logo
Israeli military used 225kg bomb in strike on Gaza cafe, fragments reveal

Israeli military used 225kg bomb in strike on Gaza cafe, fragments reveal

The Guardian3 days ago
The Israeli military used a 225kg bomb – a powerful and indiscriminate weapon that generates a massive blast wave and scatters shrapnel over a wide area – when it attacked a target in a crowded beachfront cafe in Gaza on Monday, evidence seen by the Guardian has revealed.
Experts in international law said the use of such a munition despite the known presence of many unprotected civilians, including children, women and elderly people, was almost certainly unlawful and may constitute a war crime.
Fragments of the weapon from the ruins of al-Baqa cafe photographed by the Guardian have been identified by ordnance experts as parts of an MK-82 general purpose 225kg (500lb) bomb, a US-made staple of many bombing campaigns in recent decades.
The large crater left by the explosion is further evidence of the use of a large and powerful bomb such as the MK-82, two ordnance experts said.
An Israel Defense Forces (IDF) spokesperson said the attack on the cafe in Monday was under review and that 'prior to the strike, steps were taken to mitigate the risk of harming civilians using aerial surveillance'.
Medical and other officials said between 24 and 36 Palestinians were killed in the attack on the cafe and dozens more were injured. The dead included a well-known film-maker and an artist, a 35-year-old housewife and a four-year-old child. Among the injured was a 14-year-old boy and a 12-year-old girl.
Under international law based on the Geneva conventions, a military is forbidden to launch attacks that cause 'incidental loss of civilian life' that is 'excessive or disproportionate' to the military advantage to be gained.
What is considered acceptable is open to interpretation but experts said only a target whose elimination might have a very significant impact on the course of a conflict could justify the death of dozens of civilians.
The cafe had two storeys – an open upper deck and a lower floor with wide windows on to the beach and sea – and approaches that were clearly visible from above.
Gerry Simpson, of Human Right Watch, , said: 'The Israeli military hasn't said exactly whom it was targeting but it said it used aerial surveillance to minimise civilian casualties, which means it knew the cafe was teeming with customers at the time.
'The military would also have known that using a large guided air-dropped bomb would kill and maim many of the civilians there. The use of such a large weapon in an obviously crowded cafe risks that this was an unlawful disproportionate or indiscriminate attack and should be investigated as a war crime.'
Dr Andrew Forde, an assistant professor of human rights law at Dublin City University, said the strike was shocking. 'When you see a situation where there are heavy munitions being used, particularly [in a] crowded civilian space, even with the best targeting in the world … that will necessarily create an indiscriminate outcome that is not in compliance with … the Geneva conventions,' he said.
The family-run al-Baqa cafe was founded almost 40 years ago and was well known as a recreation spot for young people and families in Gaza City. It served a small selection of soft drinks, tea and biscuits.
Though the vast majority of Gaza's 2.3 million population suffer acutely with growing malnutrition and a continuing threat of famine, some have savings or salaries that allow them to patronise the few remaining cafes.
The port area where al-Baqa cafe was located was not covered by any of the evacuation orders issued by the IDF to warn of impending military operations.
Marc Schack, an associate professor of international law at the University of Copenhagen, said: 'It is almost impossible to see how this use of that kind of munition can be justified. If you are talking about 20, 30, 40 or more civilian casualties, usually that would have to be a target of very great importance … For coalition forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, the accepted number for a very high-level target was less than 30 civilians getting killed, and only then in exceptional circumstances.'
Trevor Ball, a weapons researcher and former US army explosive ordnance disposal technician, identified a Jdam tail section and thermal battery which he said suggested either an MPR500 or an MK-82 bomb was dropped.
Another expert with extensive experience of recent conflicts identified the bomb similarly. A third said they could not make a reliable assessment from the pictures presented to them.
Israel has an wide range of munitions and has frequently used much smaller weapons for precision strikes against individuals in Gaza, Lebanon, and in its recent air offensive in Iran.
The IDF said in a lengthy statement earlier this year that even the most sophisticated measures employed to assess civilian harm were hardly ever perfect and that its choice of munitions was 'a professional matter contingent on the nature of the strike's objective'.
The statement said: 'While some targets are suitable for smaller payloads, others may require heavier munitions to achieve mission success – for example, when intending to destroy structures that are built with certain hard materials, large structures, or underground tunnel.'
On Tuesday, an Israel government spokesperson said the IDF 'never, ever targets civilians'.
Israel has repeatedly accused Hamas of using civilians as human shields, a charge that the militant Islamist group denies.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Israeli military says intercepted missile launched from Yemen
Israeli military says intercepted missile launched from Yemen

Reuters

time19 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Israeli military says intercepted missile launched from Yemen

July 6 (Reuters) - The Israeli military said on Sunday that it has intercepted a missile launched from Yemen towards Israel. Sirens were activated across several areas in Israel in accordance with protocol, it said. Israel threatened Yemen's Houthi movement with a naval and air blockade if it the Iran-aligned group persists with attacks on Israel, in what it says is solidarity with Gaza. Since the start of the war in Gaza in October 2023, the Houthis have been firing at Israel and at shipping in the Red Sea, disrupting global trade. Most of the dozens of missiles and drones they have launched have been intercepted or fallen short. Israel has carried out a series of retaliatory strikes.

Labour ‘may refuse to use Israeli parts' in UK dome defence system in bid to appease pro-Palestinian backbench MPs
Labour ‘may refuse to use Israeli parts' in UK dome defence system in bid to appease pro-Palestinian backbench MPs

Daily Mail​

timean hour ago

  • Daily Mail​

Labour ‘may refuse to use Israeli parts' in UK dome defence system in bid to appease pro-Palestinian backbench MPs

Labour was accused of planning to exclude hi-tech Israeli anti-missile systems from Britain's proposed 'Iron Dome' defences last night in a bid to appease its pro-Palestinian backbench MPs. Ministers faced claims that they were preparing to drop 'tried and tested' equipment from Tel Aviv-based firm Rafael in favour of a 'more politically correct' alternative. The accusations come as the Government seeks to upgrade and expand its array of Sky Sabre anti-missile units in imitation of Israel 's own 'Iron Dome' defences. Sources told the Mail on Sunday that even though Rafael's control and command system was currently used in all seven existing Sky Sabre units, Ministers were now looking to go instead for a Norwegian-produced rival. The Ministry of Defence responded last night by saying that no such decision had been made. But the fears come amid pressure from pro-Palestinian Labour MPs for the Prime Minister to toughen his policy towards Israeli amid mounting alarm over the scale of the Israeli military action in Gaza and the rising death toll of Palestinians living there. In particular, Sir Keir has faced calls to suspend all arms exports to Israel and to recognise Palestine as a state. Only yesterday, there were reports that French president Emmanuel Macron – who will make a state visit to the UK this week – is urging Sir Keir to hurry up and recognise Palestine. And last night, one security source told the Mail on Sunday: 'Keir Starmer doesn't want to be seen to be close to Israel on defence. 'He's terrified of the Palestinian lobby. 'And he's wary of [Attorney General] Richard Hermer saying they're complicit in helping Israel break international law.' The UK currently has no equivalent of Israel's famed Iron Dome missile defence system. But the Government's Strategic Defence Review promised last month to provide up to £1 billion in new 'homeland air and missile defence' as well as protection against cyber attack. The MoD is also set to upgrade and expand its current seven Sky Sabre medium-range, ground-based mobile air defence systems. However, sources claimed that instead of continuing with the existing Israeli-produced command and control units for Sky Sabre, Ministers were planning to appease their pro-Palestinian backbench MPs by switching to a Norwegian alternative called NASAMs. Last night, defence expert and cross-bench peer Lord Walney said: 'It would be inexcusable if tried-and-tested Israeli components were no longer used simply for politically convenient reasons.' Lord Walney, former chairman of Labour Friends of Israel, added: 'Britain needs the best high-tech defence as the world gets more unstable. 'It would be dismal if ministers ditched components from an Israeli company to avoid pressure from the pro-Palestine crowd.' Only last week, non-affiliated peer Lord Austin, the Government's trade envoy to Israel, told the House of Lords how 'the RAF would not be able to get its planes off the ground without Israeli technology' and that 'British soldiers would have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan without Israeli defence equipment.'

How Trump is using the 'Madman Theory' to try to change the world
How Trump is using the 'Madman Theory' to try to change the world

BBC News

time2 hours ago

  • BBC News

How Trump is using the 'Madman Theory' to try to change the world

Asked last month whether he was planning to join Israel in attacking Iran, US President Donald Trump said "I may do it. I may not do it. Nobody knows what I'm going to do".He let the world believe he had agreed a two-week pause to allow Iran to resume negotiations. And then he bombed anyway.A pattern is emerging: The most predictable thing about Trump is his unpredictability. He changes his mind. He contradicts himself. He is inconsistent."[Trump] has put together a highly centralised policy-making operation, arguably the most centralised, at least in the area of foreign policy, since Richard Nixon," says Peter Trubowitz, professor of international relations at the London School of Economics. "And that makes policy decisions more dependent on Trump's character, his preferences, his temperament." Trump has put this to political use; he has made his own unpredictability a key strategic and political asset. He has elevated unpredictability to the status of a doctrine. And now the personality trait he brought to the White House is driving foreign and security policy. It is changing the shape of the scientists call this the Madman Theory, in which a world leader seeks to persuade his adversary that he is temperamentally capable of anything, to extract concessions. Used successfully it can be a form of coercion and Trump believes it is paying dividends, getting the US's allies where he wants them. But is it an approach that can work against enemies? And could its flaw be that rather than being a sleight of hand designed to fool adversaries, it is in fact based on well established and clearly documented character traits, with the effect that his behaviour becomes easier to predict? Attacks, insults and embraces Trump began his second presidency by embracing Russian President Vladimir Putin and attacking America's allies. He insulted Canada by saying it should become the 51st state of the US. He said he was prepared to consider using military force to annex Greenland, an autonomous territory of America's ally Denmark. And he said the US should retake ownership and control of the Panama 5 of the Nato charter commits each member to come to the defence of all others. Trump threw America's commitment to that into doubt. "I think Article 5 is on life support" declared Ben Wallace, Britain's former defence secretary. Conservative Attorney General Dominic Grieve said: "For now the trans-Atlantic alliance is over."A series of leaked text messages revealed the culture of contempt in Trump's White House for European allies. "I fully share your loathing of European freeloaders," US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth told his colleagues, adding "PATHETIC". In Munich earlier this year, Trump's Vice-President JD Vance said the US would no longer be the guarantor of European appeared to turn the page on 80 years of trans-Atlantic solidarity. "What Trump has done is raise serious doubts and questions about the credibility of America's international commitments," says Prof Trubowitz."Whatever understanding those countries [in Europe] have with the United States, on security, on economic or other matters, they're now subject to negotiation at a moment's notice."My sense is that most people in Trump's orbit think that unpredictability is a good thing, because it allows Donald Trump to leverage America's clout for maximum gain… "This is one of of his takeaways from negotiating in the world of real estate."Trump's approach paid dividends. Only four months ago, Sir Keir Starmer told the House of Commons that Britain would increase defence and security spending from 2.3% of GDP to 2.5%. Last month, at a Nato summit, that had increased to 5%, a huge increase, now matched by every other member of the Alliance. The predictability of unpredictability Trump is not the first American president to deploy an Unpredictability Doctrine. In 1968, when US President Richard Nixon was trying to end the war in Vietnam, he found the North Vietnamese enemy intractable."At one point Nixon said to his National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger, 'you ought to tell the North Vietnamese negotiators that Nixon's crazy and you don't know what he's going to do, so you better come to an agreement before things get really crazy'," says Michael Desch, professor of international relations at Notre Dame University. "That's the madman theory." Julie Norman, professor of politics at University College London, agrees that there is now an Unpredictability Doctrine. "It's very hard to know what's coming from day to day," she argues. "And that has always been Trump's approach."Trump successfully harnessed his reputation for volatility to change the trans-Atlantic defence relationship. And apparently to keep Trump on side, some European leaders have flattered and fawned. Last month's Nato summit in The Hague was an exercise in obsequious courtship. Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte had earlier sent President Trump (or "Dear Donald") a text message, which Trump leaked. "Congratulations and thank you for your decisive action in Iran, it was truly extraordinary," he wrote. On the forthcoming announcement that all Nato members had agreed to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP, he continued: "You will achieve something NO president in decades could get done." Anthony Scaramucci, who previously served as Trump's communications director in his first term, said: "Mr Rutte, he's trying to embarrass you, sir. He's literally sitting on Air Force One laughing at you."And this may prove to be the weakness at the heart of Trump's Unpredictability Doctrine: their actions may be based on the idea that Trump craves adulation. Or that he seeks short-term wins, favouring them over long and complicated that is the case and their assumption is correct, then it limits Trump's ability to perform sleights of hand to fool adversaries - rather, he has well established and clearly documented character traits that they have become aware of. The adversaries impervious to charm and threats Then there is the question of whether an Unpredictability Doctrine or the Madman Theory can work on President Volodymyr Zelensky, an ally who was given a dressing down by Trump and Vance in the Oval Office, later agreed to grant the US lucrative rights to exploit Ukrainian mineral resources. Vladimir Putin, on the other hand, apparently remains impervious to Trump's charms and threats alike. On Thursday, following a telephone call, Trump said he was "disappointed" that Putin was not ready to end the war against Ukraine. And Iran? Trump promised his base that he would end American involvement in Middle Eastern "forever wars". His decision to strike Iran's nuclear facilities was perhaps the most unpredictable policy choice of his second term so far. The question is whether it will have the desired former British Foreign Secretary, William Hague, has argued that it will do precisely the opposite: it will make Iran more, not less likely, to seek to acquire nuclear Desch agrees. "I think it's now highly likely that Iran will make the decision to pursue a nuclear weapon," he says. "So I wouldn't be surprised if they lie low and do everything they can to complete the full fuel cycle and conduct a [nuclear] test."I think the lesson of Saddam Hussein and Muammar Gaddafi is not lost on other dictators facing the US and potential regime change... "So the Iranians will desperately feel the need for the ultimate deterrent and they'll look at Saddam and Gaddafi as the negative examples and Kim Jong Un of North Korea as the positive example." One of the likely scenarios is the consolidation of the Islamic Republic, according to Mohsen Milani, a professor of politics at the University of South Florida and author of Iran's Rise and Rivalry with the US in the Middle East. "In 1980, when Saddam Hussein attacked Iran his aim was the collapse of the Islamic Republic," he says. "The exact opposite happened. "That was the Israeli and American calculation too... That if we get rid of the top guys, Iran is going to surrender quickly or the whole system is going to collapse." A loss of trust in negotiations? Looking ahead, unpredictability may not work on foes, but it is unclear whether the recent shifts it has yielded among allies can be possible, this is a process built largely on impulse. And there may be a worry that the US could be seen as an unreliable broker."People won't want to do business with the US if they don't trust the US in negotiations, if they're not sure the US will stand by them in defence and security issues," argues Prof Norman. "So the isolation that many in the MAGA world seek is, I think, going to backfire."German Chancellor Friedrich Merz for one has said Europe now needs to become operationally independent of the US."The importance of the chancellor's comment is that it's a recognition that US strategic priorities are changing," says Prof Trubowitz. "They're not going to snap back to the way they were before Trump took office. "So yes, Europe is going to have to get more operationally independent." This would require European nations to develop a much bigger European defence industry, to acquire kit and capabilities that currently only the US has, argues Prof Desch. For example, the Europeans have some sophisticated global intelligence capability, he says, but a lot of it is provided by the US."Europe, if it had to go it alone, would also require a significant increase in its independent armaments production capability," he continues. "Manpower would also be an issue. Western Europe would have to look to Poland to see the level of manpower they would need."All of which will take years to build up. So, have the Europeans really been spooked by Trump's unpredictability, into making the most dramatic change to the security architecture of the western world since the end of the Cold War?"It has contributed," says Prof Trubowitz. "But more fundamentally, Trump has uncorked something… Politics in the United States has changed. Priorities have changed. To the MAGA coalition, China is a bigger problem than Russia. That's maybe not true for the Europeans."And according to Prof Milani, Trump is trying to consolidate American power in the global order."It's very unlikely that he's going to change the order that was established after World War Two. He wants to consolidate America's position in that order because China is challenging America's position in that order."But this all means that the defence and security imperatives faced by the US and Europe are European allies may be satisfied that through flattery and real policy shifts, they have kept Trump broadly onside; he did, after all, reaffirm his commitment to Article 5 at the most recent Nato summit. But the unpredictability means this cannot be guaranteed - and they have seemed to accept that they can no longer complacently rely on the US to honour its historic commitment to their in that sense, even if the unpredictability doctrine comes from a combination of conscious choice and Trump's very real character traits, it is working, on some at image credit: Getty Images BBC InDepth is the home on the website and app for the best analysis, with fresh perspectives that challenge assumptions and deep reporting on the biggest issues of the day. And we showcase thought-provoking content from across BBC Sounds and iPlayer too. You can send us your feedback on the InDepth section by clicking on the button below.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store