The attack on Gaza’s Nasser Hospital has sparked global outrage and raised critical questions about the Israeli military's justifications and operational protocols. Last week's airstrike resulted in at least 22 deaths, including five journalists. The military claims to have targeted a position believed to be used by Hamas militants, yet evidence and eyewitness accounts suggest otherwise.
Many of the deceased were involved in rescue operations or were there to document the aftermath of the initial assault. The military’s promise to investigate these ‘gaps’ does little to assuage concerns over the adequacy of their operational decision-making.
Public outrage is amplified by discrepancies in the military's alleged target list. Notably, one individual identified as a militant does not appear on local casualty lists established by medical personnel, raising suspicions about the reliability of the Israeli reports. Furthermore, the use of high-explosive tank shells by the military contradicts assertions that more precise measures were in place to manage civilian safety during operations.
Eyewitness testimonies confirm that a ‘double-tap’ tactic, hitting areas shortly after a first strike to target responders, was utilized—a practice condemned by international human rights organizations as potentially unlawful. Such actions, reminiscent of tactics employed by extremist groups, bring further scrutiny to the conduct of Israeli forces.
As investigations continue, the repercussions of this incident echo through both regional politics and international human rights discourse, demanding accountability and a reassessment of military engagement with civilian locations.
