Israeli Response to Amnesty International Report
Embargo until 23 February 2009 00:00 AM

In response to questions by the media, following is the Israel Ministry of
Foreign Affairs response to Amnesty International's report on use of weapons
in Operation Cast Lead:

Initial study of the report indicates that it presents a biased version of
the events, and does not adhere to professional criteria and objectivity. A
detailed response will be given at a later stage, but at this time, it is
possible to state that:

1. The report ignores the basic fact that Hamas is a terror organization,
recognized as such by the European Union, the United States and other
countries. This organization has constantly refused to recognize Israel,
rejects any opportunity for peace with it, and openly aspires to bring about
its destruction.

2. There is no mention in the Amnesty report of Hamas' deliberate use of
civilians as human shields: Hamas' bases, ammunition depots and
battlegrounds were all purposely located in the midst of Palestinian
population centers, with willful intent to cause injury to this population
during the fighting. Hamas openly used women and children as shields for
military targets, and booby-trapped homes and public buildings.

3. While the report does mention Hamas' intentional targeting of Israeli
civilians, it ignores the scale: Approximately ten thousand rockets and
mortars were launched against Israelis in the past eight years.

4. Armaments employed by the IDF comply both with international law and with
its usage by Western armies.

5. The IDF never intentionally targeted civilians. The witnesses providing
the descriptions appearing in the report are interested parties and under
Hamas pressure, as has been documented by many independent investigations in
the international media.

Hamas controls the Gaza Strip and employs terror against its own citizens,
thus rendering their testimony unreliable.

6. The international community has accepted the fact that Hamas was solely
responsible for the military confrontation, but the Amnesty report is
dedicated almost exclusively to the censure of Israel.

7. The comparison of the supply of weapons to Israel and the Hamas is
inappropriate. Israel is a sovereign nation that is obligated to use force
to protect its citizens, while Hamas is a terror organization. Can a
comparison be made between the weapons used by Al-Qaeda to those used by
NATO forces?

8. Amnesty presumes to determine which individuals participated in combat.
The organization has neither the means nor the capability to determine this.

9. Amnesty chose not to mention that Hamas is supported by foreign
extremists in its struggle against the legal and recognized government of
the Palestinian Authority.

10. The term "proportionality" has meanings that are defined in
international law, and Amnesty makes erroneous and misleading use of this
term.