International organizations, non-governmental agencies and many foreign governments prematurely and sweepingly attacked the Israelis for committing atrocities in the course of military operations in Jenin refugee camp in April 2002. As the evidence became known, it demonstrated that these initial opinions were wrong. Yet the voices that zealously condemned Israel have been largely remiss in publicizing these new facts.
In Their Own Words: Palestinian Statements Demonstrate that Israel's Actions in Jenin Were Clearly Warranted


The Palestinian fighters in Jenin spoke of how they booby-trapped the camp elaborately, armed themselves with explosive belts and grenades and enlisted women and children into the battle.

"Believe me, there are children stationed in the houses with explosive belts at their sides."

-Abu Jandal, Islamic Jihad commander

"We have prepared unexpected surprises for the enemy….We have prepared a special graveyard in the Jenin camp for them."

-Ali Safori, Islamic Jihad Al-Quds
Brigades commander

"We had more than 50 houses booby-trapped around the camp. We chose old and empty buildings and the houses of men who were wanted by Israel because we knew the soldiers would search for them."

-"Omar," Islamic Jihad bomb-maker
The Rush to Condemn Israel:

The United Nations and the European Union


The reckless and eager rush to condemn Israel was epitomized by the statements of international organizations, which attacked Israeli military actions - without knowing the facts - either by equating them with the tactics of suicide-bombers or by demonstrating hostility toward Israel more directly..

"Combating terrorism does not give a blank check to kill civilians. However just the causes, there are illegitimate means, and the means that have been used here are illegitimate and morally repugnant."

-Terje Roed-Larsen, U.N. Special
Coordinator to the Middle East

"Israelis can't trample over the rule of law, over the Geneva conventions, over what are generally regarded as acceptable norms of behaviour without it doing colossal damage to their reputation."

-Christopher Patton, European Union
External Relations Commissioner
Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch


Non-governmental organizations, including leading human-rights groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, also pre-judged Israel's behavior.

"What was striking is what was absent. There were very few bodies in the hospital. There were also none who were seriously injured, only the 'walking wounded.' Thus we have to ask: where are the bodies and where are the seriously wounded?"

- Derrick Pounder, a forensics expert
working with Amnesty International

Both Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch accused Israel of collective punishment of the Palestinian people and wanton destruction in Jenin. Both charged Israel with violations of international law and war crimes. Neither discussed the international law violations involved in arming a refugee camp, or demanded the United Nations be held in any way accountable for its lack of oversight in the camp.
World Governments


Some of the world's governments also chose to speak out before the facts were known.

The U.N. Commission on Human Rights endorsed a resolution which adopted, by reference, a 1982 resolution recognizing the "legitimacy of the struggle of peoples…by all available means, including armed struggle." Austria, Belgium, France, Portugal, Spain and Sweden supported the resolution.

"…the kind violence involving suicidal bombings which killed Israelis, Palestinians as well as Chinese, should be condemned. However, what was more shocking to the world was the human tragedy caused by brutal military attacks in Palestinian territories by Israeli forces…." (sic)

- Xinhua (Chinese news agency),
reporting the comments of Wang
Yingfan, China's Permanent
Representative to the United Nations

The United States: Restraint in the Face of Allegations

In the United States, the official response to allegations of Israeli human rights violations was restrained. Both the White House and Congress supported Israel's right to take action in the West Bank to defend itself. The White House urged that humanitarian workers be allowed into the camp and supported an investigation of the conflict by a U.N. fact-finding team. A few members of Congress were harshly critical of Israel's activities.
The Media: Failure to Provide Context and Balance


The media's greatest failing in reporting on Israel was ignorance about the complex situation there, made worse by the demand to produce scoops and splashy headlines at the cost of providing context and contrasting points of view. While the American media's coverage was uneven, it was generally fair. Lesser-known online media sources and Anglo-Arab sources were highly one-sided, as was much of the international press. The report focuses on the British press.

"Gaunt and exhausted, tormented with worry about his missing family, Jamal Fayed yesterday wandered round the vast heap of reeking detritus where Israel has buried the war crimes of Jenin refugee camp."

- The Independent

"Israeli officials were desperately scrambling to explain the war crimes committed at Jenin refugee camps as the international furore over the devastation rose to new heights yesterday."

- The Independent

"...the evidence of the Israeli army's absolute negligence in trying to protect civilian life is everywhere."

- The Economist
What Really Happened in Jenin

Jenin: Longtime Terrorist Stronghold


Jenin is a longtime terrorist stronghold that produced 23 suicide bombers since October 2000 and was highly fortified in preparation for an Israeli incursion.

The camp at Jenin was founded by the U.N. and supervised by U.N. officials. According to its own resolution, the U.N. is called upon to "help create a secure environment" in refugee centers; it condemns the arming of these centers. Yet the organization's recent attempt to organize a fact-finding inquiry in Jenin focused only on alleged Israeli violations - failing to acknowledge the possibility of either its own complicity or Palestinian violations.

In stark contract to Jenin, there was not a single Palestinian casualty or any infrastructure damage in other West Bank villages which did not offer armed resistance.
Israeli Accounts of the Battles : Restraint in the Face of Booby Traps and Intense Resistance


Israeli accounts of the Jenin battle emphasize the elaborate booby-trapping and constant bombings faced by the soldiers - almost all of which could have been avoided had the army relied on an air attack (a strategy that would likely have killed many more non-combatants) - and the provisions taken to avoid civilian casualties.

"There was always a soldier who approached the family and tried to calm them, asking about the names of the children, offering them candies, checking if they are in need of anything. A child I smiled at was confused. I'm sure he was raised believing that I'm the devil."

-Shlomi Laniado, field fighter

"The soldiers fought without harming civilians. This was noticeable in every place and on every level. I was moved by the sight of soldiers conducting themselves in such a dignified and moral manner. Many of us are reserve soldiers; we are not hotheaded people, and we were all very careful. I was impressed by the great care exercised by the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) in avoiding civilian casualties - especially in regard to children."

-Dr. David Zangen, lead accompanying medic

Israeli forces acted to minimize civilian casualties while Palestinian actions endangered civilians.

Casualty and physical damage reports indicate that the vast majority of Palestinians killed were armed. Some were wearing explosive belts.

Israel's casualties during the battles in Jenin were 23 killed and 75 wounded
Palestinian Fighters Corroborate Israeli Accounts of the Battles


Taabat Mardawi, a senior member of Palestinian Islamic Jihad who surrendered to Israeli forces, described the battle as "a very hard fight" but said he didn't see "tens of people" killed by the Israeli army. Mardawi said he and other fighters expected Israel to attack with planes in order to avoid their casualties; he spoke enthusiastically about Israel's decision to send in infantry. "It was like hunting…like being given a prize. I couldn't believe it when I saw the soldiers," he said. "The Israelis knew that any soldier who went into the camp like that was going to get killed." He added: "I've been waiting for a moment like that for years."

The Legal Basis for Operation Defensive Shield

Israel had a legal right to engage in military action in Jenin.

The conduct of the IDF in the conflict did not breach the standards of international law.

During the battle there several violations of international law by Palestinian forces
The Lessons of Jenin: The Need for Context and Balance

In conclusion, a massacre of hundreds of Palestinians by Israel was widely alleged, reported and condemned, but did not in fact occur. The tendency of groups and governments to speak prematurely - and of the media to report those comments uncritically - reminds us that, in reporting the news, freedom from bias, seeking context and examining all sides is essential for everyone, especially those with voices that carry weight internationally.

The Role of Anti-Semitism

Finally, while the report remains largely silent on the question of whether some of the zealously anti-Israel reaction to the events in Jenin reflected anti-Semitic attitudes, prejudice undoubtedly informed some of the remarks quoted. Mere criticism of Israel is not bigotry, but the vehemence and reflexiveness displayed by some of those considered here seems indicative of a larger set of beliefs about Jews

If the Israelis are so sure thay did nothing wrong whay stop the Un from investigating?

Shahar talks nonsence as the attack on the Palestinians in Jenin was yet another example of State terror against an oppressed people. When are people going to realise that the Israeli right wing politicians can only continue such murderous attacks with the financial backing of the US.All progressives should be arguing for the US to withdraw the huge subsidies it pumps into the Israeli state.

once upon a time, the palestinian state was upon british protection (a british imperial term)

over night, the people whom lived in thius state would become deposed, and a new state would exist. Terrorism was the creation of israel, and this is one of the greatest war crimes of the last century.

from the point of the obvjective observer, the creation of israel was one of the greatest war crimes in the history of the last one hundred years.

the idea that terrorism can create a state is distgusting, anyone whom lives in the occupied land must be aware that by being there is an act of terrorism.

The holocaust is no justification for another holocaust, just remember that god is an anagram of dog, is my dog just a jumbled up god, i think that thos whom believe in the idea of gods race are just racist wankers, they deserve the acme fate as hitler and bush


all humans are equal, not israelis are gods and others are just inhuman.


--
peace to all, and all means all

SHARON IS A WAR CRIMINAL, NOTHING ELSE, HE SHOULD BE IN THE NETHERLANDS NOT ON THE BANDWAGON.

GET ON THE STREETS AND GET RID OF THIS WAR CRIM, PEACE TO ALL OF ALL RELIGIONS.

t Is Israel using excessive force in its response to the violence?

Every nation must protect its citizens from threats to their lives. No nation would acquiesce to a situation in which its citizens are victimized daily by indiscriminate terrorism. Israel is no exception.

The oft-repeated charge that Israel has used excessive force against innocent Palestinian civilians is a distortion of the truth. Israeli soldiers and civilians alike have had to face thousands of organized, violent and life-threatening attacks by Palestinians, only a small percentage of which have been reported in the media. These attacks have included violent riots, lynchings, machine-gun fire directed at residential neighborhoods, fire-bombings, roadside charges and ambushes, mortar barrages, suicide bombers and car bombs in crowded shopping areas. As a result of this violence, over 250 Israelis have been killed and thousands wounded.

Under these difficult conditions, the IDF [Israel Defense Forces] has acted with the greatest possible restraint, taking care to target only those responsible for the violence, and doing its utmost to prevent collateral civilian injury or loss of life.

Israel has no interest in escalating the violence. On the contrary, Israel believes it is imperative that the violence ends so that both parties can return to constructive negotiations. Israel maintains that a just and sustainable solution can be found only through dialogue, not armed conflict. However, as long as the violence exists, Israel has an indisputable responsibility to protect its citizens.

The Israeli government regrets the loss of any life, whether Jewish or Arab, in the present wave of violence. In the final analysis, however, responsibility for these casualties lies with the Palestinian Authority, which has initiated the violence and stubbornly refuses to bring it to an end.

The inaction of the Palestinian Authority in the face of widespread terrorism in its areas, coupled with the PA's public support for this violence, have left Israel no alternative but to take the necessary action itself to prevent continued terrorism. Therefore, Israel must undertake preventive, precisely targeted operations which are designed to bring about a cessation of these clear lethal threats.

Whenever possible, Israeli operations are directed toward arresting terrorists and their accomplices and bringing them to justice. In a small minority of cases, when arrests are impossible (mostly due to the lack of Israeli jurisdiction in PA areas), and when a clear, specific and imminent terrorist threat must be countered, Israel is forced to carry out other types of preventative operations. All civilized nations would act in a similar fashion given these circumstances.

Israel does not condone or take part in 'assassinations' or 'extra-judicial killings'. These terms are derived from spheres unrelated to armed conflict and are blatantly misleading descriptions of Israel's justified counter-terrorist operations in a clear situation of armed confrontation. The widespread use of these terms by Palestinian spokespersons is intended to portray Israel and its actions in a pejorative light, while disregarding the legal reality.

Currently, Israel in engaged in a situation best defined as an armed conflict. International law in general and the law of armed conflict in particular recognize that individuals who directly take part in hostilities cannot then claim immunity from attack or protection as innocent civilians. By initiating and participating in armed attacks against Israeli civilians or security personnel, such individuals have designated themselves as combatants in the conflict, and have forfeited such legal protection.

An individual who becomes a combatant is considered to remain a combatant until hostilities come to an end and not merely during that exact instant when the individual is carrying out or organizing an attack. They are therefore to be considered legitimate military targets both when planning future attacks, and after these attacks have been committed.

Israel only acts in a manner which is in compliance with the principles and practice of armed conflict, and makes every effort to avoid involvement of innocent civilians, taking action only in conditions where inaction by Israel would result in additional loss of innocent lives in imminent terrorist actions