An Air Force KC-10 flying tanker refuels an F-22 Raptor before
strikes in
Syria. The current war from the air kills innocent civilians on
the ground,
which is at odds with U.S.
criticism of Israel for civilian deaths in Gaza.
War on IS:
America Finds Itself in Israeli Shoes (Die Welt, Germany)
"Western
nations have experienced this dilemma in Afghanistan for a decade. That is why
it is surprising that when Israel is faced with the same dilemma, they
repeatedly act as if civilian casualties are per se proof of an unethical war, when
in fact these deaths are primarily an expression of the enemy's cynicism or errors
that inevitably occur in chaotic combat situations. … . It's almost as if there
were a standard that the West applies only to Israel - and then quickly forgets
when their own country is in a fight with terrorists. This could also be called
hypocrisy."
In the war against
Hamas, the United States preached that civilians shouldn't be killed during Israeli
attacks. Now in Syria and Iraq, the U.S. itself is unable to keep to such demands.
Until recently, Washington was strongly critical of Israel's
actions in its war against Hamas in Gaza. “The suspicion that extremists are operating
in the area doesn't justify attacks that endanger the lives of so many innocent
civilians,” a State Department spokesman said at the time. Now, however,
America itself is leading a war against an Islamist terrorist organization in
Syria, and civilians are dying - because Islamic State militants, like their
colleagues in Hamas, intermingle with the civilian population. That’s how
quickly it can happen.
The United States has in fact admitted to having lowered its
tolerance threshold with respect to civilian casualties. Last year, for example,
U.S. President Barack Obama introduced a rule for air strikes against
terrorists in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, or North Africa: the deaths of
civilians had to be precluded with a high degree of certainty.
Posted By Worldmeets.US
This “near certainty” rule has now been laid bare in the
fight against IS. It had only been intended to apply “only when we take direct
action outside areas of active hostilities,” as National Security Council
spokesperson Caitlin Hayden explained
to Yahoo News. And according to
Hayden, that definition does not apply to Iraq and Syria. In those areas,
Washington considers itself bound merely by the usual standards of warfare, proportionality
and the distinction between fighters and civilians.
Civilian population
as protective shield
The United States and its allies, such as France and Britain,
face the same dilemma Israel faces in its fight against Hamas: How can a
democratic society wage a war against terrorists that is legally compliant with
international norms, when the extremists from the outset disregard international
law and use the civilian population as a shield?
In such a situation, there are really only two options: One can
allow the other side to win, or accept that civilian deaths are an inevitable consequence
of asymmetric wars, even if significant efforts are made to prevent it.
Western nations have experienced this dilemma in Afghanistan
for a decade. That is why it is surprising that when Israel is faced with the
same dilemma, they repeatedly act as if civilian casualties are per se proof of
an unethical war, when in fact these deaths are primarily an expression of the enemy's
cynicism or errors that inevitably occur in chaotic combat situations.
Also telling is the fact that the Western public appears less
concerned about civilians killed by U.S. airstrikes in Syria than it was about
those killed recently in Gaza. It's almost as if there were a standard that the
West applies only to Israel - and then quickly forgets when their own country
is in a fight with terrorists. This could also be called hypocrisy.
