Home
Archives
Jerusalem Center Homepage
View the current issue
Jerusalem Center Videos
Additional Resources
Top Commentators:
- Elliott Abrams
- Fouad Ajami
- Shlomo Avineri
- Benny Avni
- Alan Dershowitz
- Jackson Diehl
- Dore Gold
- Daniel Gordis
- Tom Gross
- Jonathan Halevy
- David Ignatius
- Pinchas Inbari
- Jeff Jacoby
- Efraim Karsh
- Mordechai Kedar
- Charles Krauthammer
- Emily Landau
- David Makovsky
- Aaron David Miller
- Benny Morris
- Jacques Neriah
- Marty Peretz
- Melanie Phillips
- Daniel Pipes
- Harold Rhode
- Gary Rosenblatt
- Jennifer Rubin
- David Schenkar
- Shimon Shapira
- Jonathan Spyer
- Gerald Steinberg
- Bret Stephens
- Amir Taheri
- Josh Teitelbaum
- Khaled Abu Toameh
- Jonathan Tobin
- Michael Totten
- Michael Young
- Mort Zuckerman
Think Tanks:
- American Enterprise Institute
- Brookings Institution
- Center for Security Policy
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Heritage Foundation
- Hudson Institute
- Institute for Contemporary Affairs
- Institute for Counter-Terrorism
- Institute for Global Jewish Affairs
- Institute for National Security Studies
- Institute for Science and Intl. Security
- Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
- Investigative Project
- Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
- RAND Corporation
- Saban Center for Middle East Policy
- Shalem Center
- Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Media:
- CAMERA
- Daily Alert
- Jewish Political Studies Review
- MEMRI
- NGO Monitor
- Palestinian Media Watch
- The Israel Project
- YouTube
Government:
Back
(Israel Defense) Daniel Reisner - For the last fifteen years, every military operation or war in which Israel has been engaged has generated a follow-on "wave" of attempted legal proceedings against Israel, Israelis, Israeli companies or even foreign companies and individuals somehow related to Israel. I am often asked why Israel, which is consistently faced with enemies who show little or no respect for legal or moral values, continues to place such an emphasis on complying with the laws of armed conflict (more commonly referred to today as "international humanitarian law" - IHL). ◦First, from a purely legal perspective, international law does not allow one party to a conflict to cease to comply with the relevant rules, solely due to the fact that the other party is violating them. The fact that Hamas consistently commits blatant violations of all international legal norms, amounting to severe war crimes, does not entitle Israel to disregard these same rules Second, Israel has made a legal and moral decision to adhere to the relevant laws and norms of international law, in spite of the serious challenges such behavior generates in the Middle East. It is a testament to the commitment of the people of the State of Israel to maintain our own values, even when all around us people appear to be losing theirs. Finally, the military and legal authorities, all too keenly aware of the fact that, immediately once the fighting dies down, voices will clamor for international investigation of alleged wrongdoings, recognize the necessity of ensuring (and being able to retroactively prove) that IDF operations fully complied with all relevant norms. For all of these reasons, during the mid-90s I initiated a process of integrating military lawyers into the IDF operational decision-making processes. Today, IDF lawyers specialized in laws of armed conflict are deeply involved in all stages of military operations. Col. (res.) Adv. Daniel Reisner served as head of the IDF's international law department. 2014-10-17 00:00:00Full Article
Israel's Legal Wars
(Israel Defense) Daniel Reisner - For the last fifteen years, every military operation or war in which Israel has been engaged has generated a follow-on "wave" of attempted legal proceedings against Israel, Israelis, Israeli companies or even foreign companies and individuals somehow related to Israel. I am often asked why Israel, which is consistently faced with enemies who show little or no respect for legal or moral values, continues to place such an emphasis on complying with the laws of armed conflict (more commonly referred to today as "international humanitarian law" - IHL). ◦First, from a purely legal perspective, international law does not allow one party to a conflict to cease to comply with the relevant rules, solely due to the fact that the other party is violating them. The fact that Hamas consistently commits blatant violations of all international legal norms, amounting to severe war crimes, does not entitle Israel to disregard these same rules Second, Israel has made a legal and moral decision to adhere to the relevant laws and norms of international law, in spite of the serious challenges such behavior generates in the Middle East. It is a testament to the commitment of the people of the State of Israel to maintain our own values, even when all around us people appear to be losing theirs. Finally, the military and legal authorities, all too keenly aware of the fact that, immediately once the fighting dies down, voices will clamor for international investigation of alleged wrongdoings, recognize the necessity of ensuring (and being able to retroactively prove) that IDF operations fully complied with all relevant norms. For all of these reasons, during the mid-90s I initiated a process of integrating military lawyers into the IDF operational decision-making processes. Today, IDF lawyers specialized in laws of armed conflict are deeply involved in all stages of military operations. Col. (res.) Adv. Daniel Reisner served as head of the IDF's international law department. 2014-10-17 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
|
Search:
|