Aid convoy not targeted
Independent review casts new light on mistaken airstrike
An independent review into an Israeli airstrike in Gaza four months ago that killed four aid workers and three British security guards has found that they were not targeted knowingly or deliberately.
Air Chief Marshal Mark Binskin AC, a former chief of the Australian defence force, was appointed by his country’s government to review Israel’s investigation of the events leading to the deaths four people who had been working for World Central Kitchen — one of them an Australian — and their security team, who were employed by the UK-based Solace Global.
Binskin found a “significant breakdown in situational awareness, predominantly in the lower levels of the Israel Defence Forces command and control decision-making”. This, he believed, was caused by:
the presence of armed locally-contracted security on the World Central Kitchen aid convoy, not notified or approved in the detailed coordination process between World Central Kitchen and the Israeli authorities, which gave the appearance of the presence of Hamas;
the failure within the Israel Defence Forces to ensure proper dissemination of the coordination details of the World Central Kitchen movements associated with the convoy to all levels within the Israeli military’s southern command; and
the inability for real-time communications to take place between World Central Kitchen personnel in Gaza and the coordination and liaison administration, part of a unit within the Israeli Ministry of Defence.
Binskin and his team visited Israel during the period 5-13 May and had access to all the areas within the Israel Defence Forces they had requested. They were shown the unedited drone footage of the incident.
The former defence force chief noted that the Israel Defence Forces’ view of targeting law relevant to the incident — particularly precautions in attack, including identification criteria and classification of people in terms of liability to lethal targeting — was the same as would be used by the Australian Defence Force in a similar situation.
“Similarly, the Israel Defence Forces’ view of the role of rules of engagement and standard operating procedures in respect of where delegations to engage are held also appears similar to that of the Australian Defence Force,” he said. “The Israel Defence Forces’ view on which targeting rules and control mechanisms are relevant and applicable to this incident is similar to what Australia’s would be in a like situation.”
The Israeli Defence Forces system for investigating such incidents is similar to the Australian system, Binskin added. When an incident was identified as sensitive, an independent fact-finding and assessment mechanism was activated. Cooperation is mandatory for all Israeli Defence Forces personnel.
It is my assessment that Israel’s acceptance of accountability for the 1 April World Central Kitchen incident, and investigation, reporting and responding has, to this point, been timely, appropriate and, with some exceptions, sufficient.
The Israel Defence Forces has taken full accountability for the 1 April World Central Kitchen incident. On 3 April, a day prior to the fact-finding and assessment mechanism debrief, the chief of general staff made a public statement taking responsibility, apologising for the strike and stating that it should not have occurred. This position was reiterated as a part of the fact-finding and assessment mechanism debrief and associated public statements. Similarly, government officials have also acknowledged responsibility for the strike, albeit it appears to be to a lesser degree…
As a result of the fact-finding and assessment mechanism investigation, the chief of general staff acted quickly to hold those responsible to account. His actions in dismissing two officers from their positions and reprimanding three others was timely and appears appropriate to the situation. Of note, while the outcomes may be similar to what could occur in Australia, these command measures were taken very quickly.
The command power in Australia can also support quick decisions regarding removal from post in operational situations but the natural justice requirements around notices to show cause and minimum times for responses likely mean that the Australian Defence Force could not have imposed equivalent reprimands as quickly as the Israel Defence Forces chief of general staff was able to.
Any further actions against individuals will now depend on a military advocate general [prosecutor] decision as to whether or not to proceed further…
With regard to timeliness, the fact-finding and assessment mechanism investigation took less than 72 hours. It would be difficult for Western militaries, including the Australian Defence Force, to be any quicker. It appears to have identified the critical issues in order for the chief of general staff and military advocate general to consider further action; however, this initial report lacked detail in some areas by not having engaged with World Central Kitchen or Solace Global.
The military advocate general has now addressed this by directing the head of fact-finding and assessment mechanism to engage with World Central Kitchen prior to completing the report.
The Israel Defence Forces has been broadly transparent in this process and the associated reporting; however, the head of fact-finding and assessment mechanism debrief with national representatives appears to have created a level of confusion and speculation due to the constrained time and quality of the edited uncrewed aerial vehicle video and subsequent questions from those present.
After discussions with a number of attendees at the debrief, it appears that most of the known information was presented and much of what couldn’t be answered was not in the purview of head of fact-finding and assessment mechanism to respond — in particular future decisions of the chief of general staff and the military advocate general.
When assessing the sufficiency of the Israel Defence Forces reporting, as mentioned previously, it is notable that the Israel Defence Forces public statement released on 5 April lacked specific detail included in the closed debrief that could have helped reduce confusion and speculation. This information was only made public during interviews or through other sources in the following days and, as such, it would have been beneficial for it to have been made available much earlier.
World Central Kitchen resumed operations in Gaza some four weeks after the incident. Its representatives — and those of Solace Global, which employed the security guards — emphasised the importance of an apology to the families of those killed.
While acknowledgement of Israel’s responsibility for the deaths has been made at many levels within the Israel government and a public apology has been given by the Israel Defence Forces chief of general staff and Israel Defence Forces spokespersons, the families do not consider this to be a proper apology at the appropriate level. Nor do they feel reassured that lessons have truly been taken from the incident and measures been put in place to reduce the chance of it happening again.
Noting the significance of the 1 April World Central Kitchen incident that led to the deaths of seven World Central Kitchen and Solace Global personnel, I would assess that an apology is an important consideration for the government of Israel to make. As a part of such an apology, there would also be an opportunity for Israel to offer compensation to the families of those who were killed.
Those killed on 1 April were Zomi Frankcom, an Australian national; Jacob Flickinger, an American-Canadian dual national; Damian Soból from Poland; Saifeddin Issam Ayad Abutaha, a Palestinian; and three British nationals employed by Solace Global who provided close personal security for the World Central Kitchen team: John Chapman, James Kirby and James (Jim) Henderson.
The Australian Department of Foreign Affairs said it was “working with the United Nations and the international community to press Israel to reform its coordination with humanitarian organisations to ensure the tragic deaths of Zomi Frankcom and her World Central Kitchen colleagues are not in vain and not repeated”.