HRW on the Lebanese ambulance accusations

Back during the Israel-Hezbullah war, some websites– and even the Australian Foreign Minister– propagated accusations that reports published by Human Rights Watch and a number of media outlets that on July 23 Israel attacked two clearly marked Lebanese Red Cross ambulances near Qana were quite false; and indeed, that these reports were part of a Hizbullah-orchestrated “hoax” designed to smear Israel.
After the war ended, HRW was able to go back and re-examine all the evidence related to the incident very carefully. On December 19, it published the results of this investigation, and concluded that,

    the attack on the ambulances was not a hoax: Israeli forces attacked two Lebanese Red Cross ambulances that night in Qana, almost certainly with missiles fired from an Israeli drone flying overhead. The physical and testimonial evidence collected by Human Rights Watch disproves the allegations of a “hoax,” made by persons who never visited Lebanon and had no opportunity to assess the evidence first-hand. Those claiming a hoax relied on faulty conjectures based on a limited number of photographs of one of the ambulances.

In the attack, the three already-wounded passengers who were being transferred from one ambulance to another at the time were further wounded, and all six of the ambulance workers involved were also wounded.
This page of the HRW report says,

    The limited damage and the high precision of the strikes on the ambulances suggest that the weapon was a smaller type of missile fired from an Israeli drone or helicopter. Israel is in possession of an arsenal of highly precise missiles that can be fired from either helicopters or drones and are designed to limit the damage to their targets. The Israeli-designed and manufactured SPIKE anti-armor missile system and the still experimental DIME (dense inert metal explosive) missile are examples of smaller missiles designed to cause smaller explosions and limit collateral damage. Such missiles cause less powerful explosions than the previous generation of US-manufactured TOW and Hellfire missiles (often used by the IDF in assassination attempts against Palestinian militants in Gaza and the West Bank), which would have destroyed the ambulances completely. While the smaller missiles can be fired from either drones or helicopters, none of the witnesses reported hearing helicopters in the air before or during the attack, so it is most likely the missiles were fired from an Israeli drone.

On this page of the report, the researchers give a detailed refutation of the claims made by those who argued that the whole incident had been a Hizbullah-orchestrated “hoax”. (Those who argued this included Oliver North– yes, he of the Iran-Contra scandal, now having reinvented himself as a rightwing radio personality.)
HRW concludes the report by stating,

    Human Rights Watch trusts that, now that the truth has been demonstrated, these armchair deniers will devote their energy to pressing Israel to determine why this attack occurred, who was responsible, whether disciplinary or punitive measures are in order, and what steps can be taken to ensure that similar attacks are not repeated in the future. It would also be appropriate to press for compensation to the victims as well.

It would also be appropriate for everyone concerned to note the it is one of the foundations of the whole body of international humanitarian law that clearly marked ambulances are absolutely not to be subjected to any attack. To attack such a vehicle is a grave breach of the laws of war, that is, a war crime.

18 thoughts on “HRW on the Lebanese ambulance accusations”

  1. It is a well known phenomenon for those commiting such crime to deny all responsibility at the earliest possible moment. In this was the retraction goes almost unnoticed.
    This happened with the shelling by the Israeli army of the beach in Gaza and also after UN workers were murdered in Lebanon.
    When the Irish army served as UN peacekeepers in Southern Lebanon, they were harassed on an almost daily basis by the Israelis or their SLA proxies.
    I notice that the new illegal settlement building plan for the Syrian Golan heights has gone almost completely unreported.
    The US even criticised this plan.

  2. No big surprise. For the Israeli military blowing up ambulances is standard operating procedure and has been for decades. (Ditto for the Americans in Iraq.)

  4. Mark,
    Just the opposite. Israel almost immediately apologizes for any damage done, even before an investigation has been conducted proving that it was the party that inflicted the damage, let along whether the use of force was justified or not.
    Helena’s entry is also rather misleading (not really a surprise). The HRW is hardly a detailed and conclusive refutation of the possibility of a hoax, but is largely founded on speculation and possible, though not conclusive, interpretations of the evidence.
    One thing I find amusing. When HRW initially objected to the use of human shields to aid and abet war criminals, Helena engaged in her hysterical attack pattern, accusing HRW of working from “comfortable” New York and having no credibility. Now that HRW has, under pressure from the “Palestine Uber-Alles” crowd (perhaps we should just call it “the lobby”) backtracked on its position, and issued another report criticizing Israel, their investigatory techniques meet Helena’s approval.
    Basically, for Helena, there is only one acceptable conclusion to an investigation, and that is complete blame for Israel. Any other conclusion will subject you to irrelevant personal attacks.

  5. Joshua:
    Can we not engage in a mature means of critique? Just like Israel bombed the peacekeepers of south Lebanon (then using the propaganda ‘what were they doing there’…perhaps trying to be in service to peace?…), bombing every means of escape, choosing war as an option, the Government of Israel openly stating its intentions to destroy Lebanon (we will turn the clock back on Lebanon 20 years?)using cluster bombs, both immoral and inhumane-providing Hezbollah with the opportunity for war, as if the Israelis did not know what would happen? Yes, the Israelis are responsible…why are they not ever held accountable? I agree with much of Helena’s analysis, not always all of it…however this is the point of discourse.
    No, I would not have written the article “In Search of Muslim Democracy” because Lebanon is a multiplural state-however, I hardly believe Helena Cobban, a deeply thoughtful scholar, is “hysterical”. Israel dropped these bombs. Did they not?

  6. rejoinder:
    Helena, PLEASE add a “preview your comment” function here, ok? I meant to write “titled as” In search of a Muslim democracy.
    Moreover, I believe that your analysis of Human Rights Watch is rather bankrupt. Indeed the pressure on HRW must be enormous-and I too do not always agree with some of their statements-the use of non-violent collective gathering (a much more accurate means to explain what is dismissed as “human shielding”) was in fact a major step for Palestinian non-violence-a’la Rachel Corrie (did she really need to be buried under a bulldozer?)…I liken some of the critique here to trying to find some rationalization as for why settlers actually shot at the car of former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson-Any particular rationale for this? I seem to be incapable of finding one…

  9. http://www.zombietime.com for a detailed refutation of the HRW report.
    Any Jewish donors to HRW should be well aware they are subsidizing blood libel. A SPIKE or DIME munition would have reduced an ambulance to smoking, charred pieces of scrap about the same size as its hubcaps, we are talking exposive anti-armor missiles here, people.

  10. Rationalizations-
    Eurosabra-So the type of munition justifies bombing ambulances? In the same way that asking what peacekeepers are doing trying to monitor events, when they were bombed with abandon-and the response is “What are they doing there”? The capacity to rationalize death is astonishing. How tragic.

  11. No, the forensic evidence indicates that ambulance was struck neither by a SPIKE or DIME munition, as HRW alleges. In fact, the probability is that the ambulance was NOT struck by ANY explosive device, as the damage is consistent with vandalism by sledgehammer rather than any munition.

  12. No, the forensic evidence indicates that ambulance was struck neither by a SPIKE nor DIME munition, as HRW alleges. In fact, the probability is that the ambulance was NOT struck by ANY explosive device, as the damage is consistent with vandalism by sledgehammer rather than any munition.

Comments are closed.