Connect with us

conflict

High death toll does not mean Israel’s violating international law

Published

2 years ago

7 minute read

From the MacDonald Laurier Institute

By Sarah Teich and Brian L. Cox

Many critics of Israel seem to be operating under a misunderstanding of the law of armed conflict.

The seven-day truce between Israel and Hamas ended on Dec. 1. Since the fighting resumed, calls to keep Israel accountable to international law have been intensifying, including, most recently, from Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly, who said that Canada will “support any form of accountability systems … at the international level that will look into” Israel’s conduct. On Tuesday, Canada voted for a ceasefire in Gaza at the United Nations, which will likely further embolden critics of Israel’s military operations.

Critics stand ready to lambaste Israeli military forces for the destruction of civilian infrastructure and civilian deaths, even accusing Israel of war crimes and genocide. Yet these criticisms often involve a distortion of the facts and a distortion of the law.

Oct. 7 was the single most brutal massacre against Jewish people since the Holocaust. The images and videos of the massacre are horrific. Women were paraded half-naked through the streets of Gaza; babies were ripped from the arms of their mothers and burned alive; elderly Holocaust survivors were terrorized and abducted. Approximately 1,200 people were killed and over 200 taken hostage in attacks orchestrated and carried out by Hamas, a recognized terrorist organization that receives funding and training from the Islamic Republic of Iran.

In the weeks that followed, and as Hamas continued to launch rockets indiscriminately at Israeli cities, Israeli forces initiated extensive ground, air and sea operations in Gaza, with the aim of dismantling Hamas and retrieving the hostages. These goals are, presumably, incredibly difficult for Israeli forces to achieve without risking harm to civilians, given that Hamas is known to use Palestinian civilians as human shields. Deaths in Gaza, according to local authorities, have surpassed 18,000.

There is a general prohibition on the use of force in international law. Unprovoked wars of aggression are illegal. States are, however, generally permitted to use force when acting in self-defence and with necessary, proportionate objectives. It is apparent that, following Hamas’s attack on Oct. 7 and continued indiscriminate rocket fire at Israel, Israel’s goal of dismantling Hamas and retrieving hostages would be considered necessary and proportionate objectives justifying the use of force. These strategic objectives comply with jus ad bellum, the body of law that governs when force may be initiated.

International humanitarian law, or jus in bello, governs the conduct of armed hostilities, even in the context of a lawful war. This is the law of war, or the law of armed conflict, and it applies to all parties to a conflict. Under the law of armed conflict (LOAC), the proportionality rule prohibits engaging in an attack “when the expected incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians or damage to civilian objects would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage that is anticipated from the attack.”

Credibly determining that a violation of the LOAC proportionality rule has been committed requires evidence of the incidental harm anticipated and the military advantage expected at the time by those responsible for planning or conducting the attack. This assessment is difficult — if not impossible — to accomplish reliably based only on information available in the public domain.

Many critics of Israel seem to be operating under a misunderstanding of the law of armed conflict. As summarized by Charles Kels, senior attorney for the United States Department of Homeland Security and a judge advocate in the U.S. Air Force Reserve, there is a disturbing trend wherein academics and others conflate jus ad bellum and jus in bello.

What those who make this mistake are saying, writes Kels, “is that even if a state is acting in self-defence with a lawful objective, and even if their forces abide by (the laws of war) in military operations, they still have a legal obligation to stop fighting if civilian casualties are too high.” This is not the law, nor should it be.

The death toll in Gaza cannot be taken lightly. However, the magnitude of civilian harm alone is not a reliable indicator of compliance with international law. The fact that Hamas embeds itself within civilian populations, and actively prevents civilians from leaving dangerous areas, likely needlessly heightens the death toll.

International law prohibits deliberately making civilians the object of attack. Israel has committed publicly to complying with international law throughout this operation, just as it has done in the past. In contrast, Hamas has targeted, and continues to target, Israeli civilians with indiscriminate attacks. Hamas refuses to release all the hostages it abducted, which constitutes an ongoing serious violation of international law.

Accountability for atrocity crimes is something that should be encouraged, across the board. However, efforts should focus on the most likely perpetrators and the most egregious crimes. Hamas can and should be held accountable for its ongoing crimes against Israelis and Palestinians, and Israel should be supported as it defends itself in accordance with the law.

Sarah Teich is an international human rights lawyer, a senior fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and a legal advisor to Secure Canada. Brian L. Cox is a visiting scholar at University of Ottawa School of Law, a lecturer at Cornell Law School and a retired U.S. Army military lawyer.

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
International / 2 hours ago

Trump not seeking ceasefire with Israel, Iran as he rushes back to White House

Crime / 10 hours ago

UK finally admits clear evidence linking Pakistanis and child grooming gangs

Business / 10 hours ago

Trump family announces Trump Mobile: Made in America, for America

conflict

Trump leaves G7 early after urging evacuation of Tehran

Published on June 16, 2025

By

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

President Trump will leave the G7 summit early following rising tensions in the Middle East. In a Truth Social post Monday night, he warned “everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran” and slammed Iran for rejecting a proposed nuclear deal.

Key Details:

  • “Iran should have signed the ‘deal’ I told them to sign,” Trump posted on Truth Social Monday night, warning that “IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON.”

  • “Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran,” he added, echoing warnings from Israeli officials issued earlier in the day ahead of expected military operations.

  • Trump’s press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, confirmed he will leave the G7 in Alberta after a working dinner with world leaders, citing the evolving conflict in the Middle East.

Diving Deeper:

President Donald Trump will cut his G7 visit short and return to the United States Monday night after issuing an urgent warning for mass evacuations in Iran’s capital city. The message, shared on his official Truth Social account, came amid intensifying military conflict between Israel and Iran.

“Iran should have signed the ‘deal’ I told them to sign. What a shame, and waste of human life,” Trump wrote. “Simply stated, IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. I said it over and over again! Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!”

The post follows Israel’s repeated missile strikes on Iranian targets, including nuclear facilities and regime leadership, in response to Tehran’s escalated provocations. Monday marked the fourth consecutive day of fighting between the two nations.

Earlier in the day, Israeli officials had already advised residents in northeastern Tehran to evacuate, foreshadowing continued strikes. According to Israeli military estimates, one-third of Iran’s ballistic missile launchers have been destroyed so far in the renewed conflict.

While attending the G7 summit in Canada, Trump emphasized the gravity of the situation. His press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, confirmed that he will depart after dinner with fellow heads of state. “Much was accomplished,” she posted, noting a major trade deal signed with the UK, “but because of what’s going on in the Middle East, President Trump will be leaving tonight.”

Continue Reading

conflict

Israel bombs Iranian state TV while live on air

Published on June 16, 2025

By

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

Israel struck Iran’s state-run television station during a live broadcast Monday, forcing an anchor to flee mid-sentence as debris rained down. The Israeli Air Force expanded its target list to include media arms of the Iranian regime after continued missile attacks on Israeli civilians.

Key Details:

  • The Israeli Air Force bombed Iran’s state broadcaster during a live segment, interrupting footage of Iranian missiles hitting Israel. An anchor was seen abandoning her post as the studio filled with smoke and debris.

  • The strike followed public warnings from Israel for residents in northeast Tehran to evacuate ahead of operations targeting regime-linked facilities.

  • Israel’s expanded military campaign follows a new wave of Iranian missile attacks Sunday night into Monday, with Jerusalem emphasizing its intent to avoid civilian casualties despite growing targeting of regime infrastructure.

Diving Deeper:

The Israeli Air Force carried out an airstrike Monday on Iran’s state-controlled television network while it was broadcasting live, part of a broader escalation in Israel’s campaign to dismantle Iran’s military and propaganda infrastructure.

According to footage circulating online, the incident occurred as the anchor—visibly agitated and dressed in a black chador—was delivering a harsh anti-Israel rant. In the middle of the broadcast, the screen darkened, the set shook, and debris began falling from the ceiling. The anchor turned and fled as the feed abruptly cut out. The moment marked a rare glimpse into the vulnerability of Iran’s tightly controlled state media under Israeli bombardment.

Israel had publicly urged civilians in northeast Tehran to evacuate earlier that day, signaling imminent attacks in the area. Initial expectations were that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) would focus on military and intelligence targets. However, in light of Iran’s continued launches of ballistic missiles at civilian areas across Israel, Jerusalem has expanded its mission to include what it calls “political instruments of the regime”—which now appears to include its media apparatus.

While Iranian authorities maintain strict control over domestic news and heavily censor dissenting voices, Monday’s strike disrupted their messaging operation in real time. Iran’s state-run outlets have played a key role in promoting anti-Israel narratives and concealing internal dissent. Journalists in Iran face imprisonment or worse for crossing red lines laid out by the regime.

The Israeli military’s broader campaign has crippled Iranian air defenses, granting the IAF near-total air superiority over Tehran and much of the country. With that operational freedom, Israel has systematically struck IRGC command centers, missile sites, and now media outlets tied to the regime.

Despite the heightened intensity of the conflict, Israeli officials have reiterated that their strikes are aimed solely at regime targets, not civilians. Reports on social media indicated growing panic in Tehran, with widespread traffic as residents attempted to flee the capital.

Monday’s dramatic strike on state TV underscored Israel’s determination to degrade all facets of Iran’s war-making and propaganda capabilities—signaling that even live broadcasts from Tehran are no longer beyond the reach of Israeli precision airpower.

Continue Reading

Trending

X