Search  |  Login  |  Register

By David French1310072630000

In a previous post, I defined lawfare as a form of asymmetric warfare that abuses domestic and international legal norms to accomplish tactical and strategic goals that can’t be won on the battlefield. Today brings news of the latest example, a U.N. report accusing Israel of violating U.N. resolutions when it responded with deadly force when demonstrators attempted to breach its border fence in May.

This critique rests on an utterly novel reinterpretation of international law. To recap, Israel remains in the midst of a multi-decade face-off against states (and terrorist entities) that refuse to recognize its borders and indeed its very right to exist. Despite decades of military conflict and multiple shooting wars, Israel has not been dislodged, and there is zero indication that Syria, Lebanon, Hezbollah, or any organized entity in the Middle East possesses the raw military power to move Israel from its current borders. Further, under international law, a sovereign nation has the ability to use armed force to defend its borders against incursions from belligerent states and belligerent entities.

On May 15, 2011, thousands of protesters — acting with the consent and cooperation of forces hostile to Israel — stormed Israel’s border fence. A large number of those protesters engaged in violent acts, including throwing stones, “petrol bombs,” and attempting to physically tear down the fence itself. Israel issued verbal warnings, fired warning shots, and then — finally — used deadly force. Could Israel have accomplished the same goals with different tactics (such as tear gas or other riot control mechanisms)? Perhaps. Was Israel required to use such tactics to defend its border? Absolutely not.

Indeed, international mandates requiring the use of nonlethal force do nothing more than encourage further incursions and diminish Israel’s ability to defend its borders. But that of course is the core goal of lawfare — to win for Hezbollah a victory in New York that it could never win in Israel.

Latest in
Israel

Taking on Anti-Israel Discrimination

By David French1416865749827

Next week the University of California student-workers union, UAW 2865 (yes, it’s affiliated with United Auto Workers), will vote on its Joint Council’s motion to boycott, divest, and sanction Israeli institutions. This motion is absurd on its face, but if it has any teeth at all it’s also illegal.

read more

Malice of Obama Admin Foreign Policy

By David French1414700721180

So, a “senior Obama administration official” called the prime minister of Israel — our closest ally in the Middle East and one of the few nations in the region that is not (a) imploding or (b) actively funding or supporting terrorists — “ a chickenshit .” While that word has rocketed around the...

read more

Victory: ASA Reverses Israel Boycott

By David French1413835081096

Last week I reported that my colleagues and I at the American Center for Law and Justice wrote to the Westin Bonaventure hotel , warning it that enforcing the American Studies Association’s boycott of Israeli scholars would violate California’s expansive nondiscrimination laws — laws that were...

read more

Anti-Semitism Has Consequences

By David French1413302954785

It is, at this point, beyond obvious that quarters of the hard-left academic world are overrun with anti-Semitism disguised as anger at alleged Israeli mistreatment of the terrorist-governed citizens of Gaza. Israeli citizens and soldiers stubbornly refuse to be killed and terrorized into...

read more