Israel has taken human shields to a whole new criminal level

Israel’s New Tactic in Gaza: A Controversial Form of Human Shielding

The use of civilians as human shields in warfare is, unfortunately, not a new tactic. Throughout history, armed forces have coerced vulnerable civilians to act as protective barriers against attacks. Yet, despite this longstanding and troubling practice, reports suggest that Israel has introduced a unique and alarming variation of human shielding in Gaza. This tactic appears unprecedented in the history of modern warfare.

Alarming Revelations of a New Shielding Tactic

Al Jazeera initially uncovered this controversial tactic, followed by an extensive exposé by the Israeli news outlet Haaretz. According to these reports, Israeli troops have allegedly abducted Palestinian civilians, dressed them in military uniforms, attached cameras to their bodies, and sent them into underground tunnels and buildings. The purpose, it appears, was to protect Israeli forces and identify the locations of armed Palestinian fighters.

Haaretz described this practice in detail, noting that these disguised civilians often appear indistinguishable from Israeli troops. The article noted, “It’s hard to recognize them. They’re usually wearing Israeli army uniforms, many of them are in their 20s, and they’re always with Israeli soldiers of various ranks.” However, there are subtle indicators—like the fact that many wear sneakers instead of military boots and have their hands cuffed behind their backs. Their faces, full of fear, betray their situation.

A Change in the Logic of Human Shielding

Historically, the concept of human shielding has been based on the recognition that those being used as shields are vulnerable civilians or prisoners of war. This acknowledgment aims to deter the opposing forces from launching attacks, as the presence of innocent lives should invoke moral and legal restraints. However, by disguising Palestinian civilians as soldiers, the Israeli military seems to have fundamentally altered this premise.

According to reports, dressing Palestinian civilians in Israeli military attire not only conceals their vulnerability but also serves a strategic purpose. The objective, it appears, is not to deter Palestinian fighters from attacking, but rather to provoke them into revealing their positions, allowing Israeli troops to respond and eliminate them.

Past Practices and New Implications

While the Israeli military has previously employed robots, trained dogs, and even Palestinian civilians as shields, this particular approach of disguising civilians as combatants seems to mark a drastic departure. In previous instances, civilians serving as shields were still recognizable as non-combatants, typically wearing civilian clothing. This latest tactic, however, blurs that distinction and raises significant ethical and legal questions.

The reports shed light on how this practice manipulates perceptions on the battlefield. By masking vulnerable civilians as soldiers, it strips them of their status and exposes them to lethal risks, transforming them from protected persons under international law into active targets.

A Reflection of Broader Attitudes?

The Israeli military’s approach towards using civilians in this manner may not come as a surprise to those who have closely followed the region’s ongoing conflicts. Some critics argue that the long-standing racialized views toward Palestinians have shaped the current military tactics. Such views could explain why Israeli President Isaac Herzog publicly declared there are “no innocent civilians” in Gaza, or why there seems to be widespread public indifference towards the extensive loss of life among Palestinians.

In this context, the tactic of disguising Palestinian civilians as soldiers to act as human shields may not be seen as an anomaly, but rather a continuation of broader attitudes towards Gaza and its residents. This raises deeper questions about the systemic disregard for civilian life and international laws that prohibit these actions.

Violations of International Law

International humanitarian law unequivocally prohibits the use of civilians as human shields and forbids any military tactics that involve perfidy—acts intended to deceive the opposing forces by using prohibited symbols or disguises. By dressing Palestinian civilians in military uniforms and coercing them to act as shields, Israeli forces are accused of violating these fundamental legal provisions.

Furthermore, these acts have been labeled as war crimes under international law. Forcing civilians to engage in military activities while disguised in enemy uniforms crosses multiple legal and moral boundaries, creating a dual violation.

A Grim Reality

Despite mounting evidence and documentation of these tactics, the likelihood of immediate change remains slim. Critics of the international legal system argue that its structure, rooted in colonial legacies, often fails to hold powerful states accountable. As pointed out by critical legal scholars, including Antony Anghie and Noura Erekat, racism and geopolitical biases have long influenced how international justice is administered.

One only needs to look at the history of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to notice a troubling pattern of selective accountability. With a lack of clear action against such violations, hopes for justice may seem distant for those living through the ongoing conflict in Gaza.

Conclusion: The Urgency for Accountability

The reports of Israeli troops using Palestinian civilians disguised as soldiers add a disturbing new chapter to the ongoing conflict in Gaza. This tactic not only changes the very logic of human shielding but also exposes a deeper disregard for international law and human rights. As the situation continues to unfold, calls for accountability and adherence to international norms become ever more urgent.

Whether these practices lead to concrete international action remains uncertain. However, one thing is clear—there is a need for a more consistent and fair application of international law, free from the influence of racial or geopolitical biases. Only then can there be hope for justice and an end to such inhumane tactics.