By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A classified Israeli military intelligence database reveals that approximately 83% of the 53,000 Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in Gaza as of May were civilians. This extremely high civilian casualty rate, rarely seen in modern warfare, indicates a disparity between the 8,900 named combatants identified by Israeli intelligence and the overall death toll. This ratio has drawn comparisons to conflicts notorious for indiscriminate killing, leading many scholars and activists to allege genocide. The Israeli military has not directly disputed the existence of the database or the data on militant deaths, though a spokesperson stated the figures presented in the article were “incorrect” and did not reflect their systems.
Read the original article here
Recent data originating from the Israeli military itself paints a stark and deeply concerning picture of the human cost of the conflict in Gaza, indicating an exceptionally high civilian death rate. This isn’t just about abstract numbers; it speaks to the lived reality and tragic loss of life for thousands of individuals.
Specifically, the data suggests that for every combatant identified by the Israeli military, approximately five civilians have been killed. This translates to a civilian death rate of around 83% of the total fatalities. To put that into perspective, a 50% civilian death rate means one civilian for every combatant, while a 66% rate implies a two-to-one ratio. The 83% figure signifies a five-to-one ratio, highlighting an incredibly disproportionate loss of civilian life.
It’s important to clarify that this figure refers to the percentage of those killed who are civilians, not 83% of the entire population of Gaza being dead. While any civilian death toll in conflict is devastating, understanding the precise meaning of the statistic is crucial for accurate discussion.
The source material explains that this statistic arises from a comparison between named fighters identified by Israeli military intelligence and the overall reported death toll in Gaza. Israeli intelligence officials identified a certain number of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad fighters as dead or “probably dead.” When this number is compared to the total number of Palestinians killed by Israeli attacks, as reported by health authorities in Gaza, it reveals that the identified fighters constitute only about 17% of the total. This leaves a staggering 83% of those killed unaccounted for as named combatants, thus indicating they are civilians.
There’s a nuanced point regarding the identification of combatants. Some argue that if an individual is not a previously known fighter, it doesn’t automatically mean they are a civilian. However, counterarguments emphasize that in warfare, there is a duty to distinguish between combatants and civilians, and failing to do so, or making assumptions without proper identification, can constitute a war crime. The logic presented is that if an airstrike hits a target, and the identities of those killed are unknown, proclaiming them all to be civilians would be a discrediting oversimplification. Conversely, the assumption that anyone not specifically identified as a fighter *must* be a combatant is also problematic.
The high civilian casualty rate raises profound questions about the conduct of the war and the strategies employed. It’s difficult to reconcile such numbers with the notion of a conflict where civilian lives are adequately protected. The intention behind such a high rate of civilian deaths, whether through direct targeting, indiscriminate attacks, or the use of powerful weaponry in densely populated areas, is a matter of grave concern.
The complex reality of urban warfare, where combatants may embed themselves within civilian populations, is acknowledged. Hamas, for instance, is noted for intentionally holding hostages and launching attacks from heavily populated areas, which inherently increases the risk to civilians. However, the argument is made that this tactic by Hamas does not absolve responsibility for the high civilian death toll on the part of the Israeli military.
Some interpretations suggest that the high Palestinian civilian casualty rate is being weaponized in a propaganda war, with Hamas potentially benefiting from increased civilian deaths to garner international sympathy. The idea that incentivizing more Palestinian civilian casualties would be a pro-Palestinian strategy is described as ludicrous and grotesque.
The data also sparks discussion about accountability. With such a high civilian death toll, the question of who is responsible and how those responsible will be held accountable becomes paramount. The notion of a “world police” or an international body to oversee such situations is brought up, highlighting a perceived lack of oversight and enforcement.
Furthermore, the intensity of the conflict and the resultant death toll are being compared to total war figures from World War II, underscoring the scale of destruction and loss of life. This comparison suggests that the conflict in Gaza is not merely a localized skirmish but a large-scale engagement with devastating humanitarian consequences.
The origin of this data, stemming from within the Israeli military itself, lends it a particular weight. While some debate the interpretation of the figures, particularly concerning the classification of individuals as civilians versus combatants, the overall picture presented by the Israeli military’s own statistics is undeniable and deeply troubling. It necessitates a serious and critical examination of the methods and outcomes of the ongoing conflict.