An investigation by the American newspaper The New York Times revealed that Israel weakened a safeguards system that was intended to protect civilians in the ongoing war on the Gaza Strip, used huge bombs instead of smaller, more accurate munitions, and adopted flawed methods to identify targets and assess the risk of civilian casualties in Gaza.
The newspaper reported that the investigation was based on interviews with more than 100 Israeli soldiers and officials, dozens of victims of Israeli raids, and experts in the rules of armed conflict.
The investigation concluded that Israel adopted “flawed” methods to identify targets and assess the risk of civilian casualties in Gaza, and failed to assess harm to civilians following bombings or punish officers for violations.
He stressed that Israel had significantly reduced the use of warning shots that give civilians time to flee, and used bombs weighing a thousand kilograms when it could have used smaller or more accurate munitions.
Unchecked attack
The investigation stated that Israel fired about 30,000 shells into Gaza in the first seven weeks of the war, and quoted 5 Israeli officers as saying that the prevailing mood within the army after the October 7, 2023 attack was “attacking the enemy without deterrence.”
Officers said the command issued an order seven hours after the October attack that made warning shots an option and allowed up to 500 civilians in Gaza to be exposed to danger daily.
Two Israeli officers admitted that the lack of guidance kits forced pilots to rely on less accurate bombs, and pushed them to rely on old bombs that might fail to explode.
According to the investigation, several intelligence officers were encouraged to propose a certain number of targets each day.
He stressed that Israel ignored internal and American warnings regarding all these failures.
In response to the findings of the New York Times investigation, the Israeli army said that the rules of engagement changed after October 7, 2023, but stressed that it adheres to “the law continuously,” and explained that “the changes were made in the context of an unprecedented conflict in light of the scale of the Hamas attack.” “.
