Said UN Ambassador John Bolton
“I think it would be a mistake to ascribe moral equivalence to civilians who die as the direct result of malicious terrorist acts,” he added, while defending as self-defense” Israel’s military action, which has had “the tragic and unfortunate consequence of civilian deaths”.
I agree that the motives of terrorist groups like Hezbollah and those of the IDF are different. For one thing, the IDF’s main goal in a military action isn’t to kill civilians, while terrorists groups target civilians specifically.
However, the notion that somehow an innocent citizen of Lebanon killed in this conflict is less in someway than an innocent Israeli killed is problematic, as both are human tragedies. Do we really want our diplomats minimizing civilian deaths? Is this a productive statement? Certainly the focus is in the wrong place to make the point he wants to make.
Bolton did say something about the motive issues as well:
“It’s simply not the same thing to say that it’s the same act to deliberately target innocent civilians, to desire their deaths, to fire rockets and use explosive devices or kidnapping versus the sad and highly unfortunate consequences of self-defense,” Bolton noted.
Still, the deaths in question do raise the proportionality issue–especially since, according to the article, 195 civilians have died in Lebanon versus 12 in Israel.
The NYT (With Israeli Use of Force, Debate Over Proportion) has updated numbers:
The asymmetry in the reported death tolls is marked and growing: some 230 Lebanese dead, most of them civilians, to 25 Israeli dead, 13 of them civilians. In Gaza, one Israel soldier has died from his own army’s fire, and 103 Palestinians have been killed, 70 percent of them militants.
I accept that Israel has the need and the right to defend itself. However, I have to wonder if this initiative is going to create far more long-term resentment amongst the Lebanese, not to mention more instability in that country, which will help fuel more violence–and ultimately redound back to create more instability for Israel. This is especially true given the infrastructural and economic damage.
Of course, it is all summed up by the following quote from Israel’s Foreign Minister:
“It’s the Middle East,” Ms. Livni said. “It’s always choosing between bad options. And that’s true for the international community, too, and not just for us.”
July 19th, 2024 at 11:37 am
In a 1:1 comparison of life versus life, you’re right: none are minimal. However, when comparing numbers (x number Lebanese civilians vs. y number Israeli civilians), it is important to remember the nature of the combatants. It is easier to limit casualties to Israeli soldiers (versus civilians) because they wear uniforms, congregate in military bases and similar locations, etc. Hezbollah are not regular army, they are guerrillas. They wear civilian clothing, which obviously makes it difficult to distinguish between them and “real” civilians. They disperse among the civilian population and use the public as their shield, which again puts civilians in harm’s way by design. Blame for the high number of civilan Lebanese deaths must be placed, at least in part, on Hezbollah itself.
July 19th, 2024 at 11:48 am
For one thing, the IDF’s main goal in a military action isn’t to kill civilians, while terrorists groups target civilians specifically.
Is this really true? In the case of the most recent events both Hezbollah and Hamas focused on military targets which then resulted in Israel attacking civilians and the civilian infrastructure.
Israel has a VERY long record of targeting civilians in both military action and in more low-impact ways (e.g. ripping up olive groves and destroying the homes of innocent civilians).
I am not sure how one can assess what IAF’s “goals” are outside of the actual impact of their actions.
July 19th, 2024 at 11:54 am
There is a moral equivalence to the deaths of civilians. Israel knows full well when it bombs an apartment building or drops a bomb in a crowded residential area, that it will kill civilians. For Israel to say that it is trying to avoid civilian deaths is complete BS.
Hezbollah fires rockets indiscriminately into residential areas, which also kills civilians. If there rockets were better, they’d kill more than they have already.
There is no difference. The end result is the same.
July 19th, 2024 at 12:06 pm
I believe Israel would trade long-term resentment for the safety of its citizens.
What would make the proportionality “issue” weaker? I will assume you are not considering more dead Israelis to be an acceptable solution. So you must be talking about fewer dead Lebanese. If there is another way that Israel can with fewer casualties remove an immediate threat from its border, a threat with missiles that can reach pretty much anywhere in Israel, a threat with strong ties to a government that is actively pursuing nuclear weapons, a threat that attacks unprovokes, I am sure Israel would consider it.
July 19th, 2024 at 12:16 pm
Two points, strong one first, already made by your commenters. What is a Lebanese “civilian” and how sure are we that some of these people are civilians in Lebanon? Is a Hizb’Allah social worker who finds “contract wives” for soldiers and “martyrdom operatives” a civilian? How about a militant out of uniform, or who never wore one? Or someone who ahs turned his house over to Hizb’Allah as a rocket storage site and stayed behind to guard it during Israeli bombardment?
Now for the weaker argument: There is a one big difference between Israeli civilians and most of the civilians who are dying in the Bekkaa Valley or South Beirut (the locus of many of the civilian casualties) – the Lebanese far more likely than not voted for Hizb’Allah as these are almost exclusively Shiite areas (try living there if you are Sunni, Alawite, Druze or Christian) and Hizb’Allah swept the Shiite vote in these areas. That is not to get all Ayn Randy about it and say they deserved it, but it is to say that they voted for something far worse than any party allowed under Israeli law, and so, no, the deaths are not equally tragic, just close. Do you weep as much for the Nazi Party voters immolated by Allied Fire Bombs as you do for Labour voters similarly immolated during the Battle of Britain? I do not.
July 19th, 2024 at 12:27 pm
Much to say, not enough time to say it all:
1) Scott: I agree that some/a great deal of the blame for civilian deaths belong at Hezbollah’s feet. However, that’s not what Bolton said in that first quote.
2) flydiveski: my point is that the resentment will breed more violence, and hence not make Israel more secure. As such, what you detail is a false trade-off, i.e., it doesn’t exist.
3) Honza: your “strong” argument seems to be that these really aren’t civilians. I don’t see the evidence for that position. Are you going to to tell me that innocents haven’t died on the Lebanese side as a result of all of this?
July 19th, 2024 at 12:30 pm
‘Disproportionate application of force’ is a phrase always applied to Israel, no matter what the facts. This phrase is just a buzz word for teminally anti-Israel left that dominates the culture. To hear the master hypocrite Putin lecturing Israel on this subject makes me laugh out loud. Chechnia is still a moonscape after the Russians got through with it.
The US needs to support Israel diplomatically, open up possibilities for diplomacy that will ensure tanquility on both sides of the border and make sure that Israel has the wherewithal to keep Lebanon from becoming an Iranian province and playground for Al Qaida.
July 19th, 2024 at 12:36 pm
Do we really want our diplomats minimizing civilian deaths?
In a word, NO.
But then I also do not want “my” top-ranking diplomats (such as the Ambassador to the UN) appointed in an end-run around the Senate.
Comsidering the tactics in its own wars of the government Bolton defends, is his statement in the least surprising?
In a word, NO.
July 19th, 2024 at 12:41 pm
On civilians, civilians and “civilians”
Poliblogger has an excellent post where he waxes agonistic about civilian casualties versus civilian casualties on the north Israeli front. Unsurprisingly, I found fault. As you may have guessed from this earlier post of mine, when fighting militias a…
July 19th, 2024 at 12:44 pm
For the record: I oppossed the recess appointment as the mechanism to appoint Bolton.
The last of several posts on that topic is here.
July 19th, 2024 at 3:27 pm
Taylor on Bolton
Responding to statements by US UN Ambassador John Bolton, Steven Taylor opines:… the notion that somehow an innocent citizen of Lebanon killed in this conflict is less in someway than an innocent Israeli killed is problematic, as both are human
July 19th, 2024 at 8:52 pm
Dr. Taylor, you are correct that many of the deaths of civilians are really civilians, including the folks living around Hizb’Allah facilities – that’s why Hizb’Allah places facilities there after all, to maximize civilian casualties for anyone willing to fight them – in criminal law, that’s like a bank robber taking hostages – he is legally responsible for felony murder if police shoot the hostage by mistake.
But not all civilians are people riding north in a bus. Some of the people in the Hizb’Allah offices hit were no doubt civilians. On NPR )NPR.org has a search feature) today I heard interviews with civilians in South Beirut and the reporter talked of “plainclothes” Hizb’Allah militiamen walking by with handheld radios. If any of these were to be killed in an Israeli airstrike or other action, would Hizb’Allah claim them to be civilians or military targets?
As for Hizb’Allah’s rockets, they are targeted on civilian sites because that is all they can hit. That’s not an excuse. They have plenty of weapons available that can hit soldiers with some accuracy, but they maintain a stockpile of notoriously inaccurate weapons anyhow. incidentally, these rockets are similar to those Saddaam Hussein used to no military effect but to great propaganda effect in his war with Iran, where he was lobbing Scuds into Tehran on a regular basis. At the end of that war, he was using occasional chemical warheads and the mullahs sued for peace because Iranians stopped volunteering to fight. Like Saddaam, Hizb’Allah brags of having chemical weapons and of raining them down on Israeli cities.
If they have weapons as sophisticated as Silkworms, surely they can hit an Israeli military base if they trade up for greater accuracy. That they do not is telling.
12 comments. Well done.
July 19th, 2024 at 9:17 pm
The issue at hand, and for which I was criticizing the ambassador, has to do with the basic notion that some civilian deaths are different from others. I would submit that there are people in Lebanon whose deaths are no less tragic that those killed in Israel. Now, that some civilians in a war situation may be less than innocent is certainly the case.
I find it disturbing that many seem to care very little about the death and disruption of many people in Lebanon who are guilty of nothing save where they were born.
And the bottom line of all of this is that Bolton would have been smarter to focus on the motives and actions of Hezbollah, not the relative value of civilian deaths.
You are talking about Hezbollah’s actions, which are a different issue and none that I attempted to defend.
July 20th, 2024 at 12:25 pm
Israel cares about its civilians and protects them with its military and organized disaster preparedness and bomb shelters. Israel’s affluence also allows for better, stronger buildings.
When two people compete, one usually wins. Peace tries, like recognizing the PA and withdrawing from Gaza obviously haven’t worked. Maybe killing the killers will – seems mathematically probable. It’s all a diversion by Iran anyway.
July 20th, 2024 at 12:36 pm
John,
Killing killers was not the point of my original post: I must confess, I am pro-killing the killers.
The issue in this discussion is whether there is some discount to be applied to the death of innocents in Lebanon. I argue that there isn’t.
July 21st, 2024 at 4:25 pm
Agreed, life should never be discounted.