Gaza: How "collateral" is the collateral damage?
Collateral damage is defined as: "Unintentional or incidental injury or damage to persons or objects that would not be lawful military targets in the circumstances ruling at the time. Such damage is not unlawful so long as it is not excessive in light of the overall military advantage anticipated from the attack."
Now look at this extract from the latest UN situation report in Gaza:
As of 12 January, there were five UNRWA [Ed: UN Relief and Works Agency] staff fatalities and three UNRWA contractor fatalities due to the fighting since 27 December.
There were also four UNRWA staff and four UNRWA contractors injured. One WFP [Ed: UN World Food Programme] contractor was killed and two others were injured.
At least 49 UN buildings have sustained damage during the fighting; one international NGO partner clinic has reportedly been destroyed; and several NGO compounds have been damaged. There have also been at least four incidents of aid convoys being hit by gunfire. (Full)
Now I ask you: how collateral is this really? Can this still be understood as "unintentional" and "incidental"?
See also Civilian and aid worker casualties on the rise in Gaza.
Picture courtesy AFP
Peter. Flemish, European, aid worker, expeditioner, sailor, traveller, husband, father, friend, nutcase. Not necessarily in that order.
2 comments:
That's what the stronger side does when they want " the "weak" ones on their knees. Destroy the food and aid even though UN did provide the location of its site to IDF :(
Someone didn't like the fact that Karen AbuZayd was too forthcoming as compared to envoy Holmes. Same treatment to the building where the PRESS ( I mean not the journalists who are embedded with IDF) was staying and to the hospital where foreign doctors are outspoken.
One way to muzzle them up and "educate" them.
@The Beaver
A nasty war. Very sad. That amount of coincidental hits can no longer be justified as 'errors'...
Post a Comment