Hamas Rocket Fire is a Double War Crime, United Nations Watch, submitted to the UN Human Rights Council, June 25, 2021

This United Nations Watch submission argues Hamas committed “double war crimes” during the 2021 Gaza conflict by deliberately targeting Israeli civilians while operating from densely populated civilian areas ⭐, and defends Israel’s military response as lawful self-defense under international humanitarian law.

1. Hamas’s Rocket Campaign as a “Double War Crime”

2. Israel’s Right to Self-Defense

3. Hamas’s Use of Civilian Infrastructure

4. Military Targets and Israeli Precautions

5. Proportionality and Civilian Harm

6. Responsibility for Civilian Deaths

7. Calls for International Condemnation

⭐ Star Facts

• The submission states Hamas fired over 4,000 rockets in 11 days during the May 2021 conflict, killing 13 Israelis, injuring around 300, terrorizing millions, and causing millions of dollars in property damage.
• The document argues Hamas committed a “double war crime” by both deliberately targeting civilians and using Palestinian civilians as human shields through operations embedded in populated urban areas.
• The report cites claims that Hamas rockets falling short inside Gaza killed at least 16 Palestinian civilians, including eight children.
• The submission references Article 51(7) of Additional Protocol I, which prohibits using civilians “to render certain points or areas immune from military operations.”
• The document cites Article 58 of Additional Protocol I, which requires parties to avoid locating military objectives within or near densely populated civilian areas whenever feasible.
• The statement argues Israel conducted hundreds of “surgical strikes” against approximately 1,500 Hamas military targets, including tunnels, rocket launchers, operational facilities, and weapon storage sites.
• The report claims Israel used precautions such as:
  • phone calls,
  • text message warnings,
  • “roof knocking,”
  • precision-guided munitions,
  • strike cancellations when civilians were detected,
  • and direct legal oversight of targeting decisions.
• The submission emphasizes that proportionality law does not compare total casualties between sides, but instead asks whether expected civilian harm was excessive relative to anticipated military advantage at the time of attack planning.

• source