Targeted killing (), or assassination is a tactic that Israel has used during the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, the Iran–Israel proxy conflict, and other conflicts.
When carrying out targeted killings, the Israeli government refers to these operations as “eliminations”. Individuals who are killed in such operations are described as having been “eliminated”, using the term “Husal” (, ).
These operations have often been described by Israeli officials as preventive or counterterrorism measures, while these measures have been criticized by critics of the Israeli government's actions, particularly when conducted outside Israel’s borders or in areas of ongoing conflict.
History The term "targeted killing" gained widespread use in 2000 during the Second Intifada, when Israel became the first state to publicly outline a policy of "liquidation" and "preemptive targeted killing" in November 2000.Jonathan Masters, Targeted Killings Council on Foreign Relations May 23, 2013.Anthony H. Cordesman, Jennifer Moravitz, The Israeli-Palestinian War: Escalating to Nowhere, Greenwood Publishing Group 2005 p.133.
Before 2001, Israel denied it practiced or had a policy of conducting extrajudicial executions.Lisa Hajjar,'Lawfare and Targeted Killing: Developments in the Israeli and US Contexts,' Jadaliyya 15 January 2012:'In 1992 a government spokesperson said, “There is no policy, and there never will be a policy or a reality, of willful killings of suspects...the principle of the sanctity of life is a fundamental principle of the I.D.F. There is no change and there will not be a change in this respect”.' Israel first publicly acknowledged its use of the tactic at Beit Sahour near Bethlehem in November 2000, when four laser-guided missiles from an Apache helicopter were used to kill a Tanzim leader, Hussein Abayat, in his Mitsubishi pickup truck, an attack that also killed two 50-year-old housewives waiting for a taxi and wounded six other Palestinians. The witnessed use of an attack helicopter forced the public acknowledgement, unlike assassinations of targets by snipers.
B'tselem has calculated that Israel targeted and killed 234 Palestinians, killing another 153 as collateral casualties, between 2002 and May 2008.B'tselem2011,'Change in military investigation policy welcome, but it must not be contingent on the security situation,' B’tselem 6 April 2011:'According to B’Tselem statistics, from the beginning of the second intifada, on 29 September 2000, to the end of 2010, Israeli security forces killed 4,927 Palestinians in the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip, 970 of them minors (under age 18). At least 2,227 of the fatalities were not taking part in hostilities. Another 239 were the object of a targeted killing. Thousands more were injured. [These figures do not include the casualties in Operation Cast Lead.' Most Israeli targeted killings have taken place in Area A of the West Bank, which is under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian National Authority.Philip Alston, UN: Report of the Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Executions, United Nations A/HRC/14/24/Add.6, May 28, 2010. Some of the killings listed below have been denied by Israel. Most fall within a series of campaigns, including Mossad assassinations following the Munich massacre, Israeli actions in the wake of the Second Intifada (2000–2005), and strikes during the 2008–09 Gaza War. According to reports, as part of the long-term cease-fire terms negotiated between Israel, Hamas and other Palestinian groups to end the 2014 Gaza War, Israel pledged it would desist from its targeted killings against Palestinian militants and faction leaders.'Abbas announces Israel-Gaza ceasefire,' Ma'an News Agency 26 August 2014.
Policy
At the outset of the Second Intifada in 2000, it was reported that Ariel Sharon obtained an understanding from the administration of George W. Bush that the American government would support Israeli efforts to assassinate Palestinians if Israel would stop building settlements in the occupied West Bank. In the face of suicide bombings, Sharon no longer took evidence of potential involvement by the target in future attacks on Israel as decisive, and the decision was left to the discretion of the Prime Minister and Shin Bet.Ami Pedahzur, The Israeli Secret Services and the Struggle Against Terrorism, Columbia University Press, 2013 ed. p.201.
The Supreme Court of Israel, in response to a lawsuit on the practice, mainly regarded actions in the Palestinian Territories, ruled on 14 December 2006 that such actions took place in an 'international armed conflict' but that the militants, as civilians, lacked combatant status under international law. Yet they were, in the court's view, civilians participating directly in hostilities, which would mean they lose their immunity. It also ruled, following a precedent set forth by the European Court of Human Rights in its McCann and Others v United Kingdom judgement, that the 'law of proportionality', balancing military necessity with humanity, must apply.Roland Otto, Targeted Killings and International Law, Springer 2011, p.6, pp.310,319ff. Assassinations were permitted if "strong and persuasive information" concerning the target's identity existed; if the mission served to curtail militancy; and if other techniques, such as attempting to arrest the target, would gravely endanger soldiers' lives.
According to the former Legal Advisor to the State Department Judge Abraham Sofaer:
...killings in self-defense are no more "assassinations" in international affairs than they are murders when undertaken by our police forces against domestic killers. Targeted killings in self-defense have been authoritatively determined by the federal government to fall outside the assassination prohibition. A state engaged in such activities must, however, Sofaer concluded, openly acknowledge its responsibility and accept accountability for mistakes made.
This characterization is criticized by many, including Amnesty International.
The Israeli army maintains that it pursues such military operations to prevent imminent attacks when it has no discernible means of making an arrest or foiling such attacks by other methods. On 14 December 2006, the Supreme Court of Israel ruled that targeted killing is a legitimate form of self-defense against militants, and outlined several conditions for its use.
The practice of targeted killing developed after World War II, throughout which Israel has exercised the option more than any other Western democratic countries, according to Israeli investigative journalist Ronen Bergman.Ronen Bergman, 'How Arafat Eluded Israel’s Assassination Machine,' New York Times Magazine 23 January 2018
Methods
Since then, the Israeli Air Force has often used attack helicopters, mainly the AH-64 Apache, to fire guided missiles toward the target. The Shin Bet supplies intelligence for the target. Sometimes, when heavier bombs are needed, the strike is carried out by F-16 fighter jets. Other strategies employ strike teams of Mossad or military operatives. These operatives infiltrate areas known to harbor targeted individuals, and eliminate their assigned targets with small arms fire or use of explosives. Snipers have also been utilized, as was in the case of Dr. Thabet Thabet in 2001.Stahl, Adam – "The Evolution of Israel Targeted Operations: Consequences of the Thabet Thabet Operation". Studies in Conflict and Terrorism, 33,2 2010
Unmanned combat aerial vehicles have also been used for strikes.
Targets Notable targeted killings by the Israeli military were Hamas leaders Jamil Jadallah (October 2001), Mahmoud Abu Hanoud (November 2001), Salah Shahade (July 2002), Ibrahim al-Makadmeh (March 2003), Ismail Abu Shanab (August 2003), Ahmed Yassin (March 2004), Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi (April 2004) and Adnan al-Ghoul (October 2004), all targeted during the Second Intifada.Stahl, Adam. "Questioning the Efficacy of Israeli Targeted Killings Against Hamas' Religio-Military Command as a Counter-terrorism Tool."
While the term "targeted killing" usually describes airborne attacks, Israeli security forces have killed top Palestinian militants in the past by other means, although this has never been confirmed officially.For more information see B'Tselem Statistics, Objectives of a Targeted Killing Other notable targeted killing involving multiple targets include Mossad assassinations following the Munich massacre against Black September Organization and PLO personnel alleged to have been directly or indirectly involved in the 1972 Munich massacre, which led to the Lillehammer affair; and then Operation Spring of Youth against top PLO leaders in Beirut in 1973, namely Muhammad Najjar, Kamal Adwan, and Kamal Nasser."34 Years Since 'Operation Spring of Youth.'" Israel Defense Forces. News-Today in the IDF-(Archives). 11 April 2007.
Civilian casualty ratio
According to the Israeli Human Rights organization B'Tselem, which uses data independent of the Israeli military, Israeli targeted killings claimed 425 Palestinian lives between September 2000 and August 2011. Of these, 251 persons (59.1 percent) were the targeted individuals and 174 (40.9 percent) were civilian bystanders. This implies a ratio of civilians to targets of 1:1.44 during the whole period.
The civilian casualty ratio of the targeted killings was surveyed by Haaretz military journalist Amos Harel. In 2002 and 2003, the ratio was 1:1, meaning one civilian killed for every target killed. Harel called this period "the dark days" because of the relatively high civilian death toll as compared to later years. He attributed this to an Israeli Air Force (IAF) practice of attacking targets even when they were located in densely populated areas. While there were always safety rules, argued Harel, these were "bent" at times in view of the target's importance.Amos Harel, Pinpoint Attacks On Gaza More Precise , Haaretz 30-12-07
According to Harel, the civilian casualty ratio dropped steeply to 1:28 in late 2005, meaning one civilian killed for every 28 targets killed. Harel credited this drop to the new IAF chief Eliezer Shkedi's policies. The ratio rose again in 2006 to 1:10, a fact that Harel blamed on "several IAF mishaps". However, in 2007 and 2008 the ratio dropped to a level of less than 1:30, or 2–3 percent of the total casualties being civilian. Figures showing an improvement from 1:1 in 2002 to 1:30 in 2008 were also cited by Jerusalem Post journalist Yaakov Katz. Professor Alan Dershowitz of Harvard Law School stated that the 2008 figure of 1:30 represents the lowest civilian to combatant casualty ratio in history in the setting of combating militancy. Dershowitz criticized the international media and human rights organizations for not taking sufficient note of it. He also argued that even this figure may be misleading because not all civilians are innocent bystanders.
However, in a July 2011 article published in the Michigan War Studies Review, "Targeted Killings: A Modern Strategy of the State", A.E. Stahl and William F. Owen wrote that casualty ratios and death counts in general should be considered skeptically. Stahl and Owen state: "A caveat: reported death counts and casualty ratios should be approached with skepticism. Statistics are too easy to manipulate for political purposes, vitiating arguments based on them."Stahl A.E. and Owen, William F, , Michigan War Studies Review 06-07-11