Partager l'article ! Judge Goldstone and his limping deductions: Judge Goldstone and his limping deductions By Thérèse ...
Regard d'un écrivain sur le Monde
Judge Goldstone and his limping deductions
Following a broadcasted interview, revealing shortcomings in judge Goldstone’s reasoning, somehow his goals and his mistakes are better seen in the true light of day.
With his features, cut in flint, Judge Goldstone spoke about law, legislation, codes, legality and justice, just as any man of law would. His report on the preconceived infractions perpetuated against Palestinians by Israel might very well display all the appearances of neutrality; it is however no less than seriously flawed. Paradox? Not at all.
No law may take effect, nor be applied adequately when one of the concerned parties, rejects it or ignores it. It is impossible to achieve any kind of equilibrium when, on balance, weights placed on the scales are not equivalent. In other words: "no one is supposed to ignore the law". We cannot settle for analyzing the consequences of any action without ascending to the causes, to the sources which define the responsibility and the offense.
However, in the confrontation of Hamas against Israel, these basic elements do not exist. To the contrary, Hamas brazenly ignores commitments to resolutions of conflicts. It tramples on them and violates the most basic of clauses. For more than nine years, Hamas has intentionally launched countless rockets on Israel citizens. Their targets have been Israeli cities, homes, kindergartens and factories. The evident purpose is to kill Israelis wherever they may be.
Hamas hides behind its own civilian population and prepares to attack from the most densely populated areas of Gaza, dressing its fighters in civilian attire. The purpose is that, if these disguised civilians become casualties, they will be held out to the press of the world as "collateral victims"
Judge Goldstone should first find a solution to this impasse before he assigns ("War crimes" or "Crimes against humanity"?) to the phenomenon. Before he arms his right hand with the heavy straps of law and human rights, he should look to his other hand which remains completely empty. Because the scales of justice are not balanced he is forced to limp and tilt towards the abyssal vacuum of his arguments.
Obviously, he doesn't omit to move forward on his chessboard the inevitable pawn of Israel, rich of an effective and well-equipped army. Hamas, he asserts, only improvises and tinkers with its arms according to its limited resources. This doesn't excuse the harmful violations against Israeli civilians by Hamas, nor does it justify them.
Perhaps he should provide Hamas with an army to better balance the scales. Or should Syria, Iran and Hezbollah provide weapons of war and training without interruption. Or should the UN absolve Hamas from responsibility for the Rafah tunnels?
During the interview, Judge Goldstone, on many occasions, also referred to his spiritual links with the state of Israel, because he is a Jew and a Zionist. Apparently, one goes with the other. In any case, he doesn’t require recognizing the asymmetric type of "dirty war", called of "low intensity", which has been the lot of this country, since the conventional Arab armies' defeats in 1967 and 1973. We may, therefore, claim these attributes to be in perfect voluntary blindness of normal combat tactics of history. Thus Hamas has become a privileged opponent, at least in the press.
Judge Goldstone also mentioned, in perfect ignorance of the preceding point, the speech of the Israeli Prime Minister, Netanyahu. In that Netanyahu urged the amendment of some laws, unveiling Israel as guilt in the violation of Human Rights.
Judge Goldstone should leave his cocoon, woven out of law and legislation and venture onto the rocky ground of reality. Things would then appear under their true light to him.
Our world is currently facing terrorist militias who respect no etiquette, law, or morals, except the ones they themselves create and which are drawn from the copious corpus of Jihad rules, ruses or Taqqiya, developed fourteen centuries ago, well before the Geneva conventions and the definitions issued from the Nuemberg trials.
Hamas today holds an Israeli hostage, prohibiting him any access, legal visit, or care for him by the International Red Cross. There is no possibility of verifying if this hostage is treated according to the law, as is sustained by Israel toward its prisoners. These prisoners have been duly judged by the established institutions of justice.
By respect for the rules of engagement relating to the Tsahal Code of Ethics, the IDF has demonstrated for years now, that it is possible to impose limits even if it doesn't guarantee that there will be no victims, indirectly affected by conflicts. The IDF recognizes that errors of assessment may arise on its part. Hamas doesn't recognize or respect the Tsahal Code of Ethics but to the contrary makes cynical use of them. It sees nothing immoral in the exchange of one Israeli prisoner for thousands of convicted Hamas prisoners, who had been judged by universally recognized laws.
A second assessment conducted by Israeli teams demonstrates that, from 36 quoted testimonies, 30 were totally false during an investigation of facts, that Judge Goldstone didn't carried out. The 6 remaining testimonies recorded operational errors, were never deliberate targets chosen by soldiers.
No army engaged in Afghanistan, Iraq, or Yemen, used phosphorus as did the Saudi army against Muslim populations. Worse, in Sri Lanka, clashes have left more the 36000 deaths on the ground, including many civilians. No army can reduce casualties with as much speed and conscientious consideration, as that performed by the IDF.
That is Judge Goldstone’s monumental mistake. He applies rules to one side of the conflict only. These same rules are ridiculed by those who triggered the conflict in the first place, in violation of all principles. If Israel has respected the codes in force and Hamas hasn’t, Israel is entitled to defend its citizens. This may mean implementing all appropriate measures to end the aggression, as judged necessary by its general staff. Israel always respects the rules in force. In the case at hand, the aggressor bears full responsibility for the consequences that he showered upon himself, violating the protection he owed to his own population
Hamas is thus, twice responsible and guilty: against Israel firstly, but also against the Gaza population that was unnecessarily exposed to a superfluous danger. Gaza was assigned to the Palestinians in 2005 by Israel. Without any based reason, other than perpetuating a separation between the two nations, in respect of each one's ideological choice, Palestinians aggressed Israel. (Hamas rather than the expelled Fatah who controlled the land previously)