The October 7th Palestinian hostage-taking under the leadership of Hamas was preceded by a massacre of over 1200 Israelis and other foreign guests during holiday events. In this case of terrorism, both were political acts, and yet, there has to be a difference between the mass killing of innocent men, women and children and the taking of prisoners for some sort of exchange.
Many countries addressed these terrorist acts in national and international laws. The United States has legislation on kidnapping, hostage-taking and the Patriot Act to deal with these kind of criminals. Hostage-taking goes back a long way in the history of the world. Hostages were part of wars and conquests as those that lost and became vassals to the winners, many times, had to provide important members of their families to be taken away as a guarantee of good faith and loyalty. The Romans were prominent in these kind of acts as they took elite members of newly conquered people and countries back to Rome as an assurance against future rebellion. The Romans especially liked to take royal children in order to educate them in the ways of the Empire and “know how to rule” when their time came.
The Chinese Han and Tang dynasties did much of the same thing to achieve their goals of conquests and reign. The practice continued in earnest through the Middle Ages and became a less important part of war as time went on.
The 20th Century saw the hostage issue become a key subject in regard to international rules of war. The Hague Convention on Land Warfare in 1907, followed later by the Geneva Convention and the United Nations developed laws that consider hostage-taking a crime and an act of terrorism.
The circumstances surrounding the acts of violence and hostage-taking by terrorists has brought Israel to declare war on the Gaza Hamas government. This, in turn, has triggered an overwhelming military response against Gaza that appears to be destroying everything in its path.
Israel seems to see Gaza as a “separate nation” whose government is an existential threat to its existence and therefore, needs to be eliminated. World opinion however, sees the perpetrators of the massacre and hostage-taking as either heroes fighting Israeli oppression or as a bunch of organized criminals doing terrible things but that, nevertheless, remain separate and apart from the rest of the Gaza citizens.
Ironically, the United States is undergoing a similar division of opinion with regard to violence and insurrection seen by some as patriotic acts and by others as treason or gross criminal behavior. What most agree on is that this form of violence amounts to terrorism.
The question for Israel and the world is not that Hamas did or did not commit grievous crimes against a people and a nation, because they did. The question involves the remedy and its consequences.
Normally, the investigation and prosecution of crimes by civilians are the preview of judicial systems and crimes by soldiers are the responsibility of the military. What happens however, when crimes are committed by militias, paramilitary groups or civilians acting in a military role?
This is the dilemma faced by those seeking to apply a just remedy to the criminals that perpetrated the massacre and hostage-taking on October 7th in southern Israel.
The solution offered by the Israeli Defense Force is to kill and destroy the enemy and its infrastructure with overwhelming power. But there is also a large body of opinion that wants justice with less lethality.
The views expressed by David Conde are not necessarily the views of laVozColorado. Comments and responses may be directed to news@lavozcolorado.com.
