Les principes du DIH exigent des belligérants de faire la distinction entre civils et combattants et entre cibles civiles et militaires ; de prendre les précautions nécessaires pour éviter de toucher les civils et d’appliquer le principe de proportionnalité. L’attaque d’une cible militaire est illégale si elle peut toucher des civils, sauf si les dommages civils sont jugés proportionnés à l’avantage militaire direct et concret attendu de l’attaque. Le Monde
Lors de l’opération « Plomb durci », en 2008-2009, le Hamas avait soutenu n’avoir eu qu’une cinquantaine de combattants tués, alors qu’Israël avançait le chiffre de 709, dont 250 agents de la police du Hamas, sur un total de 1 166 victimes. Ce n’est que le 1er novembre 2010 que le ministre de l’intérieur du Hamas, Fathi Hammad, avait finalement reconnu, dans le quotidien arabe Al-Hayat, qu’environ 700 combattants du mouvement islamiste faisaient partie des victimes. Le Monde
It has been said that it is an Israeli conspiracy, and I say it isn’t. The al-Qassam’s mujahedeen were the ones to carry out [the abduction] in show of support for the prisoners’ hunger strike. Salah Arouri
Mais pourquoi n’appelle-t-on pas ce mur, qui sépare les Gazaouites de leurs frères égyptiens « mur de la honte » ou « de l’apartheid »? Liliane Messika (Primo-Europe)
The next time anti-Israeli demonstrators shout about divided cities, refugees, walls, settlers and occupied land, let us understand that those are not necessarily the issues in the Middle East. If they were, the Cyprus tragedy would also be center stage. Likewise, crowds would be condemning China for occupying Tibet, or still sympathizing with millions of Germans who fled a now-nonexistent Prussia, or deploring religious castes in India, or harboring anger over the tough Russian responses to Georgia, Crimea and Ukraine, or deploring beheadings in northern Iraq. Instead, accept that the Middle East is not just about a dispute over land. Israel is inordinately condemned for what it supposedly does because its friends are few, its population is tiny, and its adversaries beyond Gaza numerous, dangerous and often powerful. And, of course, because it is Jewish. Victor Davis Hanson
We have put as much pressure and as much cajoling on Israel as we can to allow them to get building materials and other forbidden items into Gaza. Vice President Joe Biden (Bloomberg TV, 2010)
Some argue that Israel withdrew but imposed a siege on Gaza. In reality, Hamas produced the siege. Israel’s tight embargo on Gaza came only after ongoing Hamas attacks. The embargo on Gaza might have hurt the Palestinians who live there, but it did not stop Hamas from building a labyrinth of underground tunnels, bunkers, command posts and shelters for its leaders, fighters and rockets. The tunnels are under houses, schools, hospitals and mosques; they allow Hamas fighters to go down one shaft and depart from another. According to the Israeli army, an estimated 600,000 tons of cement — some of it smuggled through tunnels from Egypt, some diverted from construction materials allowed into Gaza — was used for Hamas’s underground network. At times, I argued with Israeli leaders and security officials, telling them they needed to allow more construction materials, including cement, into Gaza so that housing, schools and basic infrastructure could be built. They countered that Hamas would misuse it, and they were right. Developing Gaza — fostering a future for its people and protecting them — was not Hamas’s goal. So long as Israel exists, Hamas will seek to fight it. It was not Israel’s opposition to the reconciliation agreement between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (PA) that led to this latest round of warfare. Rather, it was Hamas’s political isolation and increasingly desperate financial situation. The group was broke after Egypt closed the smuggling tunnels into Gaza, Iran cut off funding because of Hamas’s opposition to Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, and Qatar was unable to send money through the Rafah border crossing, which Egypt controls. The reconciliation deal relieved Hamas of the need to govern Gaza and meet its financial obligations there — without relieving it of its weapons. But the PA wasn’t willing to pay the Hamas salaries, including to its security forces, so Hamas did what it does best: use force to alter the political landscape. Dennis Ross
A l’heure où, refusant toute prolongation de trève et démilitarisation comme condition de la levée du blocus militaire égypto-israélien, le Hamas a repris ce qu’il sait faire de mieux …
Et où, après tout ce qui a été révélé sur sa violation systématique du droit de la guerre et son traitement des journalistes, nos médias continuent comme si de rien n’était à jouer les bulletins paroissiaux dudit Hamas …
Pendant que tout en renouvelant leur soutien aux enlèvements de jeunes israéliens qui avaient été au départ de l’actuel conflit et bien à l’abri aux bon soins des financiers qataris du djihad international ou de ceux qui depuis 40 ans occupent en toute impunité un membre de l’Union européenne, les dirigeants dits « politiques » du mouvement terroriste semblent avoir lâché leurs chefs militaires à Gaza même …
Et que, toujours aussi courageux devant l’évidence et notamment le financement du djihad final par nos chers amis qataris, nos gouvernants continuent à faire les autruches …
Retour, avec l’ancien conseiller spécial de Barack Obama pour le Proche-Orient Dennis Ross sur la réalité et l’origine du blocus systématiquement imputé au seul Israël …
Qui reconnaissant sa propre contribution et partant celle de sa secrétaire d’Etat Hillary Clinton à la construction des tunnels de Gaza via la levée des restrictions sur l’entrée de ciment …
Confirme que c’est bien suite à ses propres et incessantes attaques, contre Israël comme contre l’Egypte, dès le retrait israélien il y a bientôt dix ans que le Hamas s’est imposé lui-même ledit blocus …
Opinions
Hamas could have chosen peace. Instead, it made Gaza suffer
Dennis Ross
The Washington Post
August 8, 2014
Dennis Ross, counselor at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, served as President Bill Clinton’s Middle East negotiator and was a special assistant to President Obama from 2009 to 2011.
In the winter of 2005, Ziad Abu Amr, a Gaza representative in the Palestinian Legislative Council, invited me to speak in Gaza City. As I entered the building for the event, I saw Mahmoud al-Zahar, one of the co-founders of Hamas. Before I could say anything, Ziad explained: “We decided to invite the opposition to hear you. We think it is important that they do so.”
I had not expected senior Hamas leaders to be there, but it didn’t alter my main message. Israel was slated to withdraw from the Gaza Strip in several months, so I emphasized that this was a time of opportunity for Palestinians — they should seize it. I told the audience of roughly 200 Gazans that this was a moment to promote Palestinian national aspirations.
If they took advantage of the Israeli withdrawal to peacefully develop Gaza, the international community and the Israelis would see that what was working in Gaza could also be applied to the West Bank. However, I then asked rhetorically: If Palestinians instead turn Gaza into a platform for attacks against Israel, who is going to favor an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and the creation of a Palestinian state?
Much of Palestinians’ history might have been imposed on them by others, I said. But this time they had the power to shape their future. If they made the wrong choice, they could not blame the Arabs, the Europeans, the Americans — or the Israelis.
While the audience was not shy about criticizing the U.S. role in peacemaking, no one challenged my main message that day.
Unfortunately, we know the path Hamas chose. Even as Israel was completing the process of withdrawing all its settlers and soldiers from Gaza, Hamas carried out a bus-station bombing in Israel. Then, from late 2005 to early 2006, Hamas conducted multiple attacks on the very crossing points that allowed people and goods to move into and out of Gaza. For Hamas, it was more important to continue “resistance” than to allow Gazans to constructively test their new freedom — or to give Israelis a reason to think that withdrawal could work. Some argue that Israel withdrew but imposed a siege on Gaza. In reality, Hamas produced the siege. Israel’s tight embargo on Gaza came only after ongoing Hamas attacks.
The embargo on Gaza might have hurt the Palestinians who live there, but it did not stop Hamas from building a labyrinth of underground tunnels, bunkers, command posts and shelters for its leaders, fighters and rockets. The tunnels are under houses, schools, hospitals and mosques; they allow Hamas fighters to go down one shaft and depart from another. According to the Israeli army, an estimated 600,000 tons of cement — some of it smuggled through tunnels from Egypt, some diverted from construction materials allowed into Gaza — was used for Hamas’s underground network.
At times, I argued with Israeli leaders and security officials, telling them they needed to allow more construction materials, including cement, into Gaza so that housing, schools and basic infrastructure could be built. They countered that Hamas would misuse it, and they were right. Developing Gaza — fostering a future for its people and protecting them — was not Hamas’s goal.
So long as Israel exists, Hamas will seek to fight it. It was not Israel’s opposition to the reconciliation agreement between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority (PA) that led to this latest round of warfare. Rather, it was Hamas’s political isolation and increasingly desperate financial situation. The group was broke after Egypt closed the smuggling tunnels into Gaza, Iran cut off funding because of Hamas’s opposition to Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, and Qatar was unable to send money through the Rafah border crossing, which Egypt controls.
The reconciliation deal relieved Hamas of the need to govern Gaza and meet its financial obligations there — without relieving it of its weapons. But the PA wasn’t willing to pay the Hamas salaries, including to its security forces, so Hamas did what it does best: use force to alter the political landscape.
In the 1990s, when I was the U.S. negotiator on Middle East peace, every time we made progress or seemed to be on the verge of a breakthrough, Hamas suicide bombers would strike Israeli cities. Six months before Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated in 1995, he told me that the next Israeli election and Israel’s position toward the Palestinians would be determined not by anything he did but by whether Hamas carried out bombings in Israel. His message was that his security forces — and especially those of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat — had to do a better job of rooting out Hamas or our hopes for peace would be thwarted.
With its finances dwindling, Hamas initiated the recent conflict. This time, however, its leaders held the people of Gaza hostage to its needs, hoping that Egypt would feel the need to open Rafah, that Qatar would deliver money and that Israel would be forced to release Palestinian prisoners.
The Israelis will certainly resist an outcome that offers Hamas any gains. Having destroyed the tunnels that could penetrate Israel, the Israelis have pulled out of Gaza and were willing to extend the 72-hour truce that ended Friday. Hamas was not willing to do so. If Israel hopes to build broader international pressure on the group to stop firing, the Israel Defense Forces will need to avoid targets such as U.N. schools and hospitals. Of course, that is easier said than done, given that Hamas often fires rockets from or near such sites.
At some point, Hamas will stop firing rockets — if for no other reason than its arsenal is depleted. For the people of Gaza, however, the price has been staggering. But Hamas’s leaders have never been concerned about that. For them, Palestinians’ pain and suffering are tools to exploit, not conditions to end.
When relative calm returns, there will understandably be a push for a diplomatic solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas now even less able politically to tackle the core issues , a permanent agreement between the two sides is not in the cards. U.S. diplomacy, therefore, needs to be guided by several considerations and achievable aims.
First, the new strategic alignment in the region must be recognized. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the Emirates see the Muslim Brotherhood as an existential threat, and they will be natural partners in denying Hamas, the Palestinian wing of the Brotherhood, potential gains and assisting the PA’s reentry into Gaza.
Second, because Hamas is incapable of changing, it needs to be discredited. In the short term, humanitarian and reconstruction aid in Gaza must be managed so that Hamas cannot exploit it politically or militarily. The Obama administration should insist that the crossing points cannot be reopened until adequate safeguards are in place to prevent the diversion of the assistance. Not only would this permit the PA to reestablish itself at the Gaza crossing points, but it could also prevent Hamas from seizing materials shipped into the Gaza Strip. For the longer term, the United States should organize a Marshall Plan for Gaza contingent on Hamas disarming. If Hamas chooses arms over civilian investment and development, it should be exposed before Palestinians and the international community.
Third, it is important to build the political capital of Abbas and the PA by showing that they can deliver something in the West Bank. Consistent with its security concerns, Israel can expedite the movement of goods and materials destined for the West Bank, preventing them from needlessly getting held up in Israeli ports.
Fourth, focus on conflict management, not conflict resolution. The United States should try to broker unilateral steps that could change the dynamic between the Israelis and the Palestinians. For example, in what is referred to as Area C of the West Bank, Israel controls all planning, zoning and security. We would ask Israel to open Area C, which is 60 percent of the West Bank, to the Palestinians for housing construction and industrial parks. In exchange, we would ask the Palestinians to forgo moves in international organizations designed to symbolize statehood and pressure Israel.
Fifth, try to persuade Netanyahu to declare that Israel’s settlement construction will be made consistent with its two-state policy, meaning it will not build in areas that it thinks will be part of a Palestinian state. This would not only defuse the movement to delegitimize Israel internationally, but it would also make it easier for the Egyptians, Jordanians, Saudis and Emirates to work more openly with Israel.
The point would be to create some positive movement on peace and Israel’s relations with its neighbors. The United States would publicly maintain its commitment to achieving two states for two peoples. Our diplomacy after this recent conflict must foster tangible changes on the ground, not promise a vision that is unachievable. That is the essence of good statecraft, and rarely has it been more needed.
Voir aussi:
How Hillary Clinton Enabled Hamas’ Construction of Terror Tunnels
Moshe Phillips and Benyamin Korn
Algemeiner
August 17, 2014
Much has been said and written about the terror tunnels that Hamas built in Gaza. But too little has been said about who it was that put the cement into Hamas’ hands, thus making the construction of the tunnels possible in the first place.
Until now.
In a bombshell revelation, Dennis Ross, the senior Mideast policy adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton from 2009 to 2011, has admitted that it was he who was assigned the task of pressuring Israel to ease up on its military blockade of Gaza.
“I argued with Israeli leaders and security officials, telling them they needed to allow more construction materials, including cement, into Gaza so that housing, schools and basic infrastructure could be built,” Ross revealed in the Washington Post on August 10. “They countered that Hamas would misuse it, and they were right.”
Not that Hillary’s State Department had been acting independently of the White House on the issue of cement. For example, Vice President Joe Biden told interviewer Charlie Rose on Bloomberg TV in 2010: “We have put as much pressure and as much cajoling on Israel as we can to allow them to get building materials” and other forbidden items into Gaza.
But now that Mrs. Clinton is attempting to distance herself from the president’s debacles in foreign affairs, Ross’ admission shows that it was she who sent her personal envoy to push for a policy that ultimately enabled Hamas to build the terror tunnels.
Israeli officials have long been justifiably concerned about the danger of dual-use items such as cement. On the one hand, cement could be used for innocent purposes such as home construction, in the hands of a peace-seeking, trustworthy government. But in the hands of untrustworthy elements – such as the Hamas terrorist regime that rules Gaza – it could also be used for other purposes. Such as terror tunnels.
President Obama recently remarked, in his much-discussed interview with Thomas Friedman of the New York Times: “Because Israel is so capable militarily, I don’t worry about Israel’s survival.” Secretary Clinton evidently shared that dismissive attitude when she sent Ross on his mission to put cement into Hamas’ hands.
It seems Obama and Clinton forgot that Israel is the only country in the world that is threatened with annihilation by a nearby regime rushing to build nuclear weapons. Israel is the only country in the world that, in the space of just 65 years, has been forced to fight four major defensive wars and five smaller ones in order to survive. Israel is the only country in the world whose next-door neighbors have built dozens of tunnels into Israel to perpetrate massacres of civilians.
Today, at least thirty-two terror tunnels later, we know that Clinton, Obama and Ross have been wrong, while Israel is right.
Hamas spent between $1 million and $10 million to build each of those tunnels, using as many as 350 truckloads of cement and other supplies per tunnel, according a report in to the Wall Street Journal, quoting Israeli military officials.
And it is “likely that there are additional tunnels” that the Israelis have yet to uncover, according to the Journal’s report.
Instead of lethal purposes, the materials used for each tunnel could have built 86 homes, or 19 medical clinics, or seven mosques, or six schools. But Hamas had other priorities.
And Secretary Clinton consciously turned a blind eye. Just as she turned a blind eye to other aggressive and anti-peace behavior by the Palestinians, such as the Palestinian Authority’s sheltering of known terrorists, its payments to imprisoned terrorists, the anti-Israel and anti-America propaganda that fills the PA-controlled media, and the anti-Semitic hatred in the textbooks used in the PA’s schools.
What are the real-life consequences of ignoring such Palestinian actions? An entire generation of young Palestinians have grown up incited to hatred of Jews and Israel, and glorifying terrorists as heroes and martyrs.
What are the real-life consequences of Mrs. Clinton putting cement into Hamas’ hands? The tunnels into Israel were used to carry out the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit and numerous other attacks in which Israelis were murdered. They were being prepared to carry out a mass coordinated attack on Israeli towns and kibbutzim this year on Rosh Hashanah.
Imagine a scenario in which a surgeon decided that she wanted to employ a controversial and risky technique. She was warned repeatedly that it was too dangerous, but proceeded anyway and in the process nearly killed the patient. Surely that would be deemed malpractice. The surgeon probably would be barred from ever again practicing medicine.
Secretary of Stated Hillary Clinton committed diplomatic malpractice. Her own top aide has revealed that it was she who put the cement into Hamas’ hands, even after Israel warned repeatedly that doing so was too dangerous. And Israel continues to suffer the consequences.
Another lesson of the Gaza war: Even as we condemn Hamas’s diversion of cement from the construction of housing to the construction of terror tunnels, let us not forget that it was Hillary Clinton who pushed through the policy that made those tunnels possible.
Moshe Phillips and Benyamin Korn are members of the board of the Religious Zionists of America.
Voir également:
Occupation hypocrisy: Gaza vs. Cyprus
One provokes outrage; the other earns a yawn
Voir encore:
Guerre de Gaza : le droit international a été violé
Hélène Sallon (Gaza, Jérusalem, envoyée spéciale) et Hélène Jaffiol (Gaza, Jérusalem, envoyée spéciale)
Le Monde
22.08.2014
A la faveur d’une trêve de neuf jours dans la bande de Gaza, les organisations des droits de l’homme palestiniennes ont entamé un difficile travail d’enquête sur une guerre qui a déjà fait plus de 2 000 victimes. En attendant que les ONG internationales, dont Amnesty International et Human Rights Watch, obtiennent l’autorisation de se rendre à Gaza, qu’elles réclament à Israël depuis le 8 juillet, elles sont seules sur le terrain. La reprise des hostilités, mardi 19 août, complique leur tâche, dispersant à nouveau les témoins dans des dizaines de refuges.
Il faudra des mois pour étayer les allégations de violations du droit international humanitaire (DIH) par les deux camps. Des centaines de récits, qui mélangent parfois l’horreur d’un vécu aux rumeurs entendues, restent à démêler, et certains secrets, jalousement conservés, à percer. Le 23 juillet, Navi Pillay, la commissaire aux droits de l’homme des Nations unies, avait estimé que des « crimes de guerre » pourraient avoir été commis par les deux camps. Leur responsabilité sera jugée à l’aune des principes inscrits dans les conventions de Genève.
Lire : L’exécutif palestinien hésite à saisir la la Cour pénale internationale
Les principes du DIH exigent des belligérants de faire la distinction entre civils et combattants et entre cibles civiles et militaires ; de prendre les précautions nécessaires pour éviter de toucher les civils et d’appliquer le principe de proportionnalité. L’attaque d’une cible militaire est illégale si elle peut toucher des civils, sauf si les dommages civils sont jugés proportionnés à l’avantage militaire direct et concret attendu de l’attaque. « Le DIH s’applique aux parties indépendamment de son respect ou non par l’autre partie », souligne Haggai Elad, le directeur exécutif de l’ONG israélienne B’Tselem. Le Monde a mené sa propre enquête, non exhaustive.
ALLÉGATIONS CONTRE ISRAËL
Des habitations civiles devenues des cibles militaires. Le 12 juillet au soir, dans le quartier de Chadjaiya (est de la ville de Gaza), Tayssir Al-Batch, le commandant de la police du Hamas, a été visé devant la maison de son cousin. Au moins 18 membres de la famille, dont quatre femmes et six enfants, ont été tuées dans le bombardement qui a soufflé 6 maisons. Au prix de nombreuses morts civiles, Tsahal a plusieurs fois attaqué les résidences des membres du Hamas et du Jihad islamique, définies comme cibles militaires. Or, indique Mahmoud Abou Rahma, du Centre palestinien pour les droits de l’homme Al-Mezan, la présence d’un combattant dans une habitation n’en fait pas une cible militaire. « Une maison peut perdre son statut civil si elle est utilisée pour stocker des armes et sert de centre opérationnel. » Et, même dans ce cas, « il faut respecter le principe de réponse proportionnée (…) et limiter le nombre de victimes civiles ».
A Rafah, après une frappe israélienne, le 21 août. | AFP/THOMAS COEX
Des mesures préventives insuffisantes. « Vous avez cinq minutes pour fuir. Prenez les enfants. » Le message envoyé le 8 juillet par Tsahal à la famille Al-Kaware de Khan Younès n’a pas suffi. Huit de ses membres ont été tués dans le bombardement de la maison. Les organisations des droits de l’homme jugent insuffisants et trop tardifs ces avertissements, comme les frappes d’alerte sur les toits des immeubles visés, technique du « knock on the rooftop », et les ordres d’évacuation de quartiers entiers. « Pour être conformes au DIH, les avertissements et ordres d’évacuation doivent inclure des indications précises sur la façon et l’endroit où se mettre à l’abri », estime B’Tselem.
Des quartiers entiers devenus cibles militaires. « Le 1er août, à 9 h 50, les Israéliens ont commencé à bombarder avec des F-16, des drones et des chars les quartiers est de Rafah. Les ambulances ne pouvaient pas se déplacer. Les habitants ont reçu des SMS leur disant de ne pas quitter leur maison. L’hôpital Al-Najjar, ciblé, a dû être évacué. Près de 200 personnes ont été tuées », raconte Mohammed Abdallah, enquêteur d’Al-Mezan.
Selon le journaliste israélien Amos Harel, le bombardement de Rafah a suivi le déclenchement par l’armée du protocole Hannibal pour retrouver le sous-lieutenant Hadar Goldin, enlevé le matin par des combattants palestiniens. En trois heures, la ville a essuyé plus de 1 000 obus d’artillerie et 40 attaques aériennes, sans qu’il y ait eu d’ordre d’évacuation préalable.
Un Palestinien pleure la mort d’un membre de sa famille, le 21 août à l’hôpital de Gaza. | AFP/MOHAMMED ABED
Des humanitaires et personnels de santé visés. « Le 25 juillet, on a reçu un appel d’une de nos ambulances. Les soldats israéliens avaient tiré sur son conducteur, Mohammed Al-Abadla, à Al-Karara. Trois équipes parties sur place se sont fait tirer dessus. On a demandé à la Croix-Rouge internationale d’organiser une coordination avec l’armée israélienne. Ça a pris vingt minutes, il est mort », raconte Salem, un instructeur du Croissant-Rouge palestinien à Khan Younès.
Plusieurs équipes médicales mais aussi des hôpitaux ont été ciblés. Les bombardements ont également visé six écoles de l’agence des Nations unies pour l’aide aux réfugiés palestiniens, l’UNRWA. L’attaque de l’école de Rafah, le 3 août, que l’organisation impute à Israël, a tué neuf réfugiés et un gardien.
ALLÉGATIONS CONTRE LES FACTIONS PALESTINIENNES
Les civils israéliens délibérément ciblés. Les factions palestiniennes ont tiré plus de 3 500 roquettes et obus de mortier sur le territoire israélien, faisant trois victimes civiles. Le Hamas a désigné « tous les Israéliens », civils et militaires, comme cibles potentielles.
Une roquette tirée depuis la bande de Gaza, le 21 août. | AFP/DAVID BUIMOVITCH
Mise en danger de la population gazaouie. L’armée israélienne affirme, vidéos à l’appui, qu’au moins 1 600 des 3 500 roquettes lancées sur son territoire l’ont été depuis des zones résidentielles, dont des mosquées ou des écoles. Des entrées de tunnel ont été découvertes dans des bâtiments civils. L’UNRWA a annoncé avoir retrouvé des roquettes dans deux de ses écoles désaffectées. Des équipes de télévision de France 24 et NDTV (Inde) ont filmé, les 1er et 5 août, la mise en place d’un lanceur de roquettes par des hommes en civil et des lancers de roquettes à proximité d’un hôtel du centre de Gaza abritant la presse internationale.
Par soutien à la résistance ou crainte de représailles, peu de Palestiniens acceptent d’évoquer ces « secrets de guerre ». Un habitant de Chadjaiya a indiqué au Monde qu’un atelier de fabrication de roquettes, jouxtant son immeuble, a été détruit dans un raid aérien, et des explosifs ensuite stockés dans sa cour.
Lire : Gaza : polémique sur la proportion de civils et de combattants parmi les victimes
Aucune preuve de boucliers humains. Le 9 juillet, un porte-parole du Hamas a salué la décision d’habitants de se poster sur leur toit pour protéger les habitations d’une attaque et appelé la population « à adopter cette pratique ». Le ministère de l’intérieur palestinien, lié au Hamas, a invité, le 12 juillet, la population à ne pas se conformer aux ordres de l’armée israélienne d’évacuer les « zones militaires fermées ».
Aucun témoignage ne permet d’établir que la coercition a été employée. Des milliers de personnes ont pu fuir les zones de combats. Ceux qui sont restés disent avoir eu peur de se mettre en danger, craindre de ne pas retrouver leur maison et ne se sentir en sécurité nulle part, pas même dans les écoles de l’UNRWA.
Menaces et exécutions de collaborateurs présumés avec Israël.Le 21 août, après l’assassinat ciblé de trois responsables militaires du Hamas, à Rafah, une source sécuritaire à Gaza a indiqué au site palestinien Majd que sept personnes ont été arrêtées pour avoir « aidé l’ennemi à viser des cibles », et trois autres exécutées. Soupçonnés de collaboration, des membres du Fatah, le parti rival du Hamas, ont été assignés à résidence au début de la guerre. Pour n’avoir pas respecté cet ordre, le militant Sami Abou Lachin a été blessé par balles à son domicile par des hommes armés, le 28 juillet.
[…] Confirme que c’est bien suite à ses propres et incessantes attaques contre Israël comme l’Egypte dès le retrait israélien il y a bientôt dix ans que le Hamas s’est imposé lui-même ledit blocus … […]
J’aimeJ’aime
[…] Confirme que c’est bien suite à ses propres et incessantes attaques contre Israël comme l’Egypte dès le retrait israélien il y a bientôt dix ans que le Hamas s’est imposé lui-même ledit blocus … […]
J’aimeJ’aime