Rights and Accountability 17 June 2015
This is what the voice on this video is heard exclaiming just after a sniper fires a shot toward an unarmed Palestinian man in the occupied West Bank village of Silwad.
The video shows a person in the distance, apparently standing still and not involved in any kind of confrontation, falling to the ground as soon as the shot is fired.
The Israeli publication Mako says that the soldiers in the video appear to be from the Netzah Yehuda battalion, the same Kfir brigade unit whose members were caught on video brutally beating a Palestinian man from Jalazone refugee camp last week.
Gratuitous violence
A still made by Israeli publication Mako highlights the unarmed Palestinian targeted by an Israeli sniper.
The Israeli army spokesperson justified the shooting, claiming, according to Mako: “The film shows sniper fire toward the lower body of a central inciter in a violent and illegal disruption of the peace, which occurred in the village of Silwad, northeast of Ramallah. The shooting was done with permission by the sector commanders after the suspect threw an incendiary device and stones at the forces on the spot.”
But Mako says:
However, as can be seen in the film, the wounded Palestinian man has no incendiary device in his hand, no such device fell out of his hand when he was hurt, and he is not seen walking, running, or threatening the soldiers in the field. According to the colonel with whom we discussed this, a very experienced infantry officer, “the target is not threatening the forces in the field in a manner that requires operating the sniper, not according to military procedures.”
The unnamed colonel to whom Mako showed the video adds: “It is customary to put snipers at controlling points and they have a very specific role: to locate and destroy an armed person who threatens the forces, if such a person appears among the demonstrators, or take out of commission a demonstrator who presents a clear threat and endangers the life of forces in the field … unfortunately, it does not look like that is the situation in the film in question.”
In other words, even by the standards of the occupying forces, this shooting was a gratuitous act of violence.
Embarrassing
Mako – and the officer it interviewed – seem more concerned however with the public relations damage the video could do, rather than the rights of Palestinians under occupation.
The colonel criticizes the filming style “which is more appropriate for Hamas terrorists or Syrian rebels than for an army like the IDF.”
“The trickling of such materials to the Internet is especially serious,” the colonel adds. “In this way you can see how the force operates, they’re exposing themselves to legal problems, and what they don’t understand is that this could get the whole country in hot water. Damage at a global level. It’s just stupidity.”
The colonel notes that the video “has started gaining speed over the last few hours and it looks like it has already started being published on foreign sites.”
He worries that it could hit world news programs “and then the party will begin.”
Who is the victim?
It is impossible to tell from the video the identity of the victim of the sniper attack.
According to Mako, the video “was apparently shot last Thursday, during a demonstration in the village of Silwad.”
However local media have not reported incidents on Thursday. Typically, Palestinians in the village hold weekly demonstrations against the occupation on Fridays.
The Palestinian news agency WAFA reports that on Friday, two Palestinians in the village were injured by occupation forces who “raided several homes in the town, forced residents out and took over their rooftops, turning them into military outposts to target residents.”
According to the report, one youth was shot and injured and another was hit by a stun grenade.
During confrontrations in the village on 5 June, the 48th anniversary of the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, occupation forces injured three Palestinians with live ammunition in Silwad.
All three, one a child of 13, sustained bullet wounds to their legs, according to the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights.
Given that the people of Silwad are the constant targets of occupation forces and the settlers they protect, there has been no shortage of opportunities for the kind of violence depicted in the video.
Resisting land theft
The presence of occupation forces in the area has nothing to do with any legitimate Israeli “security” concern but with protecting and promoting the theft of Palestinian land by and for settlers, in violation of international law.
Silwad villagers have seen much of their land stolen by Israeli colonists and have lived for years under severe movement restrictions by the occupation forces.
The settlement of Ofra, established in the mid-1970s, was built on lands seized from Silwad and the nearby village of Ein Yabroud.
According to the Israeli human rights group B’Tselem, the “built-up area of Ofra lies on land that is registered in the Land Registry under the names of Palestinians from the villages of Ein Yabrud and Silwad.”
“The existence of Ofra is responsible for extensive violations of the human rights of Palestinians living in the area,” B’Tselem adds.
More recently settlers from Ofra have stolen even more Silwad village land to build the “Amona” outpost, an act legitimized by Israeli authorities.
Ultra-Orthodox
What is notable about Netzah Yehuda is that it is a recently formed Haredi or Ultra-Orthodox unit. Haredi leaders have strongly opposed a recent law requiring young men from the community, who had been exempt since the founding of Israel, to enter the army for the first time.
The video is therefore being approvingly circulated on some websites to show that Haredi men are capable of being just as ruthless as other enforcers of the occupation.
Dena Shunra contributed research and Hebrew translation.
Comments
What Brave Nimrods
Permalink Zionism Is Not Judaism replied on
Better than shooting fish in a barrel, yes? With the fish one has to go through the trouble of putting BDS sashes on them.
and you wonder
Permalink Michael replied on
why some people might want Israel to just be gone.
experienced israeli colonel
Permalink eeoww replied on
Yeah man, bad for our image. That too, GLOBALLY. Just doesn't fit with the MORALS of the Israeli army (or should I just level and say "IOF"?).
Forgive the Dent to your Ego
Permalink Miss Castello replied on
Who gives a stuff about your "image"? Forgive the dent to your ego, " experienced israeli colonel" - it's not about you, it's about a captive, tortured people struggling to survive /break the shackles, of a corrupt, evil regime: YOURS. AND labelled 'terrorist' for daring to fight back. This world doesn't (or shouldn't) revolve around 'Israel'. As for "MORALS" : When? Where? The very word has no place in the same sentence as 'Israel'. Yeah Man.
Guess I didn't make myself understood at all
Permalink eeooowww replied on
Hi Ms Castello ... thank you for what you have written and I really do admire you for it. I myself share your views completely. I am neither Israeli, nor a 'Colonel', nor do I have an atom's worth of support for that "nation". As in the subject of this reply post, "I guess I didn't make myself understood at all"; it was meant to be a totally sarcastic comment, - not to be taken at 'face value'! And I hope that through you and people with similar views, many many other people will wake up to the reality that the "State" of Israel is; and to what the brave people of Palestine go through everyday. Take good care, and best regards.
Credit Due
Permalink Miss Castello replied on
Sorry, but your comment really didn't come across to me as 'satire' and I'm not without a sense of humour. All credit to you for the views you've now expressed, which I'm in wholehearted agreement. Atb.
So the Israelis hand the
Permalink Maggie replied on
So the Israelis hand the international community the proof of their ongoing, relentless war crimes against Palestinians and no one acts on it. What will it take for the world to bring Israel to account for their crimes against humanity?