Blood Vengeance

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.

Blood Vengeance

The witness:           Soldier from a Paratroop Reconnaissance Unit (Sayeret Tzanchanim)

The Location:          Palestinian check point in the Nablus area

Date:                          February 2002, one night after the attack at Eyn Arik (IOF checkpoint)

Description:

We heard about the (Palestinian) attack at Eyn Arik from our radio news reports. The following night….we received the Operation Order for that same night. The Order was to approach three Palestinian checkpoints, manned by Palestinian Police in the Nablus area, from what I remember: approach three positions, and shoot at the Palestinian Police.

Who gave the order? The unit’s commanding officer?

The commanding officer. The Brigade Commander was also present.

Who is the Brigade Commander?

Brigadier Cochavi. I remember him as he hung around there. I don’t remember whether he himself gave us the Order. It was a very rapidly drawn up Battle Plan.

What exactly were you told in that Order?

Again, I don’t remember an orderly drawn-up Order. We didn’t sit through any briefing , maybe only officers did, I don’t remember. But I do remember we were told to shoot at the Palestinian policemen.

Was ‘revenge’ mentioned?

We used it, indeed. That was at our level and at the level of the unit commander. Again, I don’t remember if the Brigade Commander used that term… but that was what we were told. Even if it wasn’t spelled out, it was clearly implied. It was definitely there—just so you’ll understand the situation, these were Palestinian policemen that we advised about our operations.

You mean before IDF soldiers begin the operation?

Yes, a day before (an operation) that would be done at the level of liason officers, not at our level, so I don’t know exactly, but yes, these were policemen we advised about our operations, we know exactly where they are, where they are sitting, it’s not that we’ve never run into them, we don’t go through the checkpoints, but I know that if there is an operation planned, then we tell them ahead of time, and then they pretend, as if-I don’t know more details as this isn’t exactly in our domain. But this is what happened. We came to kill Palestinian policemen. I was part of the commander’s unit squad. There was another squad with two officers and another squad with one officer.

Each of the two squads went to a different checkpoint?

Each squad was designated for a different checkpoint, but our activities were synchronized. I’ll give an account of the other units. The unit commander took the more active checkpoint where we were assigned. There was no one at one of the other checkpoints, and, in my opinion, there was one policeman at the (third) other checkpoint who was shot. Also a car approached (the checkpoint) and they (our guys) shot at it. I remember that that shooting was questioned as we weren’t supposed to shoot at vehicles. I am telling you about the two checkpoints where I wasn’t present.

And you know what happened there from the questioning?

From the questioning, one checkpoint was deserted, while at the other checkpoint there was one single policeman.

Was he armed?

I don’t know, and it’s irrelevant in any case.

And that was never (mentioned) in the questioning?

It was not investigated, as also the issued firing order were not at all depending on whether (the others)  were armed or not.

Regardless of whether armed or unarmed, shoot?

Yes, at Palestinian policemen.

I understand. You were told to identify Palestinian policemen by their uniforms? or anybody at the checkpoint?

We didn’t raise the issue of how to identify Palestinian policemen. Anybody present at the checkpoint. We didn’t raise any questions at this point. I remember that the only issue raised during (the subsequent) questioning, other than the deposition by the second unit, was the issue of why did they fire at the approaching car. (The witness described the event after he reached the target area).

At first, we had no intention of ‘improving’ the position (e.g. the Palestinian checkpoint), and we began shooting propelled grenades on the position, aimed by whoever was aiming…. The idea being to keep them (the Palestinians) tied down, to tie the position down…

Shooting propelled grenades at a checkpoint?

At a checkpoint without knowing what happens there. We only shot at the checkpoint if someone directs us to it.

Indirect fire?

Indirect fire as we didn’t’ see the target. The guys who saw the target were with the commander.

Did the Palestinians respond (firing)?

It’s like this. One of the policemen was killed. I don’t remember if he was killed by us or by the other team who approached the checkpoint by advancing from cover to cover, or from grenades we fired. In any case they reached one side of the checkpoint where the dead policeman was. Maybe they killed him as they were entering the checkpoint and they ‘confirmed a kill’ several times (by shooting at the lying down victim at close range).

And he responds by firing?

Yes. A battle actually evolved. Don’t remember how it finished. They (our squad) could have reached the position from two sides of a separating wall, but they didn’t use that opportunity because he (the Palestinian) continued shooting. How is it then that they nevertheless succeeded… I don’t remember.

Yes, at some stage they finished their grenades….I think that’s because they also came from the other side, they reached him from the back. From the front they couldn’t hit him because of a wall, but the same happened from the back: there too was a wall and they had to make an opening in it. At the end, some sort of battle erupted, with other soldiers participating. The reason for repeated ‘confirmed kill’ was that they were all the time …. close to the body of the first (Palestinian) policeman who was inside the…. They, four of them, were all the time inside the position…

Everyone performed a ‘confirmed kill’?

Correct. On the same…they were all the time in the heat of battle…., as they described later…., in the heat of the battle.

He was in back of them?

No.

The unit commander came , performed… how did it happen?

They are inside the position, they are ‘opening’ the position and then, it seems, everyone (of the four) passed near him (the policeman) and it seems more than single bullet was used in the ‘confirm kill’.

One bullet ‘opened’ the position, a ‘boom’ followed, what next?

Yes, something like it. As if they were all the time near him…but, again, I don’t really remember.

And the second guy, after they reached him?

They killed him.

Killed him and performed a ‘confirm kill’, from what range?

Ranges were very close. I don’t know if he had….the range was very close. That’s it. And then they started understanding what happened. One was slightly injured by a bullet in his shoulder. A very slight injury. And we started…We met again after our return. Everything that happened had been recorded.

Everything seen from the observation point?

They recorded it from the observation point. The (recording tape) cassette turned into a hysteric hit.

In the unit?

Not only. The first thing is of course our playing the tape, today with these small instruments… There are small instruments that connect to other means (night vision equipment) where you can see it really well and enlarged, as if everyone identified the game he was playing there. The unit commander has been taking it everywhere.