This response to Mark Tomlinson’s article in the Daily Maverick was first submitted to that publication but, as has become standard practice with this particular publication, it was declined. It can be noted here that the Daily Maverick recently published, in its Kiddie Supplement section of all places, extensive extracts from the book ‘From the River to the Sea’, a publication aimed at young children whose very title calls for Israel’s destruction and which in support of that aim justifies terrorism and extolls those guilty of carrying out such acts against the Jewish state. That liberal-left publications of this nature that one the one hand hold themselves up to be exemplars of fundamental democratic and human rights values yet so regularly effectively act as vehicles for Hamas propaganda is one of the more perplexing questions of our times. – SAZF
In the entire annals of warfare, there is nothing to compare with it. Look long and hard, and you will find no other case of a small, densely populated strip of land being turned into a gigantic series of subterranean fortresses inextricably connected to the above-ground civilian infrastructure through a network of over 700 kilometres of tunnels used to continually attack a neighbouring state.
This describes the grim drama that has been unfolding since the massacres carried out by Hamas on October 7 last year. Over the past ten months, the world has witnessed the frightening extent to which a tyrannical regime driven by religious fanaticism is willing to bring death and destruction upon its own people to destroy a country whose existence it refuses to accept.
‘Palestine Square’ in the area of Rimal in Gaza City is an illustrative example – one of many that could be cited – of how the Hamas regime is pursuing its war against the Israeli people. The area was used to establish an extensive military infrastructure located in the direct vicinity of commercial stores, government buildings, civilian residences, places of worship and a school for deaf children. During the fighting it was a centre of Hamas’ military rule surrounded by buildings that served as command and control centers, terror tunnel shafts, weapons depots and factories all connected to the underground infrastructure in the area of the Rantisi and Shifa hospitals.
Not only have civilian installations been turned into military bases, but UN facilities have been as well. Weapons stores have repeatedly been found hidden in tunnels beneath United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) centres including schools.
The cost of building and arming this massive series of military installations, both above and below ground, must be astronomical. If anyone has been wondering why there are persistently high levels of poverty, even as billions of dollars in international aid was received by Gaza over the past two decades, this war has provided ample answers.
When asked why, Hamas had not also built bomb shelters where civilians could take refuge during bombardments, since it had built hundreds of kilometers of tunnels, senior Hamas politburo member Mousa Abu Marzouk replied that the tunnels were “meant to protect us” from Israeli aircraft and facilitate attacks on Israeli targets. By ‘us’ he meant Hamas militants, not Gaza’s civilian population. Neglecting to protect its own citizens from the consequences of the war it instigated is not an oversight on Hamas’s’ part; rather, it is a core part of its fundamental strategy. By locating civilians in or in close proximity to its military positions, Hamas knows it has created a win-win situation. On the one hand, it places severe constraints on Israeli military action since the IDF goes to considerable lengths to prevent or at least minimize harm to civilians. On the other hand, when attacks do take place, civilian casualties will inevitably result, which Hamas can then utilise as a ‘lawfare’ tool, charging Israel with committing war crimes while garnering global sympathy for itself.
All of this constitutes multiple violations of international law. According to the Statute of the International Criminal Court, the war crime of using human shields encompasses “utilising the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas, or military forces immune from military operations.” The staggering extent to which Hamas has been guilty of these violations has been revealed for all to see. In the process, they have knowingly brought untold suffering upon their own people.
Those who furiously condemn Israel for these horrors while patently omitting to acknowledge the manner in which the Hamas regime has been directly responsible for bringing them about are not merely biased, but are creating an atmosphere wherein such horrific tactics are accepted as necessary. In a certain sense they are complicit in perpetuating the very human suffering they purport to deplore. This complicity is underlined even more when Israel is denounced without reference to the barbaric attacks that triggered the conflict, slaughter, torture, rape and mass abduction of hundreds of civilian hostages that the Hamas regime inflicted upon the people of Israel on 7 October 2024.
The article by Mark Tomlinson that appeared in the Daily Maverick of 12 August (‘How do we even begin to understand the callousness and slaughter in the hellscape of Gaza’) is a textbook instance of this kind of de facto complicity. Nowhere will you find in it even a passing reference to the October 7 atrocities, to the continued plight of those still in captivity , to the more than 17,000 missiles that have rained down on Israel’s cities. Tomlinson ignores the repeated declarations by Hamas spokespeople that what occurred ten months ago will be repeated again and again until Israel has been wiped off the map. Likewise, one finds not the slightest acknowledgement, let alone condemnation, of how the cold-blooded deliberation in which the Hamas regime has thrust Gaza’s civilian population directly into the firing line has made the tragedies he describes not just likely but inevitable.
No military can entirely avoid civilian casualties when confronting an entrenched well-armed enemy in heavily populated urban areas. Hamas knows this very well, and has exploited it the fullest extent that it can. Any fair analysis of the Gaza conflict should also take into consideration the multiple measures Israel has implemented to prevent or at least minimise harm to non-combatants. These include providing advance warnings and arranging for mass evacuations of targeted areas before the commencement of major operations. “Roof-knocking”, where small munitions are dropped on the roofs of buildings to notify residents to evacuate before a strike is one such tactic. Calling and texting ahead of an air strike is another. This is despite advance warnings having the effect of alerting the enemy and providing them with the opportunity of preparing themselves for attacks. Combat veterans with experience and expertise in urban warfare have attested that the precautionary measures taken by the Israeli military have not been matched by other nations engaging in campaigns of such a nature, including even the United States during its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hamas, as goes without saying, issues no warning to civilians prior to attacking – since killing and maiming non-combatants is seen not as an unfortunate byproduct of necessary military actions but as the very purpose of those acts.
None of this critical detail features in Tomlinson’s article. The impression created is that Israel is wantonly inflicting devastation and destruction on innocent civilians, as if it had a choice of avoiding this and deliberately chooses not to do so. However much as it is framed as a Cri de Coeur for the suffering innocents in Gaza, it amounts in reality is a propaganda piece for Hamas, whose fanatical, hate-filled leaders are directly to blame for instigating and thereafter perpetuating the appalling tragedy we have watched unfolding over the past ten months and more. That it is grossly unjust to the beleaguered people of Israel goes without saying. Do those who engage in such one-sided denunciations not realise, however, that far from advancing the welfare of the Palestinians they are achieving precisely the opposite result?
