International Law is Not a Suicide Pact

[docmauser1]

For most observers of Middle Eastern affairs, irrespective of ideology, legal ignorance is the rule. In the specific matter of Israeli self-defense against terrorism, virtually everyone gets upset whenever the Jewish State seeks to protect its deliberately targeted civilians from grievous harms. This is the expectedly general reaction, even when Israel is repeatedly obligated to retaliate against openly indiscriminate rocket attacks from Gaza.
In an increasingly chaotic region of world politics, reassuringly rhythmic mantras have become a routine stand in for facts. Almost ritualistically, and as if to underscore that any lie, if repeated often enough, can be transformed into truth, all manner of observers unhesitatingly lament Israeli "disproportionality." In certain circumstances, such lamentations lead quite directly to "lawfare." Here, Israel's determined enemies cheerfully augment their more usual resorts to terror-violence with characteristically propagandistic and fully complementary manipulations of international law.
But even the most sacred mantras may be subject to informed challenge. Significantly, international law is one of those layered and specialized subjects about which almost everyone is quick to offer a learned opinion, but where almost no one ever has any genuine knowledge. For example, and however counter-intuitive, the legal standard of "proportionality" defined by the law of armed conflict has nothing to do with any requirement to maintain equivalent levels of suffering. If it did, many still-celebrated allied military operations conducted during World War II would have been flagrantly unlawful. ...