The Myth of 'Human Shields'
A resident of Gaza’s al-Zahra neighborhood walks amid the rubble of residential buildings after Israeli airstrikes on Oct. 19, 2023. Photo by Mustafa Hassona/Anadolu via Getty Images
It’s time to debunk the most pernicious and dishonest claim at the heart of Israel’s propaganda war.
Having lived through 10 Israeli military operations in Gaza, including three wars and two full-scale ground invasions, I’ve repeatedly heard the same justification from Israel every time the military kills a loved one: "human shields." That dehumanizing buzzword has always worked like magic to absolve Israel – in its own eyes and that of much of the international community – of any responsibility after it pulls the trigger.
Yet, in all my life, I have never once witnessed or heard of a single incident when Hamas or any other militant group in Gaza forced residents to stay inside or around buildings used by fighters or directed the movement of civilians to shield military operations from attacks. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the BBC’s Jeremy Bowen, the Independent, and many others reached the same conclusion in the very wars Israel used that “human shield” claim incessantly.
Israel, however, continues to rely on this accusation, deploying a far broader and more self-serving interpretation beyond its legal meaning. In June, when Israel massacred 274 Gazans during a rescue operation of four hostages in Nuseirat, Israel repeatedly justified its operations by saying those killed were being used as “human shields.” Everyone in that town, not just in the buildings where the hostages were kept, was, in Israel’s eyes, fair game.
When Israel bombed Gaza’s Taba’een school in August, killing more than 100 Palestinians, many of whom were hacked into scattered pieces, the Israeli military again called all civilian victims “human shields” and said without evidence that it targeted Hamas members at the school – a claim that was refuted. The twisted logic here is that the mere presence of alleged Hamas members, even if they were there as displaced refugees themselves, renders everyone in that overcrowded school a legitimate target.
If a Hamas member lives in a multi-story apartment building, everyone in that building is, in Israel’s eyes, a “human shield.” The Israeli military bombs the building “without hesitation as a first option.” This is despite Israel having demonstrated capabilities of surgically striking a specific target with minimal losses to civilians around when it wants to.
Moreover, Israel doesn’t use international law’s distinction between combatant and civilian, but rather “involved” and “uninvolved.” Because Hamas, the ruling political party in Gaza, is completely integrated into daily life, Israel sees any Hamas member – including civil servants – as a legitimate target.
Given Hamas’ integration and that Gaza is one of the most densely populated and built-up areas on Earth, with over 90% of the population now displaced into tinier, overcrowded, and heavily bombed “safe zones,” there is a potential “target” for Israel in virtually every building, and on every street. The civilians present, despite having nowhere to flee, are, according to Israel, merely “human shields.”
Distorted Logic
In the current war, Israel’s distortion of the “human shields” term has reached unprecedented levels. If Hamas fires a single small projectile from a large city, or if Israel decides to launch an invasion, it issues sweeping “evacuation” orders to entire cities, displacing hundreds of thousands of people in one fell swoop. Anyone who remains behind – whether elderly, sick, or disabled – is immediately labeled a “terrorist” or “human shield” in an “extermination zone.” Israel’s largest TV channel describes this tactic as psychological warfare and collective punishment.
A man holds a flyer dropped by the Israeli military on the northern Gaza Strip urging people to "temporarily evacuate to shelters in western Gaza City" on May 11, 2024. Photo by AFP
The same strategy is now being employed in Lebanon, where Israel reportedly used 2,000-pound bombs to flatten six high-rise residential buildings in its assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah on Friday. At least 300 people were killed in the attack on a Beirut suburb, according to Israel's own estimate. Israel claimed it was targeting Hezbollah's underground headquarters and called the civilians killed "human shields" to justify the strikes, despite the fact that it would be impossible for Nasrallah to have been hiding under all six buildings. It’s also worth mentioning that Israel itself has its military headquarters and a vast underground military command post in the heart of Tel Aviv as well as a large bunker under Jerusalem.
Israel’s distorted logic contradicts international law. The Fourth Geneva Convention states, “The presence of a protected person may not be used to render certain points or areas immune from military operations."
According to international law scholar Asli Bâli, the “deliberate placement of civilians in proximity to military objectives during a conflict” defines human shielding, “not the presence of civilians in densely populated areas from which armed groups also operate.”
Otherwise, by Israel’s logic, Israeli civilians living near military bases, including the Israeli military headquarters in central Tel Aviv, would qualify as “human shields.”
Gaza’s extreme population density and urbanization make it nearly impossible for Hamas or other militant groups to avoid civilian areas. The act of fighting from a civilian area is vastly different from deliberately using civilians to shield military targets. For instance, Hamas launching a rocket a few hundred meters from a school doesn’t meet the criteria for human shielding. Given Gaza’s layout, such proximity to civilian buildings is unavoidable. Such proximity also doesn’t "render immune" the launcher. Israel could easily eliminate such targets with precision drone strikes instead of bombing the whole area with a 2000-pound MK-84 bomb and then labeling the resulting civilians killed as "human shields."
Asymmetry of Power
Insurgent groups, particularly those fighting in urban settings, have historically “hidden among civilians,” according to Israeli law professor Neve Gordon.
“Given the asymmetry of power between non-state paramilitary groups and national armies, the ability to blend into the civilian population was necessary for military survival,” Gordon writes in the London Review of Books.
The American Revolution and the War of 1812 relied heavily on unconventional guerilla warfare, especially hit-and-run tactics and ambushes against then the world’s strongest military. American privateers used to raid British ships by disguising their ships as harmless civilian vessels, according to Gordon and Nicola Perugini, who co-wrote the book, Human Shields.
The “People’s War” strategy in Vietnam meant insurgent combatants would “strike their enemies then swiftly blend into the local population” to overcome the asymmetry of power against the French and then the Americans. This tactic prompted South Vietnam’s Secret Police Chief Ngo Dinh Nhu to admit that since the army “did not know where the enemy was… [for every] 10 times we launched a military operation, nine times we missed the Viet Cong and the tenth time, we struck right on the head of the population.” Israel seems to be in a similar situation.