IDF Protection of Civilians in Gaza: Is It Enough?

A recent New York Times article showed that:

1. The IDF changed its quantitative calculations of civilian vs. military targets for the current Gaza war, as opposed to previous wars. The new regulations allow for a larger number of civilian casualties per military targets than in the past.
2. The IDF also changed its qualitative calculations. Now, even a low-level Hamas operative was considered fair game for calling in an airstrike where there would be definite civilian damage, as long as the appropriate civilian to military ratio was followed.
3. There was very little oversight by the IDF to ensure that these guidelines were properly followed, and little willingness to review mistakes or punish those who violated the guidelines on calling in airstrikes.

We also know, both from soldier testimony and from events like the killing of three Israeli hostages holding a white flag, that there have been incidents of soldiers being too quick to pull their fingers on the triggers of their guns. We also know, from videos IDF soldiers uploaded of themselves defacing Palestinian property in Gaza, that IDF soldiers have been committing war crimes.

I want to be clear: These actions violate Israeli military guidelines. After the three hostages were killed by IDF soldiers, the IDF Chief of Staff, Herzi Halevi, personally made a public speech reminding soldiers about the importance of taking proper precautions when using their weapons.

However, it is clear that there has been very little oversight to ensure that the IDF’s own rules of engagement are followed, or to punish perpetrators. Indeed, the political incentives are to ignore or reward perpetrators, as statements by Ben-Gvir, Smotrich, and other members of their party actively encourage such behavior.

The New York Times article, however disturbing it may be, shows that the IDF had rules to only target civilians when there was a military reason to do so, and did not have a policy of targeting civilians when there was no military target involved.

But I think that it adds to this growing mound of evidence, that unlike in previous wars, the IDF is not taking every precaution it can to protect civilian life.

This is even more the case when it comes to humanitarian aid. The topic of humanitarian aid is controversial in Israeli society. There have been convoys that tried to block aid, in part based on the logic that Israel should not be helping the people of Gaza as long as it held our people as hostages, or that all Gazans were involved with Hamas or supportive of the October 7th atrocities. Some members of the government have even made statements against aid.

At the same time, the IDF has worked to increase the number of aid trucks allowed in and at times risked soldiers to protect aid. There is a serious problem of looting by armed Palestinian gangs, so that even when the aid makes it to Gaza, it doesn’t always make it to the Palestinian people, or if it does, it reaches them at jacked up prices that are set by the looters.

The IDF has maintained that the looting problem is not their responsibility. But as the occupying power in Gaza, which has been there for a year and does not seem to have immediate plans of leaving, it bears responsibility for the basic humanitarian needs of Gaza residents. It is not enough to technically let in the trucks while thousands of people die due to lack of sanitary conditions and medical care, or freeze to death in the winter.

Furthermore, part of the reason there are looters is that violence thrives in a power vacuum. By refusing to put a new government in to replace Hamas, the Israeli government creates a power vacuum that is filled by a combination of Hamas members (who are after all, technically still the government), gangs, and war opportunists.

As if that were not enough, the IDF, by its own mission, considers the military mission in Gaza accomplished: It has defeated Hamas as a military force.

This begs the question of why we are still in Gaza at this point, and certainly, why we are still there in a situation where adequate measures are not being taken in order to protect civilian life.*

I am not here to answer that question. I am here to ask it -because if we are risking our soldiers’ lives and our moral futures, we owe it to ourselves to make sure there is a good reason.

*I have heard people say until we get every last terrorist. We have been occupying the West Bank since 1967 and have not managed to get every single terrorist, so I think it is unreasonable to claim that prolonged military presence in Gaza will lead to that outcome.