B’tselem condemn sniper murder of Carlos Chávez, who else will speak out?
B’tselem (an Israeli human rights NGO) condemned the murder of Carlos Andrés Muscara Chávez, a 21 year old Kibbutz volunteer and visitor to Israel from Ecuador. He was killed by a Palestinian sniper as he worked in a potato field. Condemnation for this senseless and deliberate murder should be heard from many human rights organisations. Why is B’tselem practically alone in bringing attention to this tragedy which they describe as a “grave breach international humanitarian law and a war crime”?
The B’tselem statement said, “Attacks aimed at civilians undermine all rules of morality and law. Specifically, the intentional killing of civilians is considered a ‘grave breach’ of international humanitarian law and a war crime. Whatever the circumstances, such acts are unjustifiable.”
This statement is clear, straightforward and unequivocal. The question then is where are the statements from the rest of the human rights world? Are condemnations of snipers who target civilians outside their moral framework or mandate?
Btselem had more to say, debunking claims that the situation in Israel is somehow different from other conflicts, “Palestinian organizations raise several arguments to justify attacks on civilians in Israel. The main argument is that ‘all means are legitimate in fighting for independence against a foreign occupation.’ This argument is completely baseless, and contradicts the fundamental principle of international humanitarian law. According to this principle, civilians are to be protected from the consequences of warfare, and any attack must discriminate between civilians and military targets. This principle is part of international customary law; as such, it applies to every state, organization, and person, even those who are not party to any relevant convention.”
B’Tselem ended their statement with a call to “the armed Palestinian groups to immediately cease all attacks directed at civilians”. Will other human rights organisations be issuing similar statements and use their influence to prevent further civilian deaths?
Dr Don Morris at the Doc’s Talk blog pointed out the significance of attack which “single[d] out civilian targets with precision weapons”.
Another blogger, primerprez, draws a comparison and contrast between the Deaths of Rachel Corrie and Carlos Andres Muscara Chavez. They argue that the difference is not just that Carlos was deliberately killed while Rachel (an ISM activist) died accidentally; but also the small chance that anyone in a few years will remember the name Carlos Andres Muscara Chavez. With even the human rights organisations staying mum, this blogger may well be right.
Maybe they are just a little slow to react. Maybe other human rights organisations in the region will indeed condemn this targeting of civilians, both by rockets and by snipers. On this blog we previously discussed why human rights need to be universal in combating hate. Combating the targeting of the civilians in war requires the same universality.
This lack of support from the human rights organisations must be painful not just for Carlos Andrés Muscara Chávez’s friends in Israel, but also for him friends, family and the people of Ecuador. How will they feel about the silence currently emanating from most human rights organisations? How will the UN react to the letter demanding a condemnation of this murder?
B’tselem should not need to be praised for defending the human rights of an Ecaudorian volunteer – this is their mandate. But perhaps other human rights organisations need to be reminded of their mission? If you are a member of a human rights organisation, perhaps you’ll ask them what their response has been? If you’re a representative of an NGO that promotes human rights, we invite you to comment and let us know what your response has been.
So far the silence is deafening.
Andre Oboler
