Alerts

U.S. Attacks in Yemen Provide a Security Blanket for Israel in The Hague

If the International Criminal Court were to rule that Israel's actions were illegitimate, in practice, they would also be condemning the similar U.S. approach.
Share this
USS Stout
(U.S. Navy/Anna Wade)

Table of Contents

While many commentators may have overlooked the significance, the latest wave of U.S. strikes against the Houthis in Yemen was, in fact, an expression of clear U.S. support for a legal position long held by Israel. Describing the strikes, Al-Jazeera quoted an analyst who said, “The strikes in Sanaa targeted a residential neighbourhood known to house a lot of Houthi leaders.”

This statement raises the legal question of who can be targeted, under what circumstances, and in which location.

The Laws of War, predominantly designed to deal with wars between armies, generally distinguish between two main categories: Soldiers/combatants,1 who, while they enjoy the protections of the Third Geneva Convention (GCIII), are generally considered legitimate targets; and civilians, who enjoy the protections of the Fourth Geneva Convention (GCIV) and cannot be the subject of direct attack. The question that arises is what to do with civilians who take part in the hostilities – i.e., people who present themselves as innocents but are combatants.

The Laws of War define these people, who attempt to abuse their “civilian” status to conceal their true function, as “direct participants in hostilities” or DPHs. Under the Laws of War, DPHs are legitimate targets and do not enjoy the protection of the Third or Fourth Geneva Conventions.

Israel has been forced to deal with the question of targeting DPHs for decades.

As an intentional method of terror warfare, often referred to as asymmetric warfare, the Palestinian terrorist organizations, supported by the mechanisms of the United Nations and other actors, have intentionally tried to manipulate the Laws of War as a means to vilify Israel. Distorting reality, they refuse to recognize Hamas and the other Palestinian terrorists as “combatants” and simply declare that “Israel intentionally targets civilians.”

The most opaque current example of this phenomenon is the UN death tolls for the recent war in Gaza. Taken directly from the propaganda apparatus of Hamas, the UN statistics merely refer to dead men, women, children, and the elderly, without ever providing even basic statistics regarding the number of dead terrorists – whether those terrorists were men, women, children (who are intentionally abused by the terrorists)2 or the elderly.

The UN position does not exist in a vacuum. In 2009, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) released an opinion that severely limited the temporal targeting of DPHs. According to the ICRC, DPHs could only be targeted while they were actively engaged in their terrorist activities.

What does that mean? The ICRC accepts that a Gazan terrorist involved, for example, in firing rockets to indiscriminately target Israel’s civilian population or one who infiltrated Israel to participate in the October 7, 2023, massacre can be classified as DPHs. However, per the ICRC, that classification ends one second after the terrorist ignites the rocket firing mechanism and returns to his “day job,” or once the terrorist is no longer participating in the massacre. At such time, according to the ICRC, they resume their “civilian” status and can no longer be the subject of a direct attack.

The ICRC opinion, which ignored the actions of terrorists and was legally flawed, was rejected by almost everyone – except the terrorists and their sundry (including the UN) supporters.

Criticizing the flawed approach, former Canadian JAG Kenneth Watkin wrote3 that the ICRC definition “failed to attract universal consensus on terms that by their nature are both amorphous and contextually contingent. Resistance to the Interpretive Guidance resulted in part because it is viewed as having defined DPH too narrowly and has suggested applying it in too restrictive a fashion that does not match the realities of contemporary conflict (see the U.S. DoD Law of War Manual, para. 5.8.3, pp 228-32, as well as analysis here, here, here and here).”

In a similarly comprehensive discussion on the subject, Prof. Michael N. Schmitt explained4 how terrorist organizations, such as the genocidal Gazan terrorists who carried out the October 7 massacre, can be viewed in the Laws of War as “Organized Armed Groups” (OAGs) and noted that the United States takes the broader position that OAG members are targetable merely while they remain members irrespective of their temporal actions. As support for his position, Schmitt quoted the US Army/Marine Corps Commander’s Handbook on the Law of Land Warfare,5 which provides:

Membership in the armed forces or belonging to armed groups, that is, affiliation with these groups, makes a person liable to being made the object of attack regardless of whether he or she is taking a direct part in hostilities. Moreover, the individual, as an agent of the hostile group, may be assigned a combat role at any time, even if the individual normally performs other functions for the group. Thus, with limited exceptions, combatants may be made the object of attack at all times, regardless of the activities in which they are engaged.

Herein lies the fundamental conflict between the forces fighting international terror and terrorists and those defending the terrorists.

Using the widely accepted definition of DPH and membership in OAGs, Israel has targeted hundreds of terrorists from Hamas and other Gazan terror organizations. Many of these terrorists were targeted, similar to the U.S. strikes against the Houthis, in their homes. While these strikes sometimes also resulted in the death of civilians, they remained legal and legitimate under the Laws of War and the principle of “proportionality.”

Contrary to popular misconception, the principle of “proportionality” does not refer to a tit-for-tat situation in which the terrorists fire X rockets, and the other side is limited to a similar response using the same X number of munitions. Similarly, the principle does not require that an attacked country limit its response to killing a similar number of combatants on the other side as that side killed in the initial attack.

Instead, the Laws of War and “proportionality” accept that incidental or collateral damage may be caused when a military target is attacked. Attacks of this nature are legitimate so long as the loss of life and damage to property incidental to the attack is not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage expected to be gained. As the value of the military target grows, so too does the extent of permitted incidental damage. The principle does not limit the extent of the response or the number of casualties on the opposing side.

In its strike in Yemen, the United States was implementing the same position held by Israel. The Houthis are terrorists, no different from their Hamas partners in the Iranian axis of terror. As such, its members and leadership are legitimate targets even when sleeping in their beds.

When the United States attacked those Houthi leaders in their homes, they were not only targeting the terrorists but also, possibly inadvertently, providing substantial support for Israel’s approach towards the Gazan terrorists.  

The meaning of this support cannot be understated. If hostile elements such as the UN and the International Criminal Court were to rule that Israel’s actions were illegitimate, in practice, they would also be condemning the similar U.S. approach. Since vilifying Israel alone, or even prosecuting Israeli officials for acting in accordance with the Laws of War as accepted by Western countries, would be discriminatory, the support given to Israel by the recent U.S. attack is not restricted to defending Israel against the Iranian-backed, direct Houthi kinetic aggression, but rather, also provides Israel with a much broader legal security blanket. 

* * *

Notes

  1. While the 1977 Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I) smudged the classic definition of a soldier/combatant provided in the GCIII, it is nonetheless irrelevant to the Gazan terrorists, since they do not meet the criteria stipulated even in article 43 of the Protocol I, to be considered as legitimate combatants.↩︎

  2. https://jcpa.org/palestinian-militias-in-jenin-deployed-teenage-girls-to-report-on-israeli-troop-movements-during-combat/↩︎

  3. https://lieber.westpoint.edu/mitt-regans-drone-strike-analyzing-impacts-targeted-killing-chmr-ap/↩︎

  4. https://lieber.westpoint.edu/targeting-non-state-mixed-groups/↩︎

  5. https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/ARN19354_FM%206-27%20_C1_FINAL_WEB_v2.pdf↩︎

Lt.-Col. (res.) Maurice Hirsch

Lt.-Col. (res.) Maurice Hirsch served as Director of the Military Prosecution for Judea and Samaria. Since retiring from the IDF, Hirsch worked as the Head of Legal Strategies for Palestinian Media Watch, as a Senior Military Consultant for NGO Monitor, an advisor to the Ministry of Defense, and head of an advisory committee in the Ministry of Interior. Hirsch was the architect of the Israeli law that strips citizenship from Israeli terrorists who have been convicted for terror offenses, sentenced to a custodial sentence, and receive a payment from the Palestinian Authority as a reward for their acts of terror.
Share this

Subscribe to Daily Alert

The Daily Alert – Israel news digest appears every Sunday, Tuesday, and Thursday.

Related Items

Stay Informed, Always

Get the latest news, insights, and updates directly in your inbox—be the first to know!

Subscribe to Jerusalem Issue Briefs
The Daily Alert – Israel news digest appears every Sunday, Tuesday, and Thursday.







Notifications

The Jerusalem Center
What makes a child believe killing a #Jew is justified?

In PA textbooks, Jews are called liars and frauds; their fate: elimination. This is #indoctrination—not #education. But change is happening. On East to West, @IMPACT_SE CEO Marcus Sheff exposes how #UNRWA-funded schools are fueling extremism—and what real reform looks like.  Listen now on Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/2JHqh973U  Watch on YouTube: youtu.be/8OkJTGNfVUc

11:43am
The Jerusalem Center
Highlights from the @Jerusalem_Post Annual Conference in NYC:

Dr. @Dan_Diker, President of the JCFA: “October 7 wasn’t just an attack on Israel — it was a blow to the U.S. on Israeli soil. It demands moral clarity and a united front between Israel and the U.S. to defeat jihadist terror.”

2:20pm
The Jerusalem Center
@XAVIAERD says it like it is

Well, @XAVIAERD says it like it is: If you’re part of “#Queers for #Palestine,” he’ll pay for your flight to #Gaza. Go see for yourself how they treat LGBTQ+ people over there. Don’t miss this bold take on the Israel-Hamas war and the woke right.

2:32pm
The Jerusalem Center
“This isn’t Israel vs. Hamas — it’s the frontline of the free world.”

“This isn’t Israel vs. Hamas — it’s the frontline of the free world.” On Our Middle East by @JNS_org, @Dan_Diker@KhaledAbuToameh (JCFA/@GatestoneInst) break it down: If Hamas isn’t crushed, Iran wins. The jihadis—from #Gaza to your campus—get the green light. Diker: “This war is for the West.” No fluff. No filters. Just raw insight from two insiders who actually know what’s going on.  Watch: youtu.be/4Aq_zcbb4Yo

2:15pm
The Jerusalem Center
5/5 Lt. Col. Kalo on East to West with @smartinezamir:

“This operation showcases Israel’s strategic intelligence superiority both regionally and globally. It demonstrates the moral commitment to recovered soldiers and also strengthens Israel’s position with allies.” youtube.com/watch?v=nIvNNi

2:07pm
The Jerusalem Center
4/5 The operation built on intelligence gathered during the 2019 #Baumel recovery

#Mossad agents operated under cover in #Syria for years, visiting a graveyard multiple times under fire to collect remains for DNA matching. The intelligence community’s evolution combines technology, big data analysis, and human intelligence capabilities.

2:02pm
The Jerusalem Center
3/5 This recovery coincided with the release of Israeli hostage Edan Alexander

This recovery coincided with the release of Israeli hostage Edan Alexander from #Hamas in #Gaza, significantly boosting national morale amid an ongoing conflict now stretching over 18 months. The dual successes demonstrate #Israel‘s unwavering commitment to bringing all soldiers home.

1:58pm
The Jerusalem Center
2/5 The operation used the power vacuum following #Assad’s fall from #Damascus

Lt. Col. Avi Kalo, former head of IDF Prisoners & Missing Persons Division, calls it “an outstanding event that brings hope and new spirit to the people of Israel.” The operation utilized the power vacuum following #Assad‘s fall from #Damascus, allowing #Israeli intelligence to deploy ground capabilities in #Syria.

1:56pm
The Jerusalem Center
1/5 Israeli forces recovered the remains of Sergeant First Class Zvi Feldman

In an unprecedented operation, Israeli forces have recovered the remains of Sergeant First Class Zvi #Feldman, missing since the 1982 Battle of Sultan Yacoub. The complex #Mossad mission was conducted deep within #Syrian territory, 43 years after his disappearance. This follows the successful 2019 recovery of Zachary #Baumel from the same battle.

1:54pm
The Jerusalem Center
A molotov attack on a bus = a “barbecue party”?

That’s what #Palestinian kids are being taught under @UNRWA  — from grade school to graduation. This isn’t education. It’s indoctrination. Marcus Sheff of @IMPACT_SE  breaks it down with @smartinezamir

12:51pm

Close