Should Israel Attack Hamas Military Command Centers Embedded In Hospitals?
The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.
Voting will end in:
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
The presence of Hamas military command centers embedded within hospitals in Gaza presents an exceptionally complex and ethically fraught challenge for Israel. This intricate situation demands a delicate balance between Israel's imperative to defend its citizens from terror and its legal and moral obligations to protect civilians and medical facilities under international humanitarian law. The dilemma is intensified by Hamas's alleged strategy of intentionally utilizing civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, for military purposes, effectively transforming these protected sites into legitimate military targets under specific conditions.
- Thorough intelligence gathering is essential to confirm the presence and location of military assets within hospital complexes before any military action is taken. This reduces the risk of error and helps ensure that any operation is based on credible evidence15.
- Use the least destructive means possible to achieve military objectives. If action is necessary, employ precision-guided munitions and specialized tactics to minimize damage to hospital infrastructure and avoid harming patients and medical staff1.
- Cancel or abort strikes if civilians are detected in the target area, as demonstrated by documented instances where Israeli forces have called off airstrikes upon observing civilian presence2.
- Issue clear, specific warnings to civilians and hospital staff through leaflets, phone calls, text messages, and public announcements before any military action23. This allows time for evacuation and reduces the risk to non-combatants.
- Establish and publicize humanitarian corridors to facilitate the safe evacuation of patients, staff, and civilians from the area2. For example, Israel has opened designated windows and safe routes for civilians to leave combat zones, including areas around hospitals12.
- Coordinate with hospital officials and international organizations (such as the World Health Organization or Red Cross) to arrange for the safe transfer of vulnerable patients, including infants and those on life support, before any operation12.
- Provide medical supplies and support to hospitals in conflict zones, including fuel, incubators, and medical staff, to help maintain care for those who cannot be moved2.
- Ensure all actions are reviewed for compliance with international humanitarian law, which stipulates that hospitals retain protected status unless they are being used to commit acts harmful to the enemy, and even then, only after due warning and proportional response15.
- Document and transparently communicate the rationale for any action taken against hospital sites, including evidence of military use, to maintain accountability and international trust15.
- Facilitate rapid humanitarian access to affected hospitals after operations to assist with casualties, restore services, and support remaining patients and staff2.
- https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/in-wars-hospitals-have-special-protection-under-international-law-how-does-that-apply-in-gaza
- https://jinsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Gaza-Civilian-Precautions-NatSecBrief-Final-11-16-23.pdf
- https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/the-hamas-terrorist-organization/how-is-the-idf-minimizing-harm-to-civilians-in-gaza/
- https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/14/gaza-unlawful-israeli-hospital-strikes-worsen-health-crisis
- https://www.npr.org/2023/11/10/1212073968/israel-gaza-hamas-war-crimes-hospitals
- https://lieber.westpoint.edu/legal-protection-hospitals-during-armed-conflict/
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_human_shields_by_Hamas
- https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/six-ways-hamas-could-limit-civilian-casualties-gaza
- https://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/article/3/civilians/
- https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2024/01/middleeast/gaza-hospitals-destruction-investigation-intl-cmd
- Izrael has made many things in Gaza, wich are considered to be a war crimes. For example closing Gaza for humanitarian aid, and starving pepole who still live in Gaza. (source: https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/18/israel-starvation-used-weapon-war-gaza).
- In this point in your argument you state that Izrael should use least destructive means possible. Unfortunately Izrael is not careing about that kind of operation. It was proven that Izrael uses Guided Bomb Units (GBU-31, GBU-32 and GBU-39s). To destroy civilian architecture. Those kind of bombs were used to "to penetrate through several floors of concrete and can completely collapse tall structures". (https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy66e20j531o)
- It is not possbile to make a "Targeted Operation" with bombing in an area wich is populated with 5852 capita per km². (https://www.statista.com/statistics/1423120/gaza-population-density-by-region/) For reference this is half of New York density of population wich reaches 11 313 capita per km². (https://www.kontur.io/datasets/population-dataset/united-states-population-density/)
- Izrael does not care about civilians. It is clearly shown by bombings in "safe zones" and killing Civilians in escapre corridiors. (https://www.hrw.org/news/2024/11/14/israels-crimes-against-humanity-gaza)
- Moreover, if Izrael is dispaceing Civilians it should do it only temporarly, and as i have shown in argument 2, how can they be redisplaced if Izrael is bombing down whole multi-level buildings in Gaza?
- You admit Hamas embeds command centers in hospitals.
- Israel could wipe out Hamas and all civilians with a few tactical nukes that minimize radiation.
- Human Shield Tactic: By operating beneath or within hospitals, Hamas leverages the protected status of these civilian facilities under international law. Attacking a hospital is generally prohibited unless it is being used for military purposes, and even then, only under strict conditions. This tactic makes it far more difficult for opposing forces, such as the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), to target Hamas without risking civilian casualties or violating international law.
- Deterrence Against Attacks: Knowing that Israel and other militaries seek to avoid civilian casualties and abide by the laws of armed conflict, Hamas increases the likelihood that its command centers and operatives will be spared from attack by placing them in or under hospitals, which are filled with patients, medical staff, and displaced civilians.
- Propaganda and International Sympathy: If attacks on these sites do occur and result in civilian harm, Hamas can use the resulting images and narratives to generate international condemnation of Israel and sympathy for the Palestinian cause. This dynamic is sometimes referred to as “the weapon of the weak,” where civilian infrastructure is used to gain strategic advantage both militarily and in the information domain.
- Concealment and Operational Advantage: Hospitals are busy, complex environments that provide cover for the movement of personnel and materials. Tunnels and bunkers beneath hospitals can be used for storing weapons, holding hostages, and facilitating command and control activities while remaining hidden from surveillance and direct attack.
- Disrupts Leadership and Decision-Making: Command centers are where military leaders plan, coordinate, and direct operations. Destroying or disabling these facilities disrupts the enemy’s ability to make decisions, issue orders, and respond to changing battlefield conditions.
- Breaks Communication: Command centers serve as communication hubs, linking commanders with troops, units, and supporting elements. Attacking them can sever these connections, leading to confusion, delays, and lack of coordinated action among enemy forces.
- Reduces Situational Awareness: These centers gather, analyze, and visualize real-time intelligence from various sources. Eliminating a command center blinds the enemy, making it harder for them to assess threats, track friendly and enemy movements, and adapt their strategies.
- Demoralizes Enemy Forces: The loss of central command can cause panic, lower morale, and create a sense of vulnerability among enemy troops, sometimes leading to disorganized retreats or surrender.
- Hampers Crisis Response: Command centers are crucial for managing emergencies, such as countering surprise attacks or responding to unexpected developments. Destroying them limits the enemy’s ability to react effectively.
- Nuclear use would cause indiscriminate mass civilian death, which is unacceptable under international law and humanitarian norms.
- Israel seeks to maintain some level of distinction between combatants and civilians, even as civilian casualties remain high in conventional operations
The absence of strikes on command centers would allow Hamas to continue utilizing civilian infrastructure—such as hospitals and schools—for military purposes. Israeli intelligence and military sources have repeatedly stated that Hamas embeds its command and control facilities within civilian sites to shield them from attack and complicate Israeli military responses. If these command centers are left intact, Hamas could maintain its strategy of using civilian locations as cover, thereby increasing the risk to non-combatants and perpetuating the cycle of violence and civilian suffering.
The humanitarian situation in Gaza might initially appear less dire without the destruction of key facilities, but the long-term impact could be more complex. While Israeli strikes on command centers embedded in civilian infrastructure have resulted in significant casualties and the destruction of hospitals and schools, not targeting these sites would likely embolden Hamas to further entrench its military assets among the civilian population. This could make future conflicts even deadlier for civilians, as the distinction between military and civilian targets becomes increasingly blurred.
Israel’s deterrence posture would be weakened. The ability to strike at the leadership and operational core of Hamas is central to Israel’s efforts to degrade the group’s military capabilities and deter future attacks. If Israel refrained from targeting these command centers, Hamas and other militant groups might interpret this as a sign of Israeli restraint or weakness, potentially encouraging further aggression and undermining regional stability.
Finally, the international diplomatic landscape would also be affected. Israel’s strikes on command centers, especially those located within civilian infrastructure, have drawn widespread international criticism and raised concerns about proportionality and civilian harm. If Israel ceased such attacks, it might reduce some of the immediate diplomatic pressure and condemnation. However, if this restraint led to increased attacks on Israeli civilians or a resurgence of Hamas’s military capabilities, Israel could face renewed demands for action from its own population and allies, complicating its strategic and diplomatic calculations.