New investigation reveals Israeli forces failed to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians in May attacks on the Kuwaiti Peace Camp and al-Mawasi

A toddler and a young woman were decapitated by metal fragments from Israel’s attack - using US-made bombs - on the Kuwaiti Peace Camp

Israeli tank fire on al-Mawasi killed 23 civilians and injured many more

‘Once again displaced Palestinian civilians seeking shelter and safety have paid with their lives’ - Erika Guevara-Rosas

Israeli forces failed to take all feasible precautions to avoid or minimise harm to civilians sheltering at camps for internally-displaced people while carrying out two attacks targeting Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the south of Gaza in May, said Amnesty International in a new investigation published today. 

These attacks were likely to have been indiscriminate - and one attack is also likely to have been disproportionate - and they should all be investigated as possible war crimes. 

On 26 May, two Israeli airstrikes on the Kuwaiti Peace Camp, a makeshift camp for internally-displaced people in Tal al-Sultan in west Rafah, killed at least 36 people - including six children - and injured more than 100. At least four of those killed were fighters. The airstrike, which targeted two Hamas commanders staying amid displaced civilians, consisted of two US-made GBU-39 guided bombs. 

The use of these munitions - which project deadly fragments over a wide area - in a camp housing civilians in overcrowded shelters is likely to have constituted a disproportionate and indiscriminate attack, and should be investigated as a war crime. (See ‘Attacks on Kuwaiti Peace Camp’ below for further details). 

In the second incident on 28 May, the Israeli military fired at least three tank shells at a location in the al-Mawasi area of Rafah which was designated a “humanitarian zone” by the Israeli military. The attacks killed 23 civilians - including 12 children, seven women and four men - and injured many more. Amnesty’s research found that the apparent targets of the attack were one Hamas and one Islamic Jihad fighter. This attack, which failed to distinguish between civilians and military objectives by using unguided munitions in an area full of civilians sheltering in tents, was likely to have been indiscriminate and should be investigated as a war crime.  

Hamas and Islamic Jihad fighters were located in the internally-displaced persons’ camp, a location which displaced people believed was a designated “humanitarian zone”, with fighters knowingly endangering the lives of civilians. This is likely to have violated the obligation to avoid, to the extent feasible, locating fighters in densely populated areas. Amnesty has no information regarding the reason or motivations for their presence, but all parties to the conflict should have taken all feasible precautions to protect civilians and civilian objects. (See ‘Al-Mawasi attack’ below for further details). 

Amnesty interviewed 14 survivors and witnesses, surveyed the locations of the attacks, visited a hospital in Khan Younis where the wounded were receiving treatment, photographed remnants of the munitions used in the attacks, examined satellite imagery of the locations and reviewed relevant statements by the Israeli military on the attacks. On 24 June, Amnesty sent questions regarding the two attacks to the Israeli authorities and on 5 July sent questions to the Chief Public Prosecutor and Ministry of Justice officials in the de facto Hamas administration, asking about the presence of fighters in these civilian areas. At the time of publication, no responses had been received. 

Erika Guevara-Rosas, Amnesty International’s Senior Director for Research, Advocacy, Policy and Campaigns, said:

“While these strikes may have targeted Hamas and Islamic Jihad commanders and fighters, once again displaced Palestinian civilians seeking shelter and safety have paid with their lives.

“The Israeli military would have been fully aware that the use of bombs that project deadly shrapnel across hundreds of metres and unguided tank shells would kill and injure a large number of civilians sheltering in overcrowded settings lacking protection. 

“The military could and should have taken all feasible precautions to avoid, or at least minimise, harm to civilians.

“The avoidable deaths and injuries of civilians is a stark and tragic reminder that, under international humanitarian law, the presence of fighters in the targeted area does not absolve the Israeli military of its obligations to protect civilians.

“All parties to the conflict must take all feasible precautions to protect civilians. This also includes the obligation of Hamas and other armed groups to avoid, to the extent feasible, locating military objectives and fighters in or near densely populated areas.”

Attacks on Kuwaiti Peace Camp

During the afternoon of 26 May, Hamas claimed responsibility for launching a series of long-range indiscriminate rockets at Tel Aviv from Rafah. The Israeli military said the rockets were intercepted by the Iron Dome air defence system, and no casualties were reported. At approximately 8:45pm, the Israeli military dropped two bombs on the Kuwaiti Peace Camp, and announced it had “struck a Hamas compound in Rafah in which significant Hamas terrorists were operating”. The Israeli military later issued an update stating they’d killed two senior Hamas military commanders, Yassin Rabie and Khaled Najjar. However, it later emerged that Khaled Najjar had been injured, but not killed. A military commander of Hamas’s Al-Qassam Brigades - Khuweiled Ramadan - was also killed, in addition to at least two other Hamas fighters whose identities Amnesty was able to verify. The killing of Yassin Rabie and Khuweiled Ramadan were confirmed by the Gaza health ministry and in eulogies paid to the men.

The Israeli military claimed the attacks were carried out with “the smallest munitions which can be launched by fighter jets”. Based on photographs of remains of the bombs taken at the site by Amnesty’s fieldworkers, the munitions were identified as US-made GBU-39s. These contain an explosive charge of 17kg. However, the total weight of each bomb is 113kg, capable of throwing metal fragments hundreds of metres. The Israeli military has smaller precise missiles, carried by drones, that contain far fewer explosives and have a smaller area effect. 

By using explosive munitions with wide-area effects in a displaced-persons’ camp when smaller area effect munitions were available, the Israeli military is likely to have failed to take all feasible precautions to avoid or minimise incidental harm to civilians and damage to civilian objects. 

The 26 May attacks were also likely to have been disproportionate. When considering whether an attack is disproportionate, the laws of war state that an attack is prohibited if the anticipated harm to civilians is excessive compared to the expected direct military advantage. In many attacks it has not been possible for Amnesty to identify the intended target, precluding an assessment of proportionality. In this attack, the Israeli military announced two Hamas commanders were the target. The anticipated civilian harm should have been known to those who planned the attack. The Kuwaiti Peace Camp in Tal al-Sultan had been operating for at least four months, and therefore the presence of large numbers of displaced civilians was known to the Israeli military. With civilians living in makeshift shelters which offered no protection and given the choice of two GBU-39 bombs, extensive civilian casualties would have been foreseeable. The likelihood that this would be excessive in relation to the expected direct military advantage should have been clear. 

Maps published by the Israeli military on 6 May changed the boundaries of the “humanitarian zone,” removing Tal al-Sultan which had been considered part of such a zone for months. However, this removal was not appropriately communicated to civilians who continued to shelter there. Maps circulated by the Israeli military regarding “humanitarian zones” have often been confusing and contradictory, failing to constitute effective warnings. The Israeli military has said it is “investigating” the attacks. However, documentation by Israeli and international human rights organisations has shown that the Israeli military, through its own internal mechanisms, has failed to effectively and impartially investigate alleged violations of international humanitarian law against Palestinian civilians. 

Several of the civilians killed and injured in the Kuwaiti Peace Camp strikes were hit by metal fragments, including a toddler and a young woman who were both decapitated. Other victims sustained deep cuts and broken limbs. The majority of the civilian casualties verified by Amnesty were caused by the bombs’ fragments, while others sustained extensive burns. An additional body was so badly burned it could not be identified.

Among the civilians killed on 26 May were five members of the al-Attar family. Displaced from northern Gaza, they’d been staying in the Kuwaiti Peace Camp for four months. Their shed was adjacent to that of the targeted Hamas commanders, but their surviving relatives told Amnesty they’d been unaware whether the men in the neighbouring shed were affiliated with an armed group.  

Lina al-Attar, 21, was injured in the attacks. Her mother, aunt, sister-in-law, grandfather and uncle were all killed. She told Amnesty: 

“We were staying in a safe place for displaced people, just metal sheds and tents, no houses around or wanted people. This was a green [safe] area on the maps thrown [dropped] by the Israeli army … After we prayed the Maghreb prayer, we were just sitting around chatting and relaxed as there was no sound of drones or shelling. I did not hear the sound of the missile … My brother lifted the metal which had fallen on me… He had been injured in his hand and was also injured in his shoulder by shrapnel … I managed to lift the rest of the metal and to free ourselves, and found everybody strewn on the ground, in pieces and in pools of blood. My mum was dead. My father was screaming for help. My brother’s wife was killed on the spot where she was sitting holding her baby in her arms. I took her baby and gave him to my father. Then I took my little girl from my husband’s lap as he was injured. We managed to save ourselves, but there were so many people dead all around us.”

The attacks were followed by a fire which caused further death and injury. Amnesty’s weapons experts analysed footage filmed at the scene and posted online by residents immediately after the attacks, concluding that the size and intensity of the fire were likely to have been caused by cooking fuel stored at the location being struck by the Israeli bombs. 

One resident, displaced from northern Gaza since November, told Amnesty:

“I was about 30-40 metres from the bombing … I heard the sound of two huge strikes in succession, and then a massive fire started. I heard people shouting, and I lay down on the ground. I still tremble when I recall the scene. I saw people burning. We have lived through bombardment, but I’d never seen anything like that … We were looking for safety, we just want to live, and now we are lost again.” 

Al-Mawasi attack

On 28 May, at approximately 2:45pm, the Israeli military launched at least three tank shells at a location in the al-Mawasi area of Rafah - designated for months by the Israeli military as a “humanitarian zone” - which killed 23 people and injured many more. Amnesty’s research found that two fighters - one from Hamas and one from Palestinian Islamic Jihad - had been staying in tents close to displaced civilians near the site of the strikes. These fighters may have been the intended target of the strikes. Another source told Amnesty there were fighters in a jeep moving through the area at the time, which the strikes narrowly missed. Amnesty was not able to determine if the fighters in the jeep were the same fighters staying in the tents. 

Amnesty’s weapons experts analysed photos of fragments of the weapons used and identified the ordnance as 120mm tank rounds. Satellite imagery indicates there were Israeli military positions within 120mm cannon range on the morning of the attack. Two of the shells hit the outer wall and patio of the al-Hams’ family home, killing seven-year-old Beesan al-Hams and her brother, Saleh, five. Another civilian, Ibrahim al-Ghaffari, 63, was also killed.  

Mohammad Salah al-Hams, the children’s uncle, told Amnesty:

“Saleh and Beesan were visiting their maternal grandfather. After lunch they went out of the family compound to throw away the rubbish. They were outside for something like 40 to 90 seconds, when the shells hit, only seconds apart. I was nearby and rushed to the house. Their father came out of the house and ran to where Saleh was lying dead. He had been hit in the head … Beesan had been thrown to a nearby tent by the force of the explosion. She was badly injured and was rushed to the hospital but died.”

Minutes later, another tank shell hit a camp nearby, killing 20 displaced civilians, including ten children, seven women and three men. Isra Ali, a 33-year-old displaced woman from Shuja’iyah in Gaza City, lost her husband, Ashraf Mohammed Ali, a 42-year-old taxi driver, and her son Amir, 11. 

She told Amnesty:

“I was preparing a simple lunch for the family when I heard distant sounds, back-to-back. I didn’t pay much heed because we’re used to shelling and strikes, but then minutes later … I heard a deafening sound. The first thing I saw after that was shreds, bodies of people turned into shreds. The tents were not damaged, but children, including my son Amir, were torn to shreds. We don’t know why this place was hit. Now my husband is gone, my little boy is gone. Where do I go with my children? How can we survive? My family has been torn apart; my husband, the family’s sole breadwinner, is killed. I don’t feel safe here, but I don’t know how to manage or what to do.”

The Israeli military did not offer any explanation for the attack, but later said “contrary to the reports from the last few hours, the Israel Defense Forces did not strike in the humanitarian area in Al-Mawasi”. After the attacks, some residents confronted the two fighters and asked them to leave the area, reflecting growing anger in Gaza over armed groups’ conduct endangering civilians. However, the presence of fighters continued, resulting in the entire population of the area - those displaced, as well as residents - leaving a few days later. 

International humanitarian law obligations

The concentration of civilians in small areas of Gaza has been exacerbated by the successive waves of mass displacement, coupled with Israel’s ongoing illegal blockade that restricts the movement of people seeking safety outside Gaza. These conditions make it all the more important that parties to the conflict strictly adhere to the rules of international humanitarian law which aim to protect civilians from the effects of military operations. 

The presence of military objectives does not absolve Israeli forces of their obligations under international humanitarian law, including their duty to respect the principles of distinction and proportionality, as well as their obligation to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians. 

The principle of distinction, a fundamental principle of international humanitarian law, requires parties to distinguish at all times between military objectives and civilians or civilian objects, and to direct their attacks only at military objectives. 

In addition to prohibiting attacks directed at civilians, international humanitarian law prohibits indiscriminate attacks, meaning those that are of a nature to strike military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction. The principle of precaution further requires parties to a conflict to take constant care to spare civilians and civilian objects, including by taking all feasible precautions to avoid, and in any event minimise, incidental harm to civilians and damage to civilian objects. International humanitarian law also prohibits disproportionate attacks, which are those which may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects or a combination of these which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. Parties must also take all feasible precautions to protect civilians and civilian objects under their control against the effects of attacks. 

For Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups fighting in Gaza, such obligations includes avoiding, to the extent feasible, locating military objectives and fighters within or near densely populated areas, including displaced-persons’ shelters. 

Precautions for an attacking party include verifying that targets are military objectives; choosing appropriate weapons and tactics to avoid or minimise incidental harm to civilians and damage to civilian objects present in the vicinity of targeted military objectives; assessing whether the attack may be expected to be disproportionate, and in such cases to cancel or suspend it; and giving effective advance warning to civilians, unless circumstance do not permit it. 

‘Human shields’

Intentionally using the presence of civilians or other protected persons to render certain areas immune from military attack is prohibited under international law. Amnesty was unable to establish whether or not the fighters’ presence in the camps was intended to shield themselves from military attacks. However, under international humanitarian law, even if one party uses “human shields” or is otherwise unlawfully endangering civilians, this does not absolve the opposing party from complying with its obligations to distinguish between military objectives and civilians or civilian objects, to refrain from carrying out indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks, and to take all feasible precautions to spare civilians and civilian objects.

Mass displacements

Before the beginning of Israel’s ground incursion on 7 May, Rafah had been hosting more than 1.2 million people from areas further north who have been forcibly displaced since 13 October when the Israeli military issued the first mass “evacuation” order to the population of northern Gaza. Some 85% of Gaza’s population has been displaced at least once, and many have now been forced to move several times. It is now estimated that more than one million Palestinians have been displaced from Rafah following Israel’s expansion of military operations in the area.

Since last October, Amnesty has conducted in-depth investigations into 16 Israeli airstrikes that killed a total of 370 civilians, including 159 children, and left hundreds more wounded. Amnesty has found evidence of war crimes by Israeli forces, including direct attacks on civilians and civilian object or indiscriminate attacks, as well as other unlawful attacks and collective punishment of the civilian population. Amnesty has called on the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to expedite its investigation into the situation in Palestine, and it is campaigning for an immediate ceasefire.

On 7 October, Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups launched indiscriminate rockets against, and sent fighters into, southern Israel, committing war crimes such as the deliberate mass killings of civilians and hostage-taking. According to the Israeli authorities, around 1,200 people were killed. Amnesty has called for Hamas and other armed groups to be held accountable for deliberate killings, abductions and indiscriminate attacks. Amnesty is calling for the immediate release of all civilian hostages held in Gaza. Hostage-taking is a serious violation of international humanitarian law and constitutes a war crime.