In a move reported as "unprecedented in Israeli military history," the IDF allegedly gave its officers the authority to risk killing up to 20 civilians in the airstrikes on Gaza that began on October 7, 2023, the New York Times reported on Thursday.
This is an order that has previously not been reported on, the NYT added.
According to the report, mid-ranking officers have never been given the flexibility to attack targets at a high possible civilian cost.
According to NYT, the change in directive enabled the military to target terrorists in Gaza while they were at home surrounded by family or civilians. Previously, the IDF only targeted them when they were alone outside. In previous wars with Hamas, IAF strikes were allowed only on the knowledge that there would be no civilian casualties, the NYT said.
On previous occasions, officers were permitted to risk killing up to five civilians and, on rare occasions, ten.
A senior military officer told NYT on the condition of anonymity that Israel's military leadership changed its rules of engagement after October 7, believing that Israel faced an existential threat.
An NYT investigation found that Israel lessened its safeguarding citizens regarding civilian casualties and often failed to conduct post-strike reviews of civilian harm or punish officers for wrongdoing.
After reviewing dozens of military records and interviewing over 100 soldiers and officials, the NYT reportedly learned that on a few occasions, IDF commanders approved strikes on Hamas leaders that had the potential to risk the lives of 100 civilians.
The NYT also accused the Israeli army of striking Gaza at a pace that made it hard to confirm the targets were legitimate and of developing an unproven system for finding new targets that used artificial intelligence at a vast scale.
Israel also allegedly reduced its roll-out use of roof knocks, which warn civilians that they must flee, the report claimed. Importantly, roof knocks are not required by international law and is widely considered a cutting-edge technique used by the IDF to reduce civilian casualties.
IDF response
The IDF responded to the NYT findings in a 700-word statement, reportedly acknowledging a change in its rules of engagement but emphasizing that it had “consistently been employing means and methods that adhere to the rules of law.”
The IDF added that the conflict it faced was “unprecedented and hardly comparable to other theaters of hostilities worldwide.”
“Such key factors,” the statement said, “bear implications on the application of the rules, such as the choice of military objectives and the operational constraints that dictate the conduct of hostilities, including the ability to take feasible precautions in strikes.”