Committing War Crimes with 'Precision'

War crimes are still war crimes even when they are committed using precision weapons.

Defenders of the latest Israeli bombing of Gaza like to emphasize the precision of the bombing, as if this were the only thing that mattered. Ze’ev Chafets’ op-ed is typical of this kind of argument: “This is a figure that demonstrates careful restraint, not carpet bombing.” It is true that Israel uses precision-guided munitions, but that doesn’t absolve their military of war crimes when they “precisely” bomb civilian areas and illegally target whole residential buildings for destruction. Robert Satloff leans heavily on the precision argument as well in his appalling attempt to justify dismissing the deaths of dozens of Palestinian children. Both quote the head UNRWA official, Matthias Schmale, who described the strikes as “precise,” but conveniently leave out that he also said, “So the precision was there, but there was an unacceptable and unbearable loss of life on the civilian side.” Defenders of the bombing campaign would like people to pay attention only to the first part of this formulation so that they can ignore the second, more important part.

Carrying out a bombing campaign in an urban environment, especially one as densely packed as Gaza, imperils civilians even when the strikes are precise. Charli Carpenter discussed this in a column last week:

The requirement to avoid indiscriminate attacks is more than just an injunction against targeting civilians directly. It also prohibits attacks using weapons systems that would be incapable of being directed at a specific military objective in the particular context of their use, because their effects cannot be limited or are of a nature to strike military and civilian objects without distinction.

Dropping bombs and firing missiles in the middle of a heavily populated urban area are indiscriminate attacks even if the bombs and missiles are aimed precisely. Carpenter explains: “That is because explosive weapons in densely populated urban areas simply cannot be used in a precision manner or be limited in the ways envisioned by the Geneva Conventions.”

For that matter, a military that chooses to demolish entire residential buildings because it claims that some rooms inside have been used by Hamas is not one that is overly concerned with striking only military targets. The tactic of demolishing tower blocks is a war crime even when the building has been evacuated for the simple reason that the buildings are not lawful targets. Adil Ahmad Haque comments on the destruction of the Al Jalaa tower:

The airstrike on Al Jalaa tower was illegal for the simple reason that the tower was not a military objective (a “lawful target”) at the time of the airstrike. The expected harm to civilians and civilian objects was also excessive (or “disproportionate”) in relation to the military advantage anticipated from destroying any equipment Hamas may have left behind.

The destruction of the building was precise, and it didn’t kill anyone, but it was still a war crime. The strikes that massacred entire extended families in their homes were far worse. It should go without saying that Hamas’ rocket attacks are also inherently indiscriminate and therefore war crimes.

The debate over the bombing of Gaza reminds me of the Saudi coalition airstrike that slaughtered 40 young boys on a school bus in Saada province in northern Yemen. The coalition strike hit the bus very precisely, but the target was a bus full of innocent children and it was parked in the middle of a busy marketplace. Even after the international outcry at this obvious atrocity, the coalition maintained that the bus was a legitimate target and they apologized only for attacking it while it was in the marketplace. As far as the coalition was concerned, killing 40 kids on their bus would have been fine by them if it had been done in a different place. That coalition airstrike was more flagrantly criminal than most, but the defenders of that war trotted out the same lame justifications that we hear to defend the indefensible all the time.

War crimes are still war crimes even when they are committed using precision weapons.