The air strike launched by the Israeli forces on Nasser Hospital in the Gaza Strip on August 25 raised a wave of international questions about the justifications that Tel Aviv led and the way they were carried out. These strikes resulted in the martyrdom of 22 people, including five journalists, most notably the journalist Maryam Dqah, who was working with the Associated Press and other media institutions, which sparked widespread anger in the media and international circles.
According to the agency, the Israeli forces targeted a well -known position as a place for the journalists’ gathering, claiming that a camera on the surface of the hospital was used by Hamas to monitor the movements of the Israeli army. In its novel, the Israeli army relied on what it described as “suspicious behavior” indicators and intelligence information that has not been detailed, contenting himself with indicating the presence of a cloth on the camera, an attempt to hide the identity.
The targeted camera was for a journalist
The new investigations conducted by the Associated Press showed that the targeted camera belongs to the photographer Hossam Al -Masry from Reuters, which was routinely covering events from the same site. Al -Masry was covering his camera with a white cloth to protect it from the sun and dust, which is a common procedure among photographers all over the world. Al -Masry was killed in the first blow that targeted the hospital’s external ladder.
Witnesses from the accident site indicated that the Israeli forces were watching the site with aircraft driving about 40 minutes before the attack, which gave them an opportunity to correctly identify the Egyptian journalist’s identity, which raises questions about the reason for its continued implementation of the strike.
Double strike and accusations of violating international law
After the first strike, the paramedics and journalists rushed to the site to provide assistance and report the attack, but the Israeli forces carried out additional strikes on the same site, which led to the martyrdom of Maryam Dqah and other journalists, as well as rescue workers and members of the civil defense. This type of attacks, known as the “dual blow”, is used to strike those who come to save the victims, and it is considered by international law experts a possible war crime.
The Israeli forces also used very explosive tank shells instead of using accurate weapons that could reduce the number of victims, which sparked severe criticism from arms and security experts, who confirmed that less deadly options were available and not exploited.
Four strikes targeting the hospital without warning
The “Associated Press” analysis showed that the hospital targeted at least four times without any prior warning. The Israeli forces have used heavy weapons that have not been taken into account the protection of civilians or journalists, while international law protects hospitals and journalists as long as they are not armed and do not participate in combat actions.
Witnesses indicated that during the first blow, journalists and medical staff had arrived at the site after hearing the first explosion, but the second blow came before anyone could withdraw, which led to the martyrdom of more victims.
Victims: a mixture of journalists, health workers and patients
The list of martyrs includes 22 people, including journalists, paramedics, civil defense workers and patients. While Israel issued the names of six people who said they were armed, field investigations confirmed that some of them were health staff or drivers of the civil defense teams, and the Israeli army did not provide any evidence to prove the martyrs’ association with enthusiasm or that they were armed.
Conflict of Israeli accounts with field certificates
Israel issued a statement after the attack stating that those who targeted were armed with enthusiasm, but this novel faced contradictions with the official data from the hospital. For example, one of the declared names appeared on the list of martyrs, while others were civilian workers. Israel has not provided any photographic or field evidence of the presence of weapons or military activities on the site.
International reactions and global anger
The strike caused an international anger, especially after the Associated Press and Reuters announced the targeting of their cameras and the martyrdom of journalists who were covering the events. The Committee for the Protection of Journalists also confirmed that journalists are civilians and should not be targeted, and that targeting them is a clear war crime.
This attack has shed light on the limited protection of journalists in Gaza, especially after Israel prevented foreign journalists entering the Strip since the outbreak of the war in October 2023, which made Palestinian journalists the main source of media coverage of events.
Previous monitoring and intelligence information
The Associated Press report revealed that the Israeli army was watching the camera on the hospital’s external ladder several days ago before the attack, based on intelligence information that was considered suspicious of journalists. However, no evidence was provided that the camera was used to monitor the Israeli forces, which raises questions about the seriousness of the intelligence information to which the strikes were based.
Use tanks instead of accurate weapons
Military experts explained that the use of heavy tank shells to hit the hospital was unjustified, and that the Israeli forces could have used guided missiles or accurate weapons to reduce losses. Pictures of debris and artistic analysis of shells confirmed that they were of a very explosive type, which led to a widespread destruction in the hospital and a large number of victims.
Space photos and field analysis
Satellite photos showed that Israeli tanks and armored units were operating about 4.5 km northeast of the hospital on the day of strike. Experts confirmed that the same brigade, Major General Golani, participated in a previous attack on an ambulance convoy in southern Gaza in March, which led to the death of 15 Palestinian paramedics, and an internal investigation concluded that there was a series of “professional failures”.
Criticism about targeting civilians
Certificates and videos showed that all the victims were civilians, and there is no evidence that any of them was armed or participated in combat operations. International law experts also indicated that targeting a hospital in this way and using a double strike exposes its perpetrator to international accountability.
Media coverage in Gaza
The hospital was a vital center for covering the events in Gaza, where photographers and media provides a window to follow up the bombing and daily injuries and the transmission of hunger news and the injured. Journalists used the external hospital to reach a height that enables them to photograph and monitor the city, which made the strike a great impact on the freedom of press coverage.
Israeli investigations and lack of transparency
The Israeli army said that it continues to investigate the attack, and considered what happened “gaps” in the implementation process, but he did not provide any concrete evidence, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was satisfied with describing what happened as a “tragic incident” without providing any official apology.
Summary
The Israeli attack on Nasser Hospital in Gaza highlights the great challenges facing the protection of civilians and journalists in armed conflicts. And the use of strategies such as double strike and high -explosive weapons increases the risk of possible violations of international law, and stresses the need for independent and transparent investigations to ensure that these events are not repeated.
