Analysis of the Human Rights Watch/Oxfam Allegations of "Israeli Forces' Conduct in Gaza"

Introduction

As seen in the following report, the joint HRW-Oxfam document “Israeli Forces’ Conduct in Gaza – March 19, 2024” (formally, a submission under National Security Memorandum 20, regarding compliance with requirements on the use of US military assistance) reflects a fundamental and consistent lack of rigor, credibility and verifiability.¹ Under the thin facade of analysis, HRW and Oxfam have published a prosecutorial diatribe that dispenses with the practice of presenting and weighing information from and perspectives of all the main actors and sources before reaching a conclusion.

Many of the claims of Israeli violations are ostensibly substantiated by “evidence” sourced to these same NGOs – 18 or 37 footnotes are self-references to previous HRW and Oxfam statements. These and the other references quote from the Gaza Health Ministry (GHM – controlled by Hamas); UN agencies including UNRWA, OCHA and the World Health Organization (WHO), which themselves lack credibility and which reference the same sources; unverifiable claims by anonymous “eyewitnesses” in Gaza; journalists and media platforms, such as Al Jazeera and CNN, which also cite UN agencies and anonymous “eyewitnesses”; and amorphous technical analyses. On this basis, HRW and Oxfam repeatedly claim to have “verified” various allegations regarding IDF responses to the October 7 atrocities, when in fact, no credible verification took place or was even possible. Contrasting and often more credible evidence is systematically erased, further highlighting the ideological and partisan objectives of this publication, in contrast to accurate and credible fact-finding.

Two of the central accusations in this document are the allegations that 1) Israel is deliberately and unjustifiably hampering the delivery of humanitarian and medical aid to Gaza – which HRW and Oxfam falsely declare to be an “unnecessarily complex inspection process” (Items 6 to 11 in appendix), thereby constituting  “collective punishment,”² and 2) that the IDF’s military actions in Gaza hospitals are arbitrary and unjustified. Notably, the “evidence” to support these allegations explicitly ignores numerous sources and facts constituting actual and monstrous war crimes committed by Hamas against Israeli civilians that do not fit this narrative – in particular, the massive diversion of aid, including for the construction of hundreds of kilometers of massive fortifications below schools, residences, medical facilities, etc,; the large-scale exploitation of hospitals for terror; and the manufacture and use of tens of thousands of rockets and missiles that target Israeli civilians. ³

In addition, assertions using the language of international humanitarian law (IHL) consist primarily of the authors’ political opinions. In a number of instances, they “conclude” that a particular IDF strike took place for which they did not discern a military purpose, repeating the fiction that NGO staffers have access to the real-time battlefield information available to Israeli military commanders, as well as the ability to ascertain their decision making processes. Similarly, the use by NGO political advocates of terms such as “disproportionate force” is entirely subjective and lacking in consistent criteria.⁴

In examining this document, as well as previous reports and the record of partisan political advocacy activities of HRW and Oxfam, it becomes clear that the objective of this document is to impede and disrupt cooperation between the US and Israel in counter-terrorism operations, particularly the brutal atrocities of October 7. Any citations from and references that give credibility to the allegations vilifying Israel, including in government documents, media platforms, and academic publications, would reinforce the unvirtuous circle of using unverifiable and politically motivated NGO claims as “evidence” to further defame and disrupt IDF responses to terror atrocities.

HRW’s Pseudo-Methodology

As highlighted in the appendix, HRW-Oxfam’s submission relies very heavily on unreliable and fundamentally biased sources, including the “Gaza Health Ministry – GHM” (controlled by Hamas); UN agencies such as UNRWA, UNICEF, OCHA and the World Health Organization (WHO), which themselves lack credibility and reference the same sources;⁵ unverifiable claims by anonymous “eyewitnesses” in Gaza; other political advocacy NGOs such as the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC⁶); journalists who also attribute claims to anonymous “eyewitnesses”; or amorphous and anonymous technical “open source” analysis of images and videos.

In addition, publicly available information that does not support the objective of condemning IDF actions is blatantly omitted, including media publications and investigations. The IDF and Israeli government posted numerous images, video material, and humanitarian aid data, which is not anonymous and, prima facie,  at least as credible and verifiable as the sources relied upon by HRW and Oxfam. Social media posts purportedly from Gaza also provide material that contradicts this narrative, but are also systematically ignored by HRW and Oxfam.

Information made public by the US government is also omitted, as illustrated in the report’s version of an IDF strike on an ambulance, described as “unlawfully disproportionate”, in which the Biden administration confirmed that the ambulance was used by Hamas, which “tried to sneak its fighters out of the Gaza Strip,” in contrast to the HRW-Oxfam version (see appendix, Item 1.) Similarly, in repeating the accusation (Item 3 in appendix) “that Israeli forces’ use of explosive weapons with wide-area affects in populated areas of Gaza raises significant concerns over Israel’s compliance ….”, the HRW-Oxfam report parrots assertions in three media sources that are based on claims by “expert” Marc Garlasco, a former HRW employee who resigned following a scandal. ⁷

Case study: Erasing Hamas’ use of medical infrastructure for military purposes-  Al-Shifa Hospital

The biased reporting and analysis in HRW-Oxfam submission is highlighted by the blatant and systematic erasure of overwhelming evidence regarding the use by Hamas of Al-Shifa Hospital and other ostensibly medical facilities in Gaza for command and control centers, reinforced terror tunnels, weapons storage, and hiding kidnapped and tortured hostages.

The videos released by the IDF and media reports reinforce the evidence of this exploitation that has been provided for nearly fifteen years, including from journalists, doctors, and Israeli and American officials. A senior American aid official acknowledged that this information was well known, and a Dutch journalist posted: “I have been to the Al Shifa Hospital several times as a reporter during the Israel-Gaza war in 2014 and also afterward. .. It is a vast complex. I have personally seen Hamas fighters there. Everyone in Gaza including UN staff knows about the dual use of these facilities.” The same journalist posted photographs taken secretly of “uniformed Hamas fighters (in blue) sitting cautiously next to the entrance where ambulances arrive.” These sources, which are far more diverse and credible than the ones relied upon by HRW and Oxfam, have publicly acknowledged the existence of Hamas’ headquarters under Al-Shifa Hospital.⁸

By demonstrably stripping away this evidence, HRW and Oxfam’s submission asserts that their “investigations” found no evidence to “justify depriving the hospitals of their protected status under international humanitarian law.” In sourcing this conclusion, the NGOs refer to a November 14 HRW statement “Unlawful Israeli Hospital Strikes” declaring that Israel’s claims that “Hamas uses hospitals as terror infrastructures” were “contested,” that they were unable “to corroborate them,” and had not “seen any information that would justify attacks on Gaza hospitals.” The same statement repeated, without any caveat, unverifiable testimony from anonymous Palestinians who communicated with HRW “by phone.”

Summary: As this and other examples clearly highlight, under the facade of professional analysis, the HRW-Oxfam publication is a partisan prosecutorial document, lacking methodological rigor and credibility. The factual claims are unverifiable, and evidence as well as sources that contradict the political objectives are blatantly and systematically erased.

Authors: Professor Gerald Steinberg, President of NGO Monitor and Vincent Chebat, Senior Researcher at NGO Monitor

Appendix