(3) weaponizing law to create effects that contribute directly to desired military and political outcomes
(4) “principle effects-based air defense methodology employed by US adversaries today”
Operational Actions
(1) unintended civilian casualties are used by insurgents who make claims to the media that the war is being waged in an inhuman, illegal, unfair, iniquitous way
(2) direct application of hostile media coverage used to make claims the stronger party is engaging in serial violations of LOAC, particularly by harming civilians, as a matter of policy, and that this proves the iniquity of their cause: broadcast within targeted society and around world
(3) lawsuits (civil and criminal) filed against civilian/military officials of targeted government alleging violations of LOAC all over the world under universal jurisdiction
(4) international bureaucratic supervision created to pronounce methods and means unlawful and level charges of noncompliance with LOAC generally and against specific individuals
Outcomes
Outcomes
(1) adherence to LOAC by strong state out of fear of triggering false claims of violations when combat power (air, armor, etc.) is used imposes military disadvantage
(2) realizing it cannot win w/in constraints imposed by fear of claimed LOAC violations, targeted society loses will, withdraws
Examples
worst setback for US since 9/11 was Abu Ghraib, which did not involve force of arms but rather illegality: media coverage undermined U.S. political will and led to withdrawal from Iraq w/o victory in 2011
U.S. Marines in Fallujah (2004) beaten not by insurgents but by al-Jazeera because the US was worried about what already hostile populations would think of the US after AJ reportage on US LOAC violations
“if there is the likelihood of even one civilian casualty, we will not strike not even if we think Osama bin Laden is down there.”—Lord Robertson, NATO SG, 2008, Afghanistan—leads insurgents to colocate with civilians, which leads to more collateral damage, which leads to hostile media coverage, which leads to erosion of political support, which may lead to military withdrawal in defeat
UN Special Rapporteur Philip Alston: stated that those who use autonomous weapons must disclose, to international scrutiny, much specific factual information about the exact identity of targets, the criteria by which they are selected, the assessment of target’s ability to defend himself and thus evade capture, and specifics about outcomes when attacks take place: if any nation did this it would destroy the attacker’s ability to successfully attack and reveal sources and methods
APs make journos civilians when “engaged in dangerous missions in areas of armed conflict” provided that “they take no action adversely affecting their status as civilians” and thus journos have an obligation to differentiate themselves from combatants (by wearing civvies or press symbol)
journos/media orgs cannot be targeted unless they make an “effective contribution to military action and their destruction in the specific circumstances offers a “definite military advantage” such as transmitting military orders
unclear whether broadcasts that solely improve civilian morale or express support for attacks strip away protected status
graphic footage of collateral damage caused by your troops, or dejected POWs captured by enemy, will effect the perceptions of the war of viewers on both sides of the conflict
if media are present, need to make an accurate judgment about media partiality/bias receptivity and motives behind it:
this judgment is problematic: what are the boundaries of neutrality?
four typologies: (1) media themselves strive to be impartial even as the constraints of the battlefield and the deliberate efforts of the combatants are undermining their efforts—no bias, and neutral; (2) if journo is merely shaping the media reporting of the conflict through his own information operations, or by bringing his own damaging prejudice to the battlefield, it may be a case of bias but not of non-neutrality; (3) if the host combatant is engaged in information ops intended to favorably shape the media message, such that the media’s output serves to further purposes of that belligerent, then there are legitimate questions about the de facto neutrality of the media even if the media org attempts to be scrupulously impartial and objective; (4) journo or media org engaged in deception operation or otherwise making a “direct contribution to the war effort” is non-neutral and may lawfully be targeted
three categories: (1) if media act impartially, they are entitled to civilian treatment, (2) if media are undermining the pol-milstrategy, it is legal to control them, (3) if media are behaving in a non-neutral way, it may be lawful to target them
Control/Detention
Control/Detention
controlling flow and dissemination of info emphatically is lawful and purpose of public affairs staff is to control dissemination of info to maximize military and political advantage: keep media orgs/journos away from areas of battlefield where their reportage would be damaging
GCs allow detention of correspondents
journos are entitled to all protections due combatants; equipment can be confiscated but they are not legally obliged to respond to interrogation
Military Deception
media a means of disseminating the military deception story: embedding and strategic media presentations tell only part of the story the military wants told
“outright lies do have a place on the battlefield. A media-savvy commander will also seek to use the media to directly affect the enemy’s plans as part of a military deception operation…deceive adversaries and others about friendly force dispositions, capabilities, vulnerabilities, and intentions” by creating a “plausible, but false, view of the situation, which will lead the deception target into acting in a manner that will accomplish the commander’s goal.”
ICRC position: journos/media orgs cannot be considered legitimate target even if
being used for propaganda purposes
jamming transmissions
discrediting them
countering their message
Direct Targeting
journos have become a target because management of the INFOWAR has become high priority
DOD OGC: civilians that make direct contribution to war effort may be attacked...”Civilian media generally are not considered to be lawful military targets, but circumstances may make them so. In both Rwanda and Somalia,…civilian radio broadcasts urged the civilian population to commit acts of violence against members of other tribes…When it is determined that the civilian media broadcasts are directly interfering with the accomplishment of a military force’s mission, there is no law of war objection to using the minimum necessary force to shut them down. The extent to which force can be used for purely psychological operations purposes, such as shutting down a civilian radio station for the sole purpose of undermining the morale of the civilian population, is an issue that has yet to be [resolved] by the international community.”
GEN Wesley Clark: “difficult to get political approval for striking [Serb] TV stations, because strikes…seemed undemocratic and perhaps illegal…” Approval was eventually forthcoming…and the attack on Radio TV Serbia resulted in temporary disruption of broadcasting and ten staff fatalities because Serb state-run media were not behaving with impartiality and were bureaucratically an agent of the government
“They are not fighting a military campaign against Israel because they know they could never win. They are fighting a propaganda war that Israel can never win without the staunchest support from her Western allies…Rockets, Hamas fighters and even attack tunnels are merely devices to provoke Israel’s military response…”
“They are not fighting a military campaign against Israel because they know they could never win. They are fighting a propaganda war that Israel can never win without the staunchest support from her Western allies…Rockets, Hamas fighters and even attack tunnels are merely devices to provoke Israel’s military response…”
Hamas doesn’t ignore LOAC, it knows LOAC well and simply exploits its own noncompliance and Israeli compliance as follows…
(1) attack Israeli citizens to provoke counter attack,
(2) human shielding: hide behind Palestinian civilians (schools, hospitals) while encouraging/forcing them to stay and be killed/injured
(3) make it impossible for Israel to use its artillery, airpower, and armor effectively because it is occupied with attempting to minimize Palestinian civilian casualties—force Israel to abort strikes to avoid civilian casualties, or strikes and give Hamas dead civilians to exploit
(4) media operations: encourage Western media to portray civilian suffering, minimize Hamas role in it
(5) lawfare: accuse Israel of violations of LOAC in media and conjure firestorm of outrage around world to pressure Israel to stop counteroffensive
(6) survive to reap propaganda victory and prepare next round of hostilities
(7) repeat, to destroy Israel’s international reputation, delegitimize/demonize Israel in the world, peel away Israeli allies, stir aggressive Muslim “street” in the West
(8) ask for UN/international supervision/condemnation/negotiation/secure desired “peace”
Robert Gates, former US SecDef: “prokoving or exploiting civilian casualties is a ‘principle strategic tactic’ of the Taliban.’”
Robert Gates, former US SecDef: “prokoving or exploiting civilian casualties is a ‘principle strategic tactic’ of the Taliban.’”
“by creating restrictions beyond what LOAC would require, NATO’s pronouncements encourage the Taliban to shield themselves from air attack by violating LOAC through embedding themselves among civilians. This permits a form of lawfare where NATO’s adherence to its own rules, in essence, creates for its adversary a substitute for conventional military weaponry. By this I mean that for the Taliban to survive, it is not necessary for them to build traditional air defenses; rather, just be operating amidst civilians, they enjoy a legal sanctuary created by NATO’s own self-imposed restrictions that is a secure as any fortress bristling with anti-aircraft guns.”
urban warfare manual captured by Israel and used by Shujaiya Brigade advocates use of human shields
Hamas’s real weapons are the men, women, children and babies of the Palestinian population…The term ‘human shields’ is in fact a misnomer. They are not there to shield weapons and fighters from IDF attack. They are there to be sacrificed: to bleed, to die and to be photographed doing so.”—Richard Kemp
From Least to Most Coercive…
From Least to Most Coercive…
(1) promote and fund media orgs to “manag[e] the media battle against the Israel lies” and provide info on the ground in Gaza to other Arabic-language media orgs;
(2) leverage “peace journalism”: solicit journos who rush to judgment against Israel in hope of ending carnage or are quick to simply say “both sides are to blame” and “let’s end the cycle of violence” and present news in a manner as to “nail Israel for their disproportionate brutality”
(3) issue detailed directions to Gazan “social media activists” and to media “fixers” who “encourage” all foreign journos working in Gaza not to show Hamas fighters firing from protected places, to attribute all casualties to Israel, to call all dead “civilians,” to maximize Palestinian suffering
(4) intimidate and threaten journos: one states “If we ever dared point our camera at them, they would shoot at us and kill us.” Asked to say that on camera, the journo “refused and almost ran away.”; send SMS threats to journos who tweet about Hamas using human shields, accuse them of being informants or 5th columnists who are lying for Israel, seize equipment, make claim that noncompliance with Hamas is treason and punishable, use physical violence
(5) claim Israeli airstrikes against al-Aqsa TV station are a “crime against journalists and media”
“for Hamas, the stench of death is the smell of victory…Victory is the unbalanced media outrage. The appalling images of suffering beamed around the world, inciting large-scale protests, stirring up hatred against the Jewish state, inspiring violence against the Jewish people, energizing campaigns to boycott, sanction and divest…Victory is the clamour of the UN and Western politicians to condemn…Israel.”
“for Hamas, the stench of death is the smell of victory…Victory is the unbalanced media outrage. The appalling images of suffering beamed around the world, inciting large-scale protests, stirring up hatred against the Jewish state, inspiring violence against the Jewish people, energizing campaigns to boycott, sanction and divest…Victory is the clamour of the UN and Western politicians to condemn…Israel.”
“Israeli officials have dangerously and unlawfully blurred the distinction between civilians who call for or support military attacks and those who directly participate in attacks. This claimed justification for attacking civilians opens the door to war crimes.”
file case in ICC, sue in foreign courts under universal jurisdiction
make Israelis believe the IDF is fighting an illegal war that violates Jewish moral code
media control, deception, distortion, omission, obfuscation
media control, deception, distortion, omission, obfuscation
targeting hostile media
positive media integrated with diplomatic/economic
campaigns in Western countries
defensive lawfare
Israel Govt Press Office warned foreign journos it was not responsible for their safety in Gaza
Israel Govt Press Office warned foreign journos it was not responsible for their safety in Gaza
claim media bias against Israel
manage journo access to the battlefield in a way that builds empathy, loyalty
private university in Israel waging propaganda war to counter anti-Israeli sentiment in international and social media through FB, Twitter, YouTube; translate messages from Hebrew into 30 languages, graphics team; volunteers reach audience of 21 million, get updates from Prime Minister and MoFA; claim that it is government propaganda trying to look unofficial like “everyday people chatting online”
IDF doing the same thing
point out non-state actor’s violations of LOAC
“targeted the propaganda dissemination capabilities used to broadcast the messages of al-Qassam Brigades. Al-Aqsa’ is a Hamas command and control facility and its station broadcast capabilities are used to incite Palestinians against Israel, to transit orders and messages to Hamas operatives and to instruct Gaza residents to ignore IDF warnings regarding upcoming military activity in specific areas.”
“targeted the propaganda dissemination capabilities used to broadcast the messages of al-Qassam Brigades. Al-Aqsa’ is a Hamas command and control facility and its station broadcast capabilities are used to incite Palestinians against Israel, to transit orders and messages to Hamas operatives and to instruct Gaza residents to ignore IDF warnings regarding upcoming military activity in specific areas.”
deliberately killed TV cameramen it claimed were “Hamas operatives” for a station that “regularly features programming that encourages/praises attacks on Israeli civilians…[J]ust as in other totalitarian regimes the media is used by the regime for command and control and also for security purposes. From our point of view, that’s not a legitimate journalist.”
targeted and destroyed antenna towers atop buildings housing media that IDF alleged were Hamas “operational communications infrastructure” and two floors of a building IDF said was a Hamas “intelligence and command center”
claimed individuals or facilities “had relevance to” or were “linked with” a Palestinian armed group but did not claim DPH explicitly
IDF: radio and TV stations “are intricately limked with Islamic Jihad and Hamas and have encouraged and lauded acts of terror against Israeli civilians for the past decade. Such terrorists, who hold cameras and notebooks in their hands, are no different from their colleagus who fire rockets aimed at Israeli cities and cannot enjoy the rights and protection afforded to legitimate journalists…[Hamas media workers] are an integral part of the Hamas structure and no one can deny that fact. All those involved in targeting Israeli civilians directly or indirectly should not feel that they have impunity.”
radio station normally broadcast talk shows/nonpolitical content according to owner
Israel claims not to have targeted al-Quds TV/Radio (which is the official radio station of Islamic Jihad) or Alwan Radio but rather the roof to disrupt the internal communications of Hamas, who were using the equipment on these buildings to direct attacks against Israeli civilians (antenna was target but the attack did not knock down or disable the antenna)
Leverage friendly media in Israel, Europe, and especially the US
Leverage friendly media in Israel, Europe, and especially the US
assure one’s own people of the legal and moral validity of their military’s actions: requires strategic communications plan and execution
assuring troops of the legal and moral validity of their actions adds to combat power…Law makes just wars possible by creating a well-defined legal space within which individual soldiers can act without resorting to their own personal moral codes.”
educate the media as to what the law does—and does not—require
demonstrate the Islamic/Arab foundations of LOAC to target audiences in adversary countries to counter beliefs that LOAC is a foreign tool and to delegitimize Islamic/Arab enemies that violate LOAC
build consensus toward a new protocol that systematically addresses the new realities of the media as combatants in war
harness friendly legal experts to defend Israeli interpretations of LOAC
On the Battlefield
respond quickly (and ideally before inquires are made) and as transparently as possible to lawfare-related incidents
operation verification teams: record activity in real time with video, satellite, etc in instances where an adversary is employing an effects-based lawfare strategy centered around allegations of war crimes…Multidisciplinary teams of legal, operational, intelligence, and public affairs specialists ought to be organized, trained, and equipped to rapidly investigate allegations of incidents of high collateral damage…and can prvide commanders with feedback as to how operations are being executed to allow adaptation if needed to better protect innocents.”
target the media that propound lawfare as military objectives
One commentator claims that the Palestinian people are “in the grip of a terrorist group that has embarked on a strategy to get its own children killed in order to build sympathy for its cause.” Another claims that the statement that Hamas is trying to get its own children killed is “racist and reprehensible.” Is either statement true? If this is the Hamas strategy, is it one that might actually be working?
