Dispatches from the Field—The Genocide Report
Washington, DC—29 October 2023
The ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas has placed the civilian population of Gaza under extreme duress, resulting in large-scale displacement, widespread destruction of infrastructure, and severe restrictions on humanitarian access. While Israel asserts the right to defend itself against attacks by Hamas, international humanitarian law (IHL) imposes clear legal obligations on all parties to distinguish between combatants and civilians, limit harm to noncombatants, and ensure the provision of aid. The situation highlights the challenges of enforcing compliance with the laws of war in densely populated urban environments, where military objectives and civilian presence are closely intertwined. Evaluating conduct through the lenses of legality, proportionality, and civilian protection is essential for both immediate crisis management and longer-term accountability.
Civilian Protection and Proportionality
In conflict, proportionality is a legal standard requiring that harm to civilians and civilian infrastructure not exceed the anticipated military advantage. Targeting entire neighborhoods or destroying civilian facilities to reach combatants violates this principle. In Gaza, airstrikes on densely populated urban areas have caused widespread civilian deaths and displacement, raising serious concerns under IHL. The presence of Hamas fighters in civilian areas does not permit indiscriminate attacks or collective punishment of noncombatants.
Forced Displacement and Humanitarian Access
The blockade of Gaza has trapped over 2.3 million civilians, half of whom are children, in a territory roughly twice the size of Washington, DC. Orders to evacuate northern Gaza without sufficient aid or safe passage have effectively placed civilians in mortal danger. The deliberate obstruction of humanitarian aid—including food, water, and medical supplies—constitutes collective punishment and is prohibited under international law. Ensuring safe corridors for civilians and aid must be a priority for all parties to the conflict.
Hamas: Governance and Responsibility
Hamas, governing Gaza since 2007, is a designated terrorist organization. Its governance has limited political representation and curtailed civil liberties, while its actions—indiscriminate rocket attacks and hostage-taking—violate international law. However, civilian protection obligations apply to all parties. The actions of Hamas do not justify disproportionate retaliation that targets noncombatants or violates the principle of distinction.
Israel: Defense and Legal Limits
Israel has the right to defend itself from attacks, including rocket fire and terror operations by Hamas. Yet lawful defense under IHL requires minimizing civilian harm. Airstrikes and other military measures that target noncombatants or civilian infrastructure exceed legal bounds and constitute collective punishment. Statements by officials threatening further deprivation of essential services highlight the urgent need for accountability and adherence to international norms.
Self-defense does not absolve any party—state or non-state—from compliance with international humanitarian law.”
Humanitarian Corridor
Limited aid access through the Rafah crossing has been insufficient to meet the needs of Gaza’s civilian population. Effective humanitarian corridors, including safe passage for evacuees, are required under international law. States must coordinate to ensure civilians are protected and receive assistance without interference from combat operations.
Atrocity Prevention Lens
The crisis in Gaza reflects multiple risk factors for mass atrocities, including forced displacement, targeted deprivation of essential resources, and attacks on civilian populations. Key indicators of potential escalation include the use of starvation as a weapon, indiscriminate targeting of civilian areas, and restrictions on humanitarian access. Prevention strategies must prioritize monitoring and reporting violations, facilitating safe humanitarian operations, and engaging international mechanisms to hold actors accountable for breaches of IHL.
Legal Framework
Geneva Conventions and IHL
The Fourth Geneva Convention and Additional Protocols protect civilians during armed conflict. Collective punishment, indiscriminate attacks, and deprivation of essential resources are prohibited. Violations constitute war crimes under customary international law.
Principle of Distinction
IHL requires distinguishing between combatants and civilians. Deliberate targeting of noncombatants is unlawful, regardless of the presence of opposing forces in civilian areas.
Proportionality and Necessity
Attacks must balance anticipated military advantage against potential civilian harm. Excessive civilian casualties or infrastructure destruction cannot be justified by operational objectives.
Responsibility and Accountability
All parties, including state and non-state actors, are obligated to uphold these legal standards. Violations may trigger investigation by international courts, including the International Criminal Court or UN fact-finding missions, depending on jurisdiction and mandate.
Suggested Citation
“Israel-Hamas Conflict: Civilian Protection and Legal Boundaries in Armed Conflict.” Dispatches from the Field—The Genocide Report, Washington, DC, 29 October 2023.
Photo Credit
TGR photo – Palestinian community destroyed by IDF airstrikes in Gaza along the Rafah border crossing on 28 October 2023.
About TGR
The Genocide Report (TGR) publishes analysis and educational resources on conflict, international law, and atrocity prevention. Its work seeks to bridge academic research, field realities, and public understanding of mass violence and civilian protection.