Israel’s Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has said there is no proof the Mossad spy agency carried out the killing of a Hamas commander in Dubai. But he did not fully deny that Israel carried out the killing, citing its “policy of ambiguity” on such matters.
Dubai believes 11 “agents with European passports” killed Mahmoud al-Mabhouh.
Seven foreign-born Israelis named as suspects say their identities were stolen and they were not involved. UK passports used were said to be fake.
France, Germany and the Irish Republic also said they believed the passports from their countries used by the alleged killers were false.
Hamas has accused Israeli agents of murdering their operative – a view shared by many commentators because Mossad has in the past used forged foreign passports in its operations.
But in Israel’s first official comments on the affair, Mr Lieberman said there was no reason to blame Israel and Mossad…
Mr Mabhouh was murdered in his hotel room in Dubai on 20 January. Reports have suggested he was in Dubai to buy weapons for the Palestinian Islamist movement, Hamas.
– BBC News
28 Comments
A facet of international law is opinio juris – that is, the belief that a certain action was carried out because the law demanded it. This will be law if it is accompanied by state practice. Thus, international lawyers spend a lot of time trying to work out what the practice of states is, and to draw the law out of that.
This is one of the reasons I don’t really like international law, to be honest. It’s too uncertain for my taste. I prefer working off statute or cases, because the interpretation of what people or states do and what their actions were is so subjective and political.
Sticking to the law argument then, it’s a jurisdictional problem. Presumably murdering people in their hotel rooms (regardless of your reasons) is a criminal offence on Dubai soil. Not good for the tourist trade.
Scotland too. Local joke – Why do the Rangers football team have more supporters than Celtic? Because it’s easier to shout “F*ck the Pope!” than it is to shout “F*ck the Moderator of the Free Church of Scotland!”.
News is that Pope Benedict will be visiting Scotland sometime later this year.
I’m praying that he’s not a football fan.
This is the one true faith of Scotland. 🙂
LE
Well thank you very much for that. I had never heard of opinio juris, nor the distinction between customary international law and treaties/conventions.
You are right about the ‘uncertainty.’ Ironically, it seems that opinio juris attempts to clarify that uncertainty, but at the same time causes that uncertainty. Still, I am sure it is a very fascinating area intellectually.
I am by nature very sceptical of international law, to the extent that I have happily argued that there is no such thing. But in its defence, if it didn’t exist we would have to invent it. It is vague and uncertain because, in a ‘pure’ form, it really represents the minimal standards of acceptable conduct which States agree to bind themselves to.
In its ‘hard’ form (ie WTO, TRIPs, TFEU, NAFTA, etc) it is really just law.
It is hardly surprising that anything to do with ‘morality’ (ie IHL, just war) generally falls into the vague part, subject to some exceptions around genocide and other ‘war crimes’ amounting to indiscriminate and disproportionate harm. That makes it imperfect, but doesn’t make it worse than the alternatives.
After all how ‘definite’ are our Constitutional rules?
I just got a couple of alerts from STRATFOR (pretty much the private enterprise home-away-from-home for CIA analysts) on assassinations generally and this one in particular. Great articles.
The easy-to-get at for non-newsletter folk is The Utility of Assassination. It’s a bit of “bugger the morality… do such actions achieve anything?”… and the answer as far as the Israeli action is concerned is: No, unless you are only worried about domestic party politics.
…
In other words, these ex-CIA analysts reckon that regardless of morality, regardless of law, regardless of ruffling the feathers of other nation-states, the Israeli action was futile as far as stopping Hamas went.
Assuming that the Israeli cabinet is smart enough to realize this, then it’s just a dick-swinging exercise between israeli politicians.
The analysis is patently wrong. Israel don’t pretend to be searching for a Hitler death (although they achieved something similar at Osirak lol). They are searching to systematically hamstring and weaken Hamas’ ability to organise large-scale sophisticated attacks. It is very hard for Hamas to replace these people, and it takes them time. Since Israel is similarly willing to kill their successors, this effectively does buy them time, which is time during which less Israeli citizens die.
Seems like a fair bargain (and moral calculus) to me.
It is extraordinarily rare to identify a person whose death would materially weaken a substantial political movement in some definitive sense
Coming from the CIA that’s amusing.
They are searching to systematically hamstring and weaken Hamas’ ability to organise large-scale sophisticated attacks.
What such ability? Hamas’ ability is restricted to firing the occasional rocket into Israeli territory, and missing. They do this ’cause they know the Israelis’ll go apeshit and bomb the crap out of Palestine creating more recruits for Hamas.
Well, the Israelis have made a HUGE error in screwing with Aussies!
THREE Australians linked to the assassination of a leading Hamas militant appear to have been the victims of passport fraud, Stephen Smith has told parliament.
The Foreign Minister said this morning that ASIO and the Australian Federal Police were investigating the probable identity fraud.
Dubai police have released the names of the holders of 26 Western passports they say are suspects in the killing of Mahmud al-Mabhuh in a Dubai hotel room on January 20.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/australian-passports-in-hamas-hit-duplicated-or-altered-stephen-smith-says/story-e6frg6n6-1225834232594
Beat me to it Peter – Um-ah.
That the governments of the world are more concerned about ID theft than killing tells you all you need know about realpolitik.
That photo kindly provided from the private family snaps of the Clintons. 🙂
This is a very erudite and civilised discussion.
Michael J Totten’s recent article in Commentary takes the killing of Hamas’ military head as the sort of thing that should be done. This seems to be the general burden of those commenting at his blog. The argument seems to boil down to Hamas is so obnoxious it deserves anything it gets and it is really, really preferable no one else gets hurt on the way through.
We have warrior codes to distinguish soldiers from murderers. But a standard part of such codes is to restrict killing to those engaged in the heat of battle. (Part of which is the use of uniforms: one of the many ways terrorism evades civilising restrictions.)
The killing in Dubai is murder in the legal code of Dubai and was clearly not in the heat of battle. But if you capture someone like Mahmud al-Mabhuh then you are actually increasing the danger to your own citizens, as his release becomes a reason to snatch people able to be used as levers. (See previous point about terrorism evading civilising restrictions.)
But this is part of the calculus of terrorism: to push their opponents into actions that recoil on them. There are genuine conundrums here.
Though, likely, the first time a city becomes the victim of nuclear terrorism, terrorists will be declared hostis humani generis and subject to summary execution, like pirates on the high seas in more robust days.
This seems to be where Totten et al seem to be effectively at.
On British TV last night we got to see an Israeli spokesman claim that he’d be flattered if someone stole his identity and used it to kill terrorists (presumably he’d be less flattered if they used it to max out his credit card in the process).
Do Israelis not appreciate what this makes them look like? Or do they really not care because they can do whatever they want on the American dime?
What does it make them look like? It certainly doesn’t lower my opinion of them, I respect them for defending themselves.
Do Israelis not appreciate what this makes them look like?
.
No I’m afraid it’s an ethnic trait. Party of the old merry-go-round.
DEM, I think they just don’t care any more. They’re gonna do what they’re gonna do, and the rest of the world can go jump.
But it’s also non-appreciation on the part of some. I have some Orthodox friends who were worrying some ten years back that Netanyahu’s poor English gave him a bad image in the West. “Whoo whee,” said I, “That’s the least of his image problems. I think he’s widely perceived to be an aggressor, and whether he speaks English with an accent or not isn’t really affecting his image. Many people at uni believe that Israel’s actions are wrong and oppressive in its actions. I think you’d be surprised how many people don’t think they have a right to exist at all.” They were shocked by this because they didn’t mix with many non-Jews.
For the record, I do support Israel – it was mandated by the UN, for goodness sakes. It was the only way to handle a situation where two groups of people had been promised the same land – the “King Solomon” solution, as it were (cut the land in two). The surrounding countries really f*ed up when they invaded in 1948, and it’s all gone wrong since then. But I don’t support the settlers or the annexation of Gaza. I’d like a two-State solution, but I’m really not sure how it would work now, it’s such a mess. Sigh.
As for whether I support assassinations – well, I’m really not sure – in this case, I worry that it will just make things worse rather than fix anything. I wish everyone could just put down their weapons, but the problem with guerilla groups is that they’re uncontrollable. Once you unleash the tiger, it’s damn hard to get it back on the leash.
LE
Your orthodox Jewish friend’s criticism is a bit odd. Even though “Bibi” was born in Israel, his family moved to the US when he was about 12.
Thus “Bibi” went to High School, then MIT & Harvard, then worked in management consulting (Bain or BCG, I think), not returning to Israel to live until his early 30s.
Your friend must have higher standards than the American high school system, MIT, Harvard, and Bain/BCG when it comes to English language skills! 🙂
PP, hmm, maybe she was objecting to his accent and Americanised English? Dunno.
Patrick @63. Identity theft is one of those things that just annoys folk generally, since it becomes a “you could do that to me” issue. It is its own sort of attack on the basic framework of our lives.
Y’know I fully expected someone somewhere would be giving me a “you anti-Semitic bastard” blast over #64.
Adrien, I considered my own version being, “that’s not a very nice thing to say”.
But then I recalled reading in an Israeli newspaper that there were particular problems faced by Israeli backpackers who were generally regarded as the rudest and most unpleasant backpackers of all. I’m sure this is in part because they all go on a world trip and get stoned after they’ve done national service and they’re totally f*ed in the head, but I’m sure it’s also because they do not care or know what they look like to others.
It’s not so much an ethnic trait, I think, as a product of two things:
(a) the idea that the rest of the world stood by while someone tried to wipe us out, so everyone else can go jump;
(b) a certain insularity (eg, I had a massive argument with an Israeli backpacker over her lack of knowledge of the Killing Fields in Cambodia, for example).
Adrien
Maybe we saw you being provocative a hundred miles away! 🙂
In one sense, it seems a bit contradictory for us to accept concepts like “multiculturalism,” if we cannot thus identify, name, and discuss those multiple ‘cultures.’
Given what we really mean by ‘culture’ is ethnicity and/or religion, we must be allowed to list the features of each ethnicity/religion that constitute its being unique, and thus one of the “multi.” Thus, it is perhaps a paradox of “multiculturalism” that ethnic generalizations are not only inevitable, but necessary.
Whether or not any one particular generalization is ‘unacceptable’ or even in LE’s words “not very nice” we need to keep in mind two things:
1. Without fear or favor, what are empirically identifiable traits of this unique “culture.”
2. To those people who might take offense at uttering or listing those traits, the only consolations that can be offered are that ‘it’s in the eye of the beholder’ and ‘don’t shoot the messenger.’ 😉
Stereotypes are strange. I was warned repeatedly that New Yorkers are rude. They aren’t. What they are is more restrained in their hospitality than other Americans (the contrast with DC and Virginia is palpable). They reminded me of Londoners, actually, who are perfectly polite, but just not inclined to be effusive. Having strangers talk to me on the DC metro was very odd and unnerving; New Yorkers are silent on their subway, as Londoners are on the tube. I prefer this, probably because it’s what I’m used to.
Peter – Maybe we saw you being provocative a hundred miles away!
What me? Provocative? Surely you jest.
The weird thing about the Cult of Racial Harmony is that it leads to ethnic disharmony. All ethnic traits are human traits really filtered thru a cultural preset. Here’s another one: Celts are violent. Now all humans have a capacity for violence but we enjoy it. 🙂
Thing is when one ethnicity rubs another the wrong way it ashould be possible to object. Jewish people can be very stubborn. I don’t blame them. It’s surfeit of a legacy of oppression and the arrogance that attends being the chosen people. Part of their charm. But when the Israeli govt tells people whose identity has been pinched that they should be grateful for possibly being made a target of Hamas well that’s going a little too far.
And now for a Jewish joke: the head waiter at a schmick restaurant walks up to a table where three Jewish women are dining and asks: excuse me ladies is anything all right? 🙂
Which is why I think those stupid terrorist dudes who drove their car into Glasgow Airport had NO understanding of this VERY IMPORTANT difference between Celts and Angles. I mean, there were about 10 Scots on the guys in ten seconds, ready to rip their balls off. Did they not realise this was Glasgow? They’re lucky their heads weren’t ripped off. Don’t f*ck with the Celts, guys. Hell, I’d probably be ready to rip them to shreds, and I’m pretty sweet…until you threaten my family, that is.
I believe that someone once teased my grandfather’s father, and his two older sisters said, “Which boy was it? We’ll go put a brick through his window!” They were lasses of Scottish extraction.
I’ll have to ask my mother, but I’m sure Great Aunty Ella used to have a “not so wee dram” of Scotch every morning “for her health”.
Great Aunty Ella used to have a “not so wee dram” of Scotch every morning “for her health”.
.
Oh yeah I forgot. We’re drunks too. 🙂
A rather pointed comment in a piece in support of targeted assassination:
Tell that to Ariel Sharon…
Can’t, he’s in a coma. Also, what would you charge him with, given the massacre was carried out by Lebanese Christians, not Israelis? Criminal negligence perhaps, given the known cycle of massacre in Lebanon?
Regarding the original subject of the post, Dubai has been the venue recently of another targeted assassination, as a former general in the Chechen insurgency was shot in a Dubai hotel in March 2009. A targeted assassination nobody much cared about, apparently, so was not newsworthy. Both his brothers had previously been killed.
Just to make it very James Bond, he was shot with a gold-plated gun.