Amnesty: Israel committed war crimes in Lebanon campaign

Amnesty International have said that Israel committed war crimes in Lebanon by deliberately destroying the Lebanese infrastructure, an act that I have always said was a war crime as it was an act of "wanton destruction".

The Israeli attacks on roads, power plants, hospitals, petrol stations and aqueducts "indicate that such destruction was deliberate and part of a military strategy, rather than 'collateral damage" according to the human rights group.

Amnesty International, whose delegates monitored the fighting in both Israel and Lebanon, said Israel violated international laws banning direct attacks on civilians and barring indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks.

The group urged the United Nations to look into whether both combatants, Israel and Hezbollah, broke international law.

Amnesty International said it would address Hezbollah's attacks on Israel separately.

Amnesty have condemned the attacking of civilians and the targeting of power plants, bridges, main roads, seaports and Beirut airport all of which are "presumed to be civilian".

I am pleased that Amnesty have had the courage to point out what was obvious to most of us during the war - that Israel was indulging in acts of collective punishment and wanton destruction - both of which are war crimes. However, I am also sure that nothing will come of this.

A cursory glance at the front-pages of the web sites of both the New York Times and the Washington Post carry no hint that Amnesty have even made this finding. As usual, it is only by going to Israeli web sites that you come across any mention of this. The Israelis prove, once again, to be much more willing to discuss their international condemnation than their American counterparts.

Meanwhile, Italy have offered to send 3,000 troops to southern Lebanon, the largest number offered by a single country, but has warned that this is conditional on Israel sticking to it's cease-fire agreement with the Lebanese.

Italy's foreign minister, Massimo D'Alema, highlighted those concerns when he said his forces would not go in unless Israel respected the ceasefire. "From Israel, we expect a renewed effort, this time truly binding, to respect the ceasefire," he told La Repubblica newspaper. "It's fair to expect that Hizbullah put down their weapons, but we cannot send our troops to Lebanon if the [Israeli] army keeps shooting."

The Israelis have always argued that they have a right under the UN resolution to prevent Hizbullah from rearming, a right that is usually reserved for the Security Council rather than for individual nations. It appears the Italian offer is conditional on Israel accepting the more conventional reading of the rules regarding international cease-fires and giving up it's claims that it can prevent rearmament through the use of force, which most of us think is simply giving itself the right to attack Lebanon at will.

Meanwhile, in Israel, Olmert's government continues to come under pressure since the 34 day war with senior politicians threatening to break apart his coalition government.

The Israeli government is already under pressure from army reservists who have demanded a major national inquiry as well as the resignations of the prime minister, Ehud Olmert, and his defence minister, Amir Peretz.

Treasury officials say the cost in damage to buildings and lost income in northern Israel is double original estimates and stands at 6bn shekels (£730m), Ha'aretz newspaper said. Yesterday a parliamentary committee met to agree a 2bn-shekel budget cut to help meet that extra cost, but had to abandon the vote after two politicians from the Labour party - a key coalition member - refused to back it.

One leading political figure said the prime minister needed to reshuffle his cabinet immediately. "The meaning of this is that Israel has no coalition today. The Labour party isn't a coalition partner you can rely on," Avigdor Yitzhaki, the coalition whip in Mr Olmert's Kadima party, told Israel Radio. "Therefore I will propose to the prime minister that he do an immediate reshuffle to restart the coalition process."

Olmert's government is teetering on the brink of collapse and there are now open calls for him to step down.

I wonder if he now regrets his rash decision to wage war rather than to conduct a prisoner swap. He would be in a much better position now had he pursued this more sensible course of action. And I'm sorry to sound like a worn out record on this subject, but where in all of this is Gilad Shalit?

Click title for Ha'aretz article.

Tags: Amnesty, International, war, crimes, Israel, Lebanon, UN, US, UK, Gilad, Shalit, Italy