Challenging Israel's contempt for murder allegations

Exhibiting the usual contempt, the Israel Defence Forces have dismissed the autopsy results on Nadim Seyam Nawara and Mohammed Mahmoud Odeh which determined that live fire was the cause of the teenagers’ deaths. Such disdain was also evident in the rhetoric expressed by the UN regarding the killing of the youngsters during protests commemorating the Nakba and expressing solidarity with Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike. The expected denial follows previous claims by an unnamed senior Israeli defence official that the video showing the murders was a fabrication.

Dismissing the findings of the autopsy carried out on Nawara’s corpse, the IDF insisted that “only non-lethal dispersal methods” were used by the soldiers. Palestinian demonstrators, it is alleged, “only” faced rubber bullets. An investigation supposedly opened by the IDF has so far been shrouded in the usual secrecy which determines impunity for the perpetrators.

In the absence of any solid details, the Israeli media has attempted to convey the image of an army abiding by international recommendations by quoting US State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki, whose statement conveyed a semblance of concern which was undermined by her terminology. “We look to the government of Israel to conduct a prompt and transparent investigation to determine the facts surrounding this incident,” said Psaki, “including whether or not the use of force was proportional to the threat posed by the demonstrators.”

Similar to UN rhetoric which disparaged both the murders and Palestinian history of the Nakba, Psaki’s comment builds upon the mainstream illusions of a victimised state, Israel, seeking to comply with internationally-recognised norms. However, the statement lacks credibility. The videos, which human rights organisation B’Tselem has made available on its website, do not depict an incident where lethal force could be justified. Disputing the use of live ammunition in this case is just another exercise in manipulating the facts, since the footage established that neither of the murdered Palestinians posed any threat to the IDF, so lethal force was certainly not justified.

Considering the imbalance between murder and impunity, it is important to avoid the snare of allegedly opposing narratives on an equal footing, which allows Israel the liberty to humiliate Palestinians through its web of international support. The equation of equal but opposing narratives is distorted swiftly yet again to allow the supremacy of Israeli fabrications to become facts, a tactic which the UN employs in its haste to assure the settler-colonial state of its inherent bias towards justifying atrocities.

Disputing the autopsy results is a tactic which Israel has availed itself of time and again, including the case of Arafat Jaradat, who died during a torture and interrogation session at the hands of Shin Bet, Israel’s internal security agency. Siam Nawara, the father of one of the murdered Palestinian youngsters, noted that an investigation will not bring his son back. “However, the exhumation and examination of his body will expose the Israeli government and prevent its soldiers from killing more children.”

Given the state-sanctioned hatred towards Palestinian resistance, it is difficult to envisage the investigation as a deterrent. Nevertheless, every effort should be made to oppose the fallacy of juxtaposed narratives, otherwise each murder committed by Israel will only add to the multitude of Palestinians annihilated by the settler-colonial state, as opposed to the necessary assertions of struggle towards liberation.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.