As the Gaza conflict stumbles forward, out of control, bloody, deadly, and seemingly endless, the Israeli Prime Minister vows “total victory” against Hamas as he steps over the bodies of thousands of Palestinians caught up in the violence. Total victory is an impossibility in this conflict. The days of total victory, of unconditional surrender, are over. The United Nations’ paradigm of restoring international peace and security negates these concepts.
Israel had a righteous basis to fight, a reason to retaliate after the surprise attacks of Oct. 7, 2023. The world was stunned and offered to help. Like the United States after the tragedy of 9/11, Israel — stung and hurting — lashed out with little rationale other than revenge and retribution. It didn’t work then for the United States and it will not work now for Israel. Revenge is a terrible reason to wage war. These are not biblical times. In the modern era, disputes should be settled peaceably as a matter of course; force should be used only as a matter of last resort.
When force is deemed appropriate under international and domestic law, it must be fought in accordance with the law. There is an entire legal regime/paradigm in place for controlling armed conflict and protecting those on the battlefield, whether soldiers or civilians caught in the crossfire. International humanitarian law — the laws of armed conflict that comprise the rules, policies, procedures, and customs of warfare — seeks to ensure that conflict does not become a lawless blood bath.
In the 21st century, respect for the laws of armed conflict has waned. Far too often, these laws are invoked or ignored selectively, based on an analysis of their benefit or detriment to a warring party.
This should not become the new status quo. Over the past 30 years, those who chose to ignore the law have been charged and convicted in various tribunals or courts for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Currently, a former head of state and various commanders, soldiers, politicians, and others are serving lengthy sentences for violating the laws of armed conflict and other international norms. This is as it should be.
Yet despite these successes, the ignoring of rules that protect those found on the battlefield such as civilians, the wounded and sick, as well as in protected places like hospitals has become more commonplace. For an abundance of illustrations, one can look to the crises unfolding around the world — in Syria, Yemen, Ethiopia, Sudan, Ukraine, and now in Gaza.
The tactics by the Russian Federation of mass destruction in Ukraine are now mirrored in Gaza as Israeli forces grind toward “total victory.” The rule of law is lacking in these two conflicts by way of example and it reflects poorly on these two United Nations member states, one that claims itself to be a liberal democracy.
It is important to hold to the rule of law when force is used. That force must follow the basic tenets of the laws of armed conflict — military necessity, proportionality, the prevention of unnecessary suffering, and distinction between civilians and combatants. In the dirty little wars of this new century, these tenets are far too often shunted to the side by warring parties.
The message needs to remain clear: violate these tenets and you are committing war crimes.
For Israel, “total victory” would be a hollow victory indeed. A victory won amid allegations of violations of international law, including war crimes, is a victory based on the shifting sands of the Sinai peninsula and will serve as unstable ground. No one will win the Gaza conflict, and sadly and tragically, fewer and fewer will remember that terrible October day when innocents were massacred by a lawless band of thugs. Israel has become a pariah and will suffer the practical, political, and legal consequences of their policy of “total victory.”
As the world watches Israel and Russia continue their military actions and policy of mass destruction, it will be necessary to pause and reflect on how the rule of law can control, mitigate, and account for these dirty little wars for which civilians in particular have been forced to pay unimaginable prices. In time, Israel will have to step back from its actions in Gaza and develop corrective steps to restore its place as a viable and respected member of the family of nations. In its current unrelenting quest to seek vengeance against Hamas fighters, Israeli authorities veer not toward “total victory,” but toward a loss of control and an uncertain future.
The dirty little wars of the 21st century are an affront to the laws of armed conflict. All United Nations member states must renew their respect for the important protections of personnel found on the battlefield, civilians, the wounded, and the sick, as well as those medical personnel who assist in mitigating the scourge of war. There will have to be an accounting when these conflicts end. Difficult decisions will have to be made on how this will be done, but it must be done. We cannot afford to loosen our grip on the belief that the rule of law is and must remain more powerful than the rule of the gun.
**David M. Crane is the founding Chief Prosecutor of the UN Special Court for Sierra Leone. He is also the founder of the Global Accountability Network. In his career he has advised senior commanders on the laws of armed conflict and taught these rules to armies around the world.
