|
Over
the last year ‘Breaking the Silence’ has collected testimonies given
by hundreds of IOF (Israeli Defense Forces) soldiers who served in
the territories during the last conflict. These testimonies reveal
the impossible reality those soldiers have to face, and the terrible
moral price this reality demands. Selected collections from those
testimonies have been published in testimonial collections produced
by ‘Breaking the Silence’.
The
present collection is not just one more testimonial-collection,
revealing the brutal routine of the territories’ reality, or the
constant moral degradation and erosion of soldiers’ values. The
collection focuses on IOF orders, rules of engagement and
operational procedures. It presents a grave picture of evidently
illegal orders given frequently, and in different times and places:
firing at civilians who pose no risk, revenge operations,
intentionally shooting at rescue-forces, and more. This collection
reveals the depth of the military administration’s moral corruption,
and the dimness of moral sense, which has spread to the highest
ranks. The testimonies in this collection concerns various units
that were operative in the territories in different times and at
different places, and is thus an evidence for the magnitude of the
moral decay, and for the depths to which flawed norms have diffused.
It
is also apparent that the IOF’s self-inspection system has failed to
fulfill its duty. This also applies to the civilian and
parliamentary inspection mechanisms, which, during the last
confrontations, have consistently refrained from criticizing the
army’s mode of conduct in general, and its rules of engagement in
particular. This brings out sharply an urgent need to create a
platform on which the information we have gathered here can be
presented, in order to examine what this information teaches, as
well as the IOF’s mode of conduct during the last confrontations. A
civilized and decent society cannot survive without a continuous
inspection and criticism of the most powerful organization operating
within it. ‘Breaking the Silence’ is therefore calling for the
establishment of an independent public inspection committee, which
will enable a responsible disclosure and examination of the facts.
Listening and taking responsibility is the very least that is
required of society and its representatives in a civilized and
decent society founded on basic moral values.
Wet Entries
Witness:
Staff sergeant, Nahal.
Place:
Not specific
Date:
Not specific
Description:
From
November 2001 on I took part in arrest operations. It is important
to emphasize that when you are on an arrest mission the supreme
authority is the unit’s commander, a company commander – which was a
Captain or a Major. The character and form of action changed from
one company commander to the other. I had two company commanders,
who had completely different characters. The first was working more
by the book. A day after the Supreme Court decided the neighbor
procedure (human shields) was illegal, we stopped using that
procedure. With the other company commander the arrest were much
more aggressive.
We
would get information from the Shabak (the secret General Security
Service) and from the intelligence units as to the whereabouts of
suspects, the weapon they had, and the level of risk. We would plan
an operation. In the beginning the level of planning was higher – we
would sit for a week, practicing on models, got permissions from
Generals, and so on. As the time passed the permission, including
the open-fire orders, were given by lower and lower ranks, until
they were decided within the unit.
With
the second company commander the method was different. It was all
more aggressive. We sometimes would first shoot one Lau missile at
the house wall to make things calmer – in order to let people know
not to mess with us. We would also shoot a bit. We were not allowed
to shoot at windows, to prevent us from hitting the soldiers on the
other side of the house. We also were not allowed to shoot walls
that looked too slim. But it was never really clear how to judge
that by the walls’ appearance.
Most
of our breakings into houses at that time were “wet” [using live
ammunition]. “Wet entry” means that you go into the room and spray
around to make sure no one shoots you back from the inside.
There was this one incident of wet entry, where a mother left a
child – a three year old – inside the room. It was in a building. We
took everyone out of the building and started searching it.
We
went through the whole building, and entered every room in it
shooting. After this wet searching, we searched the house for
weapons. Then we found a 3 year old under a bed. He was lucky he
didn’t get killed, because people shot in that room, and also at the
bed. This case shook us a bit. After this incident we would shoot
beds differently: one soldier would pick the bed up, and a second
soldier would shoot.
|
