Israeli officials again mull establishment of independent -- or judicial -- inquiry into Gaza war
Marian Houk
October 21, 2009
Israeli officials seem to be taking a range of views on the question of establishing an independent Israeli commission to look into last winter's war on Gaza.
The IDF's Operation Cast Lead (27 December to 18 January), was primarily justified as necessary to stop rocket, mortar, and missile fire from Gaza onto surrounding Israeli communities (the range was expanded during the war to up to 60 km). In some instances, Israeli officials said that it was necessary to end Hamas rule in Gaza.
Regardless of the motivation, the Fact-Finding Mission on last winter's Gaza war, established by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva, and headed by South Africa's Justice Richard Goldstone, has recommended that both Israel and Hamas should, each, separately, establish their own independent investigations into how their military operations, connected with the three-week war last winter, were conducted.
Last Friday (16 October) the UNHRC finally did adopt a Palestinian-backed resolution supporting the Goldstone report, after a dramatic diplomatic . The vote was 25 in favor, 11 against, and 6 abstentions, and the results can be viewed on the website of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights here.
The Israeli military is proceeding at its own pace to carry out its own internal investigations into the war -- and some cases have reportedly been sent for possible criminal prosecution, including cases of Palestinian civilians being shot while waving white flags.
But Justice Goldstone, his team, and many Israeli as well as international human rights and international law advocates have said that it is quite simply impossible for the Israeli military (or any powerful accused institution, for that matter) to carry out a credible investigation of itself.
Haaretz is reporting that "Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor thinks Israel should establish its own independent committee to investigate Israel Defense Forces activity in the Gaza Strip during last winter's Operation Cast Lead ».
However, Meridor told Haaretz in an interview: «I have faith in the army and it is my duty to protect it, its commanders and its soldiers - and the most effective tool for this is serious self-examination … A state that examines itself [protects itself from] harassment. Today, with the development of international law, one of the best means of defense is for a state to investigate itself ... The commission of inquiry that I hope will be established must examine the Goldstone report's claims, even if it is a biased report, and its mandate from the outset was to examine Israel's crimes, and one of the committee's members stated prior to the investigation that Israel commits war crimes', said Meridor, who also serves as minister of intelligence and atomic energy. 'But the threat is serious and a commission of inquiry should be established, also to examine the suitability of the rules of war to the new type of war that has been imposed on us'." This article is posted on Haaretz's website, here.
Israeli officialdom appears to be divided -- though mainly over tactics. Like Meridor, some senior Israeli officials are reportedly speaking out in favor of an independent Israeli investigation. Some mainstream Israeli international law experts and legal figures agree. However, as reported in recent days, the explanation given in some cases is that the independent investigations should be just to comply with the bottom-line recommendation contained in the UN Human Rights Council-mandated Goldstone report -- namely, that Israel and Hamas must each establish internal investigations within six months, or be referred to the UN Security Council.
Some say this is required for "better PR".
Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak has a different concept of PR, and is reportedly adamantly opposed to an independent investigation into possible war crimes and crimes against humanity, and other problems related to last winter's Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. The IDF Chief of Staff agrees. According to a story on Israel's YNet website today, "IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi attended Tuesday's cabinet meeting on the formation of an inquiry committee, and said that he could personally guarantee that the IDF operated in the most moral and ethical manner, more than any other military in the world. He stressed that forming such a committee could send a message to military officers that they are not trusted".
Netanyahu has reportedly wavered, but seems to be more comfortable with the military's position.
Many of the views are points along the same spectrum.
Israel's YNet website reported today that "a top General Staff official told Ynet on Wednesday that more could be done on the PR front. 'There is something that can be done… We can explain better to the world and to ourselves what we are doing', the source said ... A General Staff official told Ynet submission to certain guidelines may be harmful to the IDF's operational capabilities. 'The Goldstone Report shows that the world has not internalized the nature of wars ... No one in the world can do it better, there is no example of a more cautious or accurate manner of conduct in such a populous environment. We did not drop bombs without looking and checking thoroughly ... How can we work and defend Israel's citizens if we need a lawyer to tell us every thing. I don't know of a better method in such a conflict, and if anyone does, let them come and say it. Goldstone didn't say it. If we do not attack, then we will be attacked, and it won't stop', he said. He said the military has nothing to apologize for, and that the IDF was well prepared for the operation, which is why it suffered a relatively low number of casualties ... The official said, 'The question is not how many were hit on our side as opposed to the other side, but how many targets did we hit without harming innocents and the surroundings, and I believe we did this well'." Nonetheless, the YNet report noted, "he completely rejected all claims of alleged war crimes committed during the Gaza offensive". This report can be read in full here.
Netanyahu's first responses to the Goldstone report included exhorting major Israeli allies -- and chief among them the U.S. and Europe -- to act to reject it, otherwise they would be hampered in carrying out their own wars "on terror" (U.S. President Obama has, however, apparently ordered that this terminology be dropped). Netanyahu also said that endorsing the Goldstone report would "kill" the Israel-Palestinian peace process.
The Jerusalem Post reported Wednesday that "Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu directed the relevant ministries on Tuesday to look into ways of launching an international initiative to change the laws of war to deal with the modern-day scourge of terrorism. This new initiative comes fast on the heels of the Goldstone Report, which accused Israel of war crimes for its military operation in the Gaza Strip against Hamas earlier this year. At a meeting of the security cabinet that focused on the report and its ramifications, Netanyahu said Israel's challenge was 'to delegitimize the continuous attempt to delegitimize the State of Israel ... The most important arena where we need to act in this context is in the arena of public opinion, which is crucial in the democratic world. We must continue to debunk this lie that is spreading with the help of the Goldstone report', Netanyahu said ... Netanyahu said that such a new initiative was necessary to keep up with the spread of terrorism throughout the world, according to a statement put out by the Prime Minister's Office".
What Netanyahu did explore, according to some Israeli media reports, was the establishment of a judicial commission of inquiry, possibly to be headed by former Supreme Court of Justice Avraham Barak. He dropped the idea when the Palestinian leadership initially agreed, on 1-2 October, and reportedly as a result of American "intense diplomacy", to withdraw a draft resolution endorsing the Goldstone report's conclusions, and referring it to the UN General Assembly.
After a groundswell of scathing criticism from Palestinians both inside the occupied territory and around the world -- and from their international supporters as well -- and a precipitous loss of support that threatened the legitimacy of the present Palestinian leadership and system, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas changed course and ordered an all-out effort to get a discussion within the Human Rights Council, which last week finally adopted an even-stronger resolution with what might be an even-greater margin of votes.
The resolution adopted on 16 October by the UNHRC in Geneva endorsed the recommendations in the Goldstone report, and recommended that the UN General Assembly "consider" the report in its current session (which lasts until late December, or eventually until next September).
As a result, the UN General Assembly in New York is looking at dates to schedule a discussion before the end of the main part of its current session in late December.
The UNHRC resolution also said that the Israeli restrictions on Gaza -- which the HRC resolution says is occupied -- is a "siege" that "constitutes collective punishment of Palestinian civilians". The resolution also stresses "that the right to life constitutes the most fundamental of all human rights", and recognizes that "the Israeli siege imposed on the occupied Gaza Strip, including its closure of border crossings and the cutting of the supply of fuel, food and medicine, constitutes collective punishment of Palestinian civilians and leads to disastrous humanitarian and environmental consequences".
On the Goldstone report itself, the UNHRC resolution condemns "all targeting of civilians and stressing the urgent need to ensure accountability for all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law to prevent further violations, [and it also]
1. Condemns the non-cooperation by the occupying power, Israel, with the independent international fact-finding mission;
2. Welcomes the report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission;
3. Endorses the recommendations contained in the report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission, and calls upon all concerned parties including United Nations bodies, to ensure their implementation in accordance with their respective mandates;
4. Recommends the General Assembly to consider the report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission, during the main part of its 64th session;
5. Requests the United Nations Secretary General to submit to the 13th Human Rights Council´s session, a report, on the status of implementation of paragraph 3, above".
What will happen next, and beyond that, is not clear. The UN Human Rights Council still has on its books a resolution calling for considering (or re-considering) the Goldstone report in March 2010 -- more or less the six-month period within which Israel and Hamas should have started their own independent internal investigations that is mentioned in the Goldstone report's recommendations. But the U.S. and now also reportedly Russia are apparently opposed to any discussion within the UN Security Council.
The JPost article noted that "One issue critical to Israel's dealing with the Goldstone report was not discussed on Tuesday, but is likely to be discussed at the security cabinet's next meeting: whether Israel should set up a judicial commission to look into various allegations stemming from Operation Cast Lead. Defense Minister Ehud Barak, however, is adamantly opposed to such a committee, and reportedly blocked attempts by Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz to bring the matter to the security cabinet on Tuesday. Barak reportedly said in the cabinet meeting that such a body was not needed, since the IDF was capable of investigating itself. Those in favor of setting up such a body maintain that by doing so, Israel would prevent itself from possibly being hauled before the International Criminal Court in The Hague on war crimes charges, since the ICC does not take up cases where credible and independent investigations are being conducted by the countries involved. Because of the sensitivity of the matter, it was impossible Tuesday to get any of the 15 members of the security cabinet to come out openly and say whether or not they supported establishing an independent committee. Sources close to the prime minister said that he had not yet formulated an opinion on the matter". This JPost article can be read in full here.
According to Israel Radio, the Jerusalem Post reported on Tuesday, in advance of the Security Cabinet meeting, that "Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz had been expected to propose setting up such a commission, but he was set to face strong opposition from security cabinet members, particularly Defense Minister Ehud Barak. Those inside the government advocating an independent inquiry into the Gaza offensive have argued that this would be one way to remove the threat of Israel being hauled before the International Criminal Court in The Hague, since the International Criminal Court does not take up cases where credible and independent investigations are being conducted by the countries involved". The JPost also noted that "The Prime Minister's Office on Monday would not divulge the nature of Netanyahu's response to a joint letter sent on Friday by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown urging the premier, among other things, to set up an independent inquiry into Operation Cast Lead". This JPost report can be read in full here.
In a separate report, the JPost said that South Africa's Justice Richard Goldstone also said that Israel would be let off the hook if only it launched its own independent investigation into the report of his Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza conflict: "If the Israeli government set up an open investigation, that would really be the end of the matter, as far as Israel is concerned", Goldstone told American rabbis in a telephone conference call organized on Sunday night by Taanit Tzedek-Jewish Fast for Gaza -- a group, the Jpost explained, which is composed of « U.S. rabbis who have been organizing monthly fasts since July to protest Israel's closure of the Gaza crossings to all but humanitarian aid».
Goldstone also said, during the call, that « the level of civilian destruction in Gaza 'was not by error, it was by design. It was not a mistake, the IDF does not do those things by error ... It was a collective punishment. I do not believe that significant distinction was made between civilians and combatants in that respect', Goldstone said". According to this JPost article, Goldstone indicated that the "report is meant to be a blue print for further judicial investigations ... It was meant to be the result of a fact-finding mission. 'We weren't conducting a judicial investigation. We didn't make our findings according to the criminal standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I would say it was a prima facie case, reasonable on weighing the evidence'."
In the same conference call, this JPost story reports, "Goldstone rejected Israel's assertion that the report would damage the peace process ... The Israeli claims 'are shallow and false', Goldstone said. 'What peace process are they talking about? There isn't one'."
Goldstone added, according to the Jerusalem Post: 'I don't believe you can have a lasting peace until these things have been put on the table'." This report can be read in full here.
Goldstone himself has published an introspective piece in the Jerusalem Post on Monday, in which he said that: "Over the past 20 years, I have investigated serious violations of international law in my own country, South Africa, in the former Yugoslavia, in Rwanda and the alleged fraud and theft by governments and political leaders in a number of countries in connection with the United Nations Iraq Oil for Food program. In all of these, allegations reached the highest political echelons. In every instance, I spoke out strongly in favor of full investigations and, where appropriate, criminal prosecutions. I have spoken out over the years on behalf of the International Bar Association against human rights violations in many countries, including Sri Lanka, China, Russia, Iran, Zimbabwe and Pakistan. I would have been acting against those principles and my own convictions and conscience if I had refused a request from the United Nations to investigate serious allegations of war crimes against both Israel and Hamas in the context of Operation Cast Lead. As a Jew, I felt a greater and not a lesser obligation to do so."
However, Goldstone laments, "Five weeks after the release of the Report of the Fact Finding Mission on Gaza, there has been no attempt by any of its critics to come to grips with its substance. It has been fulsomely approved by those whose interests it is thought to serve and rejected by those of the opposite view. Those who attack it do so too often by making personal attacks on its authors' motives and those who approve it rely on its authors' reputations. Israeli government spokesmen and those who support them have attacked it in the harshest terms and, in particular my participation, in a most personal and hurtful way. The time has now come for more sober reflection on what the report means and appropriate Israeli reactions to it".
Goldstone also wrote that "In Gaza, I was surprised and shocked by the destruction and misery there. I had not expected it. I did not anticipate that the IDF would have targeted civilians and civilian objects. I did not anticipate seeing the vast destruction of the economic infrastructure of Gaza including its agricultural lands, industrial factories, water supply and sanitation works. These are not military targets. I have not heard or read any government justification for this destruction".
He noted that "Israel has an internationally renowned and respected judiciary that should be envy of many other countries in the region. It has the means and ability to investigate itself. Has it the will?" Justice Goldstone's piece can be read in full here.
In a separate piece published in the JPost, the legal adviser to the Israeli Foreign Ministry Alan Baker wrote that "The Israeli government cannot ignore the call by Goldstone and everyone else, to institute an official governmental inquiry. If indeed Israel has the substantive answers to the accusations levelled by Goldstone, then there is no reason to delay any further the establishment of such an inquiry. It would not, as has been claimed, be perceived as submitting to terror or caving in to international pressure, and would not be seen as lack of faith in our soldiers and officers. Considerable damage has been done by the Goldstone accusations. Such damage cannot be repaired by hasbara, which has proven itself to be utterly useless, or by repetitive, weak statements by Israeli ministers and deputy ministers. Israel must act to control that damage by establishing an inquiry manned by a prominent retired Supreme Court justice and serious military and legal experts. Such a move would instantly neutralize and deflate international criticism; it would provide a viable claim of non-admissibility to any attempt to prosecute Israel or Israeli leaders before international or national courts and tribunals". Alan Baker's piece can be read in full here.
Separately, an article in Haaretz stated that "Israel's western allies have pressured the country to launch credible investigations into the allegations of possible war crimes. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged on Monday that Israel would ensure that the report would be vetoed at the United Nations General Assembly. 'It's going to the UN', the premier told lawmakers from his Likud party. 'We'll make sure it gets vetoed'." This Haaretz article can be read in full here.
There is, of course, no veto in the UN General Assembly, where the Goldstone report is headed -- the veto is only in the UN Security Council. and only by the five Permanent Members (U.S., Russia, China, Britain and France).
The Goldstone report said that if either Israel or Hamas fail to set up their own independent internal inquiries, the UN Security Council should consider referring the matter to the International Criminal Court in The Hague.
The IDF's Operation Cast Lead (27 December to 18 January), was primarily justified as necessary to stop rocket, mortar, and missile fire from Gaza onto surrounding Israeli communities (the range was expanded during the war to up to 60 km). In some instances, Israeli officials said that it was necessary to end Hamas rule in Gaza.
Regardless of the motivation, the Fact-Finding Mission on last winter's Gaza war, established by the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) in Geneva, and headed by South Africa's Justice Richard Goldstone, has recommended that both Israel and Hamas should, each, separately, establish their own independent investigations into how their military operations, connected with the three-week war last winter, were conducted.
Last Friday (16 October) the UNHRC finally did adopt a Palestinian-backed resolution supporting the Goldstone report, after a dramatic diplomatic . The vote was 25 in favor, 11 against, and 6 abstentions, and the results can be viewed on the website of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights here.
The Israeli military is proceeding at its own pace to carry out its own internal investigations into the war -- and some cases have reportedly been sent for possible criminal prosecution, including cases of Palestinian civilians being shot while waving white flags.
But Justice Goldstone, his team, and many Israeli as well as international human rights and international law advocates have said that it is quite simply impossible for the Israeli military (or any powerful accused institution, for that matter) to carry out a credible investigation of itself.
Haaretz is reporting that "Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor thinks Israel should establish its own independent committee to investigate Israel Defense Forces activity in the Gaza Strip during last winter's Operation Cast Lead ».
However, Meridor told Haaretz in an interview: «I have faith in the army and it is my duty to protect it, its commanders and its soldiers - and the most effective tool for this is serious self-examination … A state that examines itself [protects itself from] harassment. Today, with the development of international law, one of the best means of defense is for a state to investigate itself ... The commission of inquiry that I hope will be established must examine the Goldstone report's claims, even if it is a biased report, and its mandate from the outset was to examine Israel's crimes, and one of the committee's members stated prior to the investigation that Israel commits war crimes', said Meridor, who also serves as minister of intelligence and atomic energy. 'But the threat is serious and a commission of inquiry should be established, also to examine the suitability of the rules of war to the new type of war that has been imposed on us'." This article is posted on Haaretz's website, here.
Israeli officialdom appears to be divided -- though mainly over tactics. Like Meridor, some senior Israeli officials are reportedly speaking out in favor of an independent Israeli investigation. Some mainstream Israeli international law experts and legal figures agree. However, as reported in recent days, the explanation given in some cases is that the independent investigations should be just to comply with the bottom-line recommendation contained in the UN Human Rights Council-mandated Goldstone report -- namely, that Israel and Hamas must each establish internal investigations within six months, or be referred to the UN Security Council.
Some say this is required for "better PR".
Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak has a different concept of PR, and is reportedly adamantly opposed to an independent investigation into possible war crimes and crimes against humanity, and other problems related to last winter's Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. The IDF Chief of Staff agrees. According to a story on Israel's YNet website today, "IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi attended Tuesday's cabinet meeting on the formation of an inquiry committee, and said that he could personally guarantee that the IDF operated in the most moral and ethical manner, more than any other military in the world. He stressed that forming such a committee could send a message to military officers that they are not trusted".
Netanyahu has reportedly wavered, but seems to be more comfortable with the military's position.
Many of the views are points along the same spectrum.
Israel's YNet website reported today that "a top General Staff official told Ynet on Wednesday that more could be done on the PR front. 'There is something that can be done… We can explain better to the world and to ourselves what we are doing', the source said ... A General Staff official told Ynet submission to certain guidelines may be harmful to the IDF's operational capabilities. 'The Goldstone Report shows that the world has not internalized the nature of wars ... No one in the world can do it better, there is no example of a more cautious or accurate manner of conduct in such a populous environment. We did not drop bombs without looking and checking thoroughly ... How can we work and defend Israel's citizens if we need a lawyer to tell us every thing. I don't know of a better method in such a conflict, and if anyone does, let them come and say it. Goldstone didn't say it. If we do not attack, then we will be attacked, and it won't stop', he said. He said the military has nothing to apologize for, and that the IDF was well prepared for the operation, which is why it suffered a relatively low number of casualties ... The official said, 'The question is not how many were hit on our side as opposed to the other side, but how many targets did we hit without harming innocents and the surroundings, and I believe we did this well'." Nonetheless, the YNet report noted, "he completely rejected all claims of alleged war crimes committed during the Gaza offensive". This report can be read in full here.
Netanyahu's first responses to the Goldstone report included exhorting major Israeli allies -- and chief among them the U.S. and Europe -- to act to reject it, otherwise they would be hampered in carrying out their own wars "on terror" (U.S. President Obama has, however, apparently ordered that this terminology be dropped). Netanyahu also said that endorsing the Goldstone report would "kill" the Israel-Palestinian peace process.
The Jerusalem Post reported Wednesday that "Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu directed the relevant ministries on Tuesday to look into ways of launching an international initiative to change the laws of war to deal with the modern-day scourge of terrorism. This new initiative comes fast on the heels of the Goldstone Report, which accused Israel of war crimes for its military operation in the Gaza Strip against Hamas earlier this year. At a meeting of the security cabinet that focused on the report and its ramifications, Netanyahu said Israel's challenge was 'to delegitimize the continuous attempt to delegitimize the State of Israel ... The most important arena where we need to act in this context is in the arena of public opinion, which is crucial in the democratic world. We must continue to debunk this lie that is spreading with the help of the Goldstone report', Netanyahu said ... Netanyahu said that such a new initiative was necessary to keep up with the spread of terrorism throughout the world, according to a statement put out by the Prime Minister's Office".
What Netanyahu did explore, according to some Israeli media reports, was the establishment of a judicial commission of inquiry, possibly to be headed by former Supreme Court of Justice Avraham Barak. He dropped the idea when the Palestinian leadership initially agreed, on 1-2 October, and reportedly as a result of American "intense diplomacy", to withdraw a draft resolution endorsing the Goldstone report's conclusions, and referring it to the UN General Assembly.
After a groundswell of scathing criticism from Palestinians both inside the occupied territory and around the world -- and from their international supporters as well -- and a precipitous loss of support that threatened the legitimacy of the present Palestinian leadership and system, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas changed course and ordered an all-out effort to get a discussion within the Human Rights Council, which last week finally adopted an even-stronger resolution with what might be an even-greater margin of votes.
The resolution adopted on 16 October by the UNHRC in Geneva endorsed the recommendations in the Goldstone report, and recommended that the UN General Assembly "consider" the report in its current session (which lasts until late December, or eventually until next September).
As a result, the UN General Assembly in New York is looking at dates to schedule a discussion before the end of the main part of its current session in late December.
The UNHRC resolution also said that the Israeli restrictions on Gaza -- which the HRC resolution says is occupied -- is a "siege" that "constitutes collective punishment of Palestinian civilians". The resolution also stresses "that the right to life constitutes the most fundamental of all human rights", and recognizes that "the Israeli siege imposed on the occupied Gaza Strip, including its closure of border crossings and the cutting of the supply of fuel, food and medicine, constitutes collective punishment of Palestinian civilians and leads to disastrous humanitarian and environmental consequences".
On the Goldstone report itself, the UNHRC resolution condemns "all targeting of civilians and stressing the urgent need to ensure accountability for all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law to prevent further violations, [and it also]
1. Condemns the non-cooperation by the occupying power, Israel, with the independent international fact-finding mission;
2. Welcomes the report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission;
3. Endorses the recommendations contained in the report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission, and calls upon all concerned parties including United Nations bodies, to ensure their implementation in accordance with their respective mandates;
4. Recommends the General Assembly to consider the report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission, during the main part of its 64th session;
5. Requests the United Nations Secretary General to submit to the 13th Human Rights Council´s session, a report, on the status of implementation of paragraph 3, above".
What will happen next, and beyond that, is not clear. The UN Human Rights Council still has on its books a resolution calling for considering (or re-considering) the Goldstone report in March 2010 -- more or less the six-month period within which Israel and Hamas should have started their own independent internal investigations that is mentioned in the Goldstone report's recommendations. But the U.S. and now also reportedly Russia are apparently opposed to any discussion within the UN Security Council.
The JPost article noted that "One issue critical to Israel's dealing with the Goldstone report was not discussed on Tuesday, but is likely to be discussed at the security cabinet's next meeting: whether Israel should set up a judicial commission to look into various allegations stemming from Operation Cast Lead. Defense Minister Ehud Barak, however, is adamantly opposed to such a committee, and reportedly blocked attempts by Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz to bring the matter to the security cabinet on Tuesday. Barak reportedly said in the cabinet meeting that such a body was not needed, since the IDF was capable of investigating itself. Those in favor of setting up such a body maintain that by doing so, Israel would prevent itself from possibly being hauled before the International Criminal Court in The Hague on war crimes charges, since the ICC does not take up cases where credible and independent investigations are being conducted by the countries involved. Because of the sensitivity of the matter, it was impossible Tuesday to get any of the 15 members of the security cabinet to come out openly and say whether or not they supported establishing an independent committee. Sources close to the prime minister said that he had not yet formulated an opinion on the matter". This JPost article can be read in full here.
According to Israel Radio, the Jerusalem Post reported on Tuesday, in advance of the Security Cabinet meeting, that "Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz had been expected to propose setting up such a commission, but he was set to face strong opposition from security cabinet members, particularly Defense Minister Ehud Barak. Those inside the government advocating an independent inquiry into the Gaza offensive have argued that this would be one way to remove the threat of Israel being hauled before the International Criminal Court in The Hague, since the International Criminal Court does not take up cases where credible and independent investigations are being conducted by the countries involved". The JPost also noted that "The Prime Minister's Office on Monday would not divulge the nature of Netanyahu's response to a joint letter sent on Friday by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown urging the premier, among other things, to set up an independent inquiry into Operation Cast Lead". This JPost report can be read in full here.
In a separate report, the JPost said that South Africa's Justice Richard Goldstone also said that Israel would be let off the hook if only it launched its own independent investigation into the report of his Fact-Finding Mission on the Gaza conflict: "If the Israeli government set up an open investigation, that would really be the end of the matter, as far as Israel is concerned", Goldstone told American rabbis in a telephone conference call organized on Sunday night by Taanit Tzedek-Jewish Fast for Gaza -- a group, the Jpost explained, which is composed of « U.S. rabbis who have been organizing monthly fasts since July to protest Israel's closure of the Gaza crossings to all but humanitarian aid».
Goldstone also said, during the call, that « the level of civilian destruction in Gaza 'was not by error, it was by design. It was not a mistake, the IDF does not do those things by error ... It was a collective punishment. I do not believe that significant distinction was made between civilians and combatants in that respect', Goldstone said". According to this JPost article, Goldstone indicated that the "report is meant to be a blue print for further judicial investigations ... It was meant to be the result of a fact-finding mission. 'We weren't conducting a judicial investigation. We didn't make our findings according to the criminal standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. I would say it was a prima facie case, reasonable on weighing the evidence'."
In the same conference call, this JPost story reports, "Goldstone rejected Israel's assertion that the report would damage the peace process ... The Israeli claims 'are shallow and false', Goldstone said. 'What peace process are they talking about? There isn't one'."
Goldstone added, according to the Jerusalem Post: 'I don't believe you can have a lasting peace until these things have been put on the table'." This report can be read in full here.
Goldstone himself has published an introspective piece in the Jerusalem Post on Monday, in which he said that: "Over the past 20 years, I have investigated serious violations of international law in my own country, South Africa, in the former Yugoslavia, in Rwanda and the alleged fraud and theft by governments and political leaders in a number of countries in connection with the United Nations Iraq Oil for Food program. In all of these, allegations reached the highest political echelons. In every instance, I spoke out strongly in favor of full investigations and, where appropriate, criminal prosecutions. I have spoken out over the years on behalf of the International Bar Association against human rights violations in many countries, including Sri Lanka, China, Russia, Iran, Zimbabwe and Pakistan. I would have been acting against those principles and my own convictions and conscience if I had refused a request from the United Nations to investigate serious allegations of war crimes against both Israel and Hamas in the context of Operation Cast Lead. As a Jew, I felt a greater and not a lesser obligation to do so."
However, Goldstone laments, "Five weeks after the release of the Report of the Fact Finding Mission on Gaza, there has been no attempt by any of its critics to come to grips with its substance. It has been fulsomely approved by those whose interests it is thought to serve and rejected by those of the opposite view. Those who attack it do so too often by making personal attacks on its authors' motives and those who approve it rely on its authors' reputations. Israeli government spokesmen and those who support them have attacked it in the harshest terms and, in particular my participation, in a most personal and hurtful way. The time has now come for more sober reflection on what the report means and appropriate Israeli reactions to it".
Goldstone also wrote that "In Gaza, I was surprised and shocked by the destruction and misery there. I had not expected it. I did not anticipate that the IDF would have targeted civilians and civilian objects. I did not anticipate seeing the vast destruction of the economic infrastructure of Gaza including its agricultural lands, industrial factories, water supply and sanitation works. These are not military targets. I have not heard or read any government justification for this destruction".
He noted that "Israel has an internationally renowned and respected judiciary that should be envy of many other countries in the region. It has the means and ability to investigate itself. Has it the will?" Justice Goldstone's piece can be read in full here.
In a separate piece published in the JPost, the legal adviser to the Israeli Foreign Ministry Alan Baker wrote that "The Israeli government cannot ignore the call by Goldstone and everyone else, to institute an official governmental inquiry. If indeed Israel has the substantive answers to the accusations levelled by Goldstone, then there is no reason to delay any further the establishment of such an inquiry. It would not, as has been claimed, be perceived as submitting to terror or caving in to international pressure, and would not be seen as lack of faith in our soldiers and officers. Considerable damage has been done by the Goldstone accusations. Such damage cannot be repaired by hasbara, which has proven itself to be utterly useless, or by repetitive, weak statements by Israeli ministers and deputy ministers. Israel must act to control that damage by establishing an inquiry manned by a prominent retired Supreme Court justice and serious military and legal experts. Such a move would instantly neutralize and deflate international criticism; it would provide a viable claim of non-admissibility to any attempt to prosecute Israel or Israeli leaders before international or national courts and tribunals". Alan Baker's piece can be read in full here.
Separately, an article in Haaretz stated that "Israel's western allies have pressured the country to launch credible investigations into the allegations of possible war crimes. Meanwhile, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu pledged on Monday that Israel would ensure that the report would be vetoed at the United Nations General Assembly. 'It's going to the UN', the premier told lawmakers from his Likud party. 'We'll make sure it gets vetoed'." This Haaretz article can be read in full here.
There is, of course, no veto in the UN General Assembly, where the Goldstone report is headed -- the veto is only in the UN Security Council. and only by the five Permanent Members (U.S., Russia, China, Britain and France).
The Goldstone report said that if either Israel or Hamas fail to set up their own independent internal inquiries, the UN Security Council should consider referring the matter to the International Criminal Court in The Hague.
Print
Email
