Huge rise recorded in number of houses IDF razes in arrest raids By Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondent
A Haaretz inquiry reveals that the Israel Defense Forces has increased its use of home demolitions during West Bank arrest raids since a ban on the forced entry of Palestinian civilians into homes of barricaded fugitives.
When the High Court of Justice banned the "neighbor procedure" eight months ago, senior Israel Defense Forces officers warned that this would likely endanger soldiers' lives. Haaretz has learned that new arrest procedures are not any more dangerous to soldiers, but that is because the IDF is using more aggressive tactics during the actual operations.
IDF sources say that the ban diminishes the tactical options of the officers. "The result is that very quickly we escalate in means, in other words, we use the bulldozers," one officer says.
In early October 2005, the High Court justices accepted the petition of human rights organizations against the "neighbor procedure." This tactic, employed hundreds of times in the territories during the first intifada, involved forcing the Palestinian neighbors of wanted militants to enter the homes of the barricaded fugitives in an effort to convince them to surrender, and consequently, also bring out information for the army on the conditions inside the home.
This forcing of Palestinian civilians to act as "agents" for the IDF drew intense public criticism, especially when a Palestinian from a village in the northern West Bank was shot and killed by his barricaded neighbor during the application of the "neighbor procedure."
The High Court ban forced the army to adopt new arrest methods, which do not endanger soldiers' lives as military sources had previously warned, says a senior IDF officer serving in the West Bank because "they take no chances. Not one of us will send a soldier to check a home in which it is known that a living, armed fugitive is barricaded, before we have carried out very aggressive action."
It turns out that the end result of the decision is different from the original intention: both the army and human rights groups, who closely follow developments in the territories, agree that the risk to the lives of Palestinian civilians is greater today. Furthermore, the new procedures result in more extensive damage to Palestinian homes in the territories.
The operation is as follows: If the fugitive refuses to exit, warning shots are fired around the house and then at points in the home that appear suspicious. If the fugitive continues to refuse to surrender, a bulldozer is brought in and begins to pound the walls of the house. The final stage is for the bulldozer to raze the home with everyone in it. Only then are troops sent in to search for survivors.
In one incident, a 43-year old woman was killed when shots fired at a home of a fugitive strayed into her home. The soldiers say that the conditions at the site made accurate shooting difficult. An internal probe concluded that the soldiers violated safety regulations, but no Military Police investigation was initiated.
'Outstretched arm' tactic After the initial High Court ban, the IDF employed a more complicated version of the "neighbor procedure," called "early warning procedure," in which the neighbor could not be forced to enter the house in question unless it was done with his consent, and similarly the neighbor could not be forced to wear an army bullet-proof vest and helmet.
To the chagrin of the IDF, the justices shot this procedure down as well.
Senior General Staff officers tried to convince the court of the necessity of the tactic, and even Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz volunteered to testify before the court, but the justices remained unmoved.
The current tactic is called "outstretched arm." This allows the army to use an interlocutor, someone who normally lives in the house, and only if they are still in the house at the time the soldiers arrive. In most cases the fugitives allow the civilians inside to exit the house, and in that case the army can ask a family member to use a bullhorn to call out to the fugitive to surrender, so long as this is done at a safe distance.
In conversations with Haaretz, officers to this day maintain that the court's decision reflects a certain dislocation from the operational realities in the territories, and that the moral argument accepted by the court has resulted in graver danger to the lives of Palestinian civilians and their property.
But there are those at the General Staff who say that "over and over [Supreme Court President] Aharon Barak has saved us from ourselves. Against rampant terrorism there were times when we lost our sense of judgment and brought excessive means to bear. The High Court, by intervening in matters such as the route of the separation fence and the neighbor procedure, brought us back to a rational state, even if the officers in the field may not like it."