TEL AVIV, Israel — As Israeli forces conduct ongoing military operations against Hamas and other Iranian-backed terror organizations in Gaza, Israel continues to emphasize a foundational legal and moral principle: every individual in Gaza is presumed innocent until proven otherwise. This doctrine, reflected in the Hebrew phrase ‘עד שיוכח אחרת’, remains integral to Israeli rules of engagement, despite the unprecedented challenges posed by urban warfare, ongoing rocket attacks, and the systematic use of human shields by terrorist groups.
Israel’s War Doctrine: Emphasizing Moral Distinctions
The Iron Swords war, launched in direct response to the October 7th massacre—the deadliest antisemitic assault since the Holocaust—has tested Israel’s commitment to the laws of armed conflict. On that day, Hamas and its affiliates invaded Israeli territory, murdering over 1,400 civilians, abducting hostages, and committing mass atrocities verified by forensic and intelligence sources. The Israeli government has made clear that its military objectives focus on dismantling Hamas terror infrastructure, rescuing hostages, and defending its population, not on harming Gaza’s civilian residents.
The complexity of the conflict arises from Hamas’s deeply entrenched military assets within urban population centers. Intelligence from Western and Israeli sources, as well as independent observers, confirm that Hamas deliberately places its operatives, weapons, and command centers in homes, hospitals, and schools. This strategy, designed to maximize civilian casualties and use them as propaganda, has placed unprecedented burdens on Israeli decision-makers, legal advisors, and intelligence officers.
Operational Protocols to Protect Civilians
Israel’s Chief of Staff, Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir, and the IDF’s embedded legal corps oversee pre-strike intelligence protocols that include surveillance, signal intelligence, and human sources to confirm whether targets are involved in terrorism. Military operations are subject to legal review, and the IDF has repeatedly canceled or delayed airstrikes upon detecting civilian presence. During major campaigns, as documented by international observers, over half of potential strikes have been aborted in real-time due to risk to non-combatants.
Urban warfare in Gaza forces the IDF to adapt constantly. The Israeli military warns civilians through multilingual leaflets, phone calls, text messages, and public announcements—methods unique in their scale and precision. No comparable global conflict has seen such a comprehensive effort to limit civilian harm during active combat. Despite these measures, the presence of hostages and the enforced immobility of residents by Hamas complicate efforts to fully evacuate civilians from combat zones.
Legal and Historical Context
Israel’s approach is rooted in legal traditions and codified in both domestic and international law. The IDF Code of Ethics, established well before the present conflict, demands a clear separation between enemy combatants and uninvolved populations. The Israeli High Court routinely reviews operational policy and has set global precedents by constraining military actions to protect civilian life.
Comparative Analysis and International Oversight
The doctrine of presumption of innocence contrasts sharply with the systematic approaches of Hamas and affiliated groups. Numerous documentary, visual, and testimonial evidence has demonstrated that these groups intentionally blur the lines between combatant and civilian, employing forced recruitment, propaganda, and executions of dissenters within Gaza.
International military attachés, including from the United States and United Kingdom, have closely studied Israeli procedures, noting their rigor and adaptability. Western military experts frequently highlight Israel’s multi-layered targeting review processes as best practice for allied forces.
Combating Hamas’s Propaganda Tactics and Civilian Protection
Hamas’s information warfare has made accurate reporting difficult, with casualty statistics controlled by its Health Ministry often including both terrorists and civilians, and inflated for political effect. Independent analysis, including that by regional human rights monitors, confirms that casualty data is weaponized in information campaigns aimed at undermining Israeli legitimacy.
Israel’s position is that it carefully distinguishes between Hamas terrorists and uninvolved residents in both targeting and public policy. Gaza residents suspected of terrorism are detained only upon verified intelligence, and legal frameworks ensure the presumption of innocence until direct evidence is presented. In contrast, Israeli hostages remain victims of abduction and forced detention with no legal process—a fact central to hostage negotiations and international appeals for their release.
Humanitarian Measures and International Coordination
Israeli authorities continue to coordinate humanitarian aid with Egypt, the United Nations, and international organizations, ensuring food, water, and medical supplies reach civilians where security conditions permit. The government also supports medical treatment for Gaza residents in Israeli hospitals, often under difficult circumstances. These efforts highlight Israel’s distinction between defending itself from terrorism and punitive action against Gazan civilians.
Strategic Context: Gaza in Iran’s Regional Campaign
The ongoing war must be understood as one front in a broader Iranian-led campaign to destabilize Israel. Hamas, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and IRGC-affiliated militias in Syria and Iraq all receive funding, weapons, and strategic guidance from Tehran. Israeli officials and Western security agencies warn that these proxies are used not only to attack Israel militarily but also to erode the moral standing of democracies that hold themselves to higher standards in asymmetric conflict.
Conclusion: The Stakes of Presumption of Innocence
The principle of presumption of innocence—עד שיוכח אחרת—remains a pillar of Israeli operational doctrine and national identity. Despite the immense pressures of sustained warfare, the Israeli state and its military continue to distinguish civilians from terrorists, document their decisions, and subject themselves to judicial and international review. As Iran’s network of proxies forces protracted war and civilian endangerment upon Israel and the wider region, maintaining this principled approach is not only a moral obligation but a strategic necessity for the survival and legitimacy of the Jewish state in the modern world.
