the Israeli army intentionally attacked densely populated residential areas in order to inflict collective punishment on civilians. The shelling of residential areas occurred without warning, and excessive and indiscriminate military power was used against a defenseless and unarmed population.

The extent and nature of the Israeli violations against Palestinian children is extremely disturbing. Our conclusion is that there is an immediate need for the international community to safeguard the rights of Palestinian children. Further, all cases of use of lethal force against Palestinian civilians should be investigated and subjected to the processes of justice in order to avoid impunity.

The United Nations Commission on Human Rights established in its Special Session on the Occupied Territories on the 18 October 2000, that the Israeli actions against the Palestinian civilian population constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity and called upon Israel to put an immediate end to the use of force against unarmed civilians. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson, expressed her view in a press release on November 27, 2000, that the Israeli security forces have engaged in excessive force, disproportionate to the threat faced by their soldiers. In her report, she recommended that the security forces on both sides should act in full conformity with the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials and the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. “Whenever force is used, the principle of proportionality has to be applied, and all necessary measures have to be taken to avoid loss of life or injury to civilians or damage to civilian property”, she urged.

The absence of the Palestinian Authority as an agency capable of offering support to the residents under its authority in the face of measures undertaken by the Israeli army is disturbing. Palestinians are continuing to turn to non-governmental organizations (NGOs), Israeli and Palestinian alike, or to seek the assistance of lawyers. No emergency organization has been set up in the PA to coordinate the monitoring of damage and to offer legal and financial aid to the victims. The PA has not initiated a thorough investigation of the shooting and shelling incidents. Most of the updated information can be obtained from NGOs, news sources and even the Israeli army.

Further, the Palestinian focus on suspected Israeli use of depleted uranium has taken the attention away from the massive collateral damage already inflicted by Israeli excessive use of force against civilians. There is no need to exaggerate or dwell on use of weapon types that have not been confirmed by independent sources, when so much evidence of massive damage already exists in every Palestinian village and town.

The PHRMG demands that the international community ensure that Israel complies with the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention, where the rights of protected persons in situations of belligerent occupation are safeguarded. We strongly urge the High Contracting Parties to the Fourth Geneva Convention to ensure Israel's respect of all its relevant provisions.

PHRMG calls on Israel to publicly commit itself to fully respect the laws of war and renounce, in particular, deliberate attacks on civilians or indiscriminate attacks in all circumstances. PHRMG demands effective protection for civilians.

PHRMG condemns, unreservedly, the violation of the right to life. We fear that the brutal regularity of civilian casualties may contribute to the belief that civilian deaths are an inevitable consequence of this conflict, and create an almost casual acceptance of these deaths. As the Israeli army repeatedly failed to warn people to evacuate their homes, the unlawful killing of civilians must be investigated, those responsible for abuses punished, and the victims compensated. We are calling on the Israeli Government to set up a proper judicial inquiry to do so, and to make recommendations to prevent unlawful killings in the future.

PHRMG calls upon the United Nations Security Council to act upon resolution 194, 242 and 338 in order to ensure Israel's compliance with its stipulations concerning the illegal occupation of territory by force.