Collateral Damage

PM Netanyahu apologized for the unfortunate mistake made by the IAF in attacking an encampment of civilians in Rafah. Although a precision guided missile was used in the attack that killed two major terrorists, the subsequent fire killed 45 (presumably including the terrorists). This was not intentional, but was an example of the collateral damage to civilians that occurs in war. Israel neither wanted nor started this war, that was initiated by the surprise brutal massacre by Hamas of 1,300 Israeli civilians that occurred on Oct 7, 2023.

Here are some other examples: 1. During the NATO bombing campaign against Serbia, the Grdelica train bombing occurred on 12 April, 1999, when missiles fired by a USAF fighter bomber hit a passenger train while it was passing across a railway bridge over the Grdelica gorge, south of Belgrade, Serbia. Estimates of the death toll run as high as 60.

2. In May, 1999, the Lužane bus bombing occurred when missiles fired from an RAF helicopter targeted a bridge in Kosovo, north of Pristrina, but hit a bus killing 46 civilians. Among the victims were 14 children. NATO did not always meet its legal obligation in selection of targets of attack.

3. The Haska Meyna wedding party airstrike was an attack by US forces on 6 July, 2008, in which 47 Afghans were killed. The targeted group was escorting a bride to a wedding ceremony in the groom’s village in Nangahar Province, Afghanistan. The US government denied that civilians were killed in the incident, but the Afghan government determined that 47 civilians, including the bride, had been killed.

No military is immune from such unfortunate incidents, so it is better not to be “holier than thou.” There is a tendency to apply a higher double standard to Israel that others do not meet. that is clearly based on anti-Semitism. The IDF actively attempts to avoid such civilian casualties. Note that this encampment was NOT an IDF declared safe zone, as claimed by Hamas. The IDF is forbidden to act in such self-declared safe zones.

NATO and Ukraine

The NATO summit in Vilnius went about as far as they could go in endorsing Ukraine, while at the same time not getting directly involved in fighting Russia. To allow Ukraine to join NATO while the war between Russia and Ukraine is on-going would trigger the article that requires NATO to counter-attack any state that attacks any of its members, and that would include Russia at this time. But, short of that, meeting in Vilnius that is very close to the Russian border, NATO showed its firm and extensive support of Ukraine. Not only did they establish committees in which Ukraine will be treated as an equal member of other NATO members, but the members of NATO committed themselves to continue to support Ukraine with the extensive supply of heavy military weaponry and supplies.

Ukraine did not get the fighter aircraft it desires to protect its skies, but did get a commitment to train its pilots to fly them, so that a future supply of F-15s and other advanced jets will be feasible. This is no doubt a threat to Pres. Putin. Also, the flow of heavy tanks, including from South Korea, as well as the US and European allies will continue to flow into Ukraine. Although the vaunted spring offensive has not garnered a major breakthrough of the Russian defensive lines, nevertheless there is steady Ukrainian progress in taking back territory.

President Biden at the summit stated that Pres. Putin has already lost the war in Ukraine. With the fiasco of the Wagner Group defection from the Russian side as well as the assassination of a Russian general and the firing of Gen. Popov for criticizing the functioning of the General Staff, things are not going well for Putin. Although we do not know what the future holds, nevertheless, this war will be seen as the beginning of the end of Russian superpower pretensions and the expansion of NATO, including Finland and Sweden, and eventually Ukraine, to the east, the opposite of what Putin envisaged.