2024-04-25 03:41:58
“It travels like a white mist. But when it falls to the ground, it turns to dust. Tears began to come out of our eyes. If it weren’t for covering our mouth and nose with a wet cloth, we might not be alive today,” adds Ali Ahmed Abu Samra, a 48-year-old farmer in southern Lebanon, says he was enveloped by a dense cloud. of white smoke on October 19.
“They say it smells like garlic, but it’s much worse than that. The smell was unbearable, worse than sewage,” says Ali, describing an attack with white phosphorus.
It is toxic gas It is harmful to the eyes and lungs and can cause severe burns, so it is strictly regulated by international laws.
The Israeli army assures that it is legal to use this controversial weapon once morest armed militants, both in Gaza and Lebanon. However, human rights groups argue that it should be investigated as a war crime.
For its part, the United States said it will investigate Israel’s use of white phosphorus in both regions. White phosphorus munitions, which burn at temperatures of up to 815°C, are highly flammable and extremely toxic.
Since the beginning of the war in Gaza, violence has increased along the border between Israel and Lebanon, causing casualties on both sides and the displacement of thousands of people.
Closely aligned with Iran and ally of Hamas, Hezbollah It is one of the most heavily armed non-state military forces in the world. In almost daily clashes, rocket and drone attacks by Hezbollah fighters are repelled with airstrikes and heavy artillery, including white phosphorus, by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).
When white phosphorus is released from its shell, it reacts with oxygen to create a thick smoke screen. This provides almost instant cover to troops on the ground, obscuring the enemy’s line of sight. It is a very effective and legal military tactic under certain conditions.
However, under international law it is the responsibility of all parties to protect civilians during armed conflicts.
Most of the world’s major militaries have used white phosphorus in the last century. According to the CIA, the Soviet Union used it extensively during World War II. The United States admitted using it in Iraq in 2004 and then once more in Syria and Iraq once morest Islamic State in 2017. Israel also reported using the chemical during a 2008-2009 offensive in Gaza. But following the UN said the Israeli military was acting “systematically reckless” in its use of the substance, the IDF said in 2013 that it would be “removed from active service soon.”
Hezbollah fighters are known to move in small units of two to four people. They take advantage of the forest for cover and often launch missiles and rockets across the border at the Israeli army on the other side. For Israeli forces, enveloping them in smoke is a way to interfere with Hezbollah’s ability to target its targets.
On the days when Ali’s village was attacked, between October 10 and 19, he assures that there were no armed groups in the area.
“If Hezbollah was there, people would have told them to leave because no one wanted to die,” Ali says. “Hezbollah did not exist.”
Evidence of white phosphorus
Immediately following the attack on Ali’s village, reports appeared on the internet. At first, the Israeli army denied using white phosphorus munitions. But then he did a 180 degree turn and admitted using it “within international law.”
By verifying the available evidence, the BBC was able to independently verify the use of white phosphorus in Dhayra and three other villages along the border in the last six months.
In Kfar Kila, the BBC obtained and chemically tested a fragment of a projectile that fell between two civilian houses. The analysis was carried out by a renowned chemistry professor. For security reasons, he asked to remain anonymous.
Wearing a gas mask and full personal protective equipment, the professor examined several dark, sticky clumps on the inside edge of the metal fragment.
“This is part of a 155mm howitzer. The M825A1 marking indicates that it is a white phosphorus ammunition. “It is American-made,” he details.
The expert holds a lighter to the sticky clumps and they immediately burst into flames. “Imagine trying to remove this material from your clothing while it burns and sticks to your skin.”
It ensures that even following 30 days, traces of white phosphorus can still ignite.
Aid worker Khaled Qraitem accuses Israel of deliberately using white phosphorus to drive people out of border areas.
“We had a beautiful rural life,” he says. “They started bombing the forested areas with phosphorus on purpose to burn the olive trees and avocado orchards.”
“The IDF completely rejects any claims that smoke screen howitzers to expel Lebanese civilians from the border,” the Israeli military said.
Did Israel violate the law?
White phosphorus is not defined as chemical weapon and even the term “incendiary weapon” is controversial.
According to United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weaponsthere are restrictions on weapons designed primarily to start fires or burn people.
However, most states, including Israel, agree that if white phosphorus is used primarily for create smoke screens and not for fires (even if they occur incidentally), then the incendiary weapons law no longer applies.
But Human Rights Watch (HRW) disagrees. The organization warns that there are too many “loopholes” in the convention.
“The convention contains loopholes, particularly regarding its definition of incendiary weapons,” says HRW researcher Ramzi Kaiss. “But under International Humanitarian Law (IHL), all parties to the conflict must take feasible precautions to avoid harm to civilians, especially when white phosphorous munitions are used.”
In determining whether Israel has violated IHL, Professor Bill Boothby, an independent lawyer and military expert, says one problem is the “clash of evidence”.
“The Israelis say their purpose was to create a smokescreen,” Boothby explains. “Villagers say there was no point in creating a smokescreen because there were no militants. Was that really the reason white phosphorus was used? Knowing the answer would imply knowing what was in the minds of those who were deciding the attack.”
The “proportionality”, says Boothby, is also key. The damage caused must not be excessive with respect to the expected military benefits.
“We are talking regarding the need to establish that the expected civilian injuries and damage to civilian property were excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage that they anticipated obtaining before the attack.”
All of this, the professor insists, depends on knowing what those who decided the attack had in mind.
When asked what their objective was in Dhayra, the IDF responded to the BBC: “These are operational guidelines that are classified and cannot be disclosed.”
1714019712
#white #phosphorus #Israel #attacks #Lebanon