from NY to Israel Sultan Reveals
The Stories Behind the News

How to Take the Human Shields out of the Equation

Posted: 04 Feb 2009 07:43 PM PST

No one does something for no reason, that includes terrorists.
An enemy force will use a tactic because it's successful. Which is

why there's only way to stop them from reusing that tactic, render

it a failure.

Terrorists use human shields because the strategy pays off. The
enemy has identified a particular weakness in us, we have difficulty
causing the deaths of civilians. That is because we're moral and value

human life, and they don't.

This is a strategic strength when it comes to intelligently
deploying troops in a way that spare lives and reduce casualties.

The use of Human Shields by errorists however turns this strength

into a weakness, when it protects the terrorists directly through

hesitation allowing them to escape, or indirectly through media and

public outrage when the human shields are wounded or killed.

Each time that happens, and the use of human shields is successful--

we're insuring that human shields will be used again. It's like paying

ransom every time pirates seize your boats. It turns an individual

crime into a profitable venture, and creates an entire industry built

around it. So too when civilized countries directly or indirectly reward

the use of Human Shields, it increases in scope and becomes a
vast problem.

In Lebanon and Gaza, Hamas and Hizbullah built much of their

defensive strategy around placing high priority targets and

weapons embedded around facilities such as schools or

hospitals, betting that either they would not be bombed, or
that bombing them would enable them to pull off a media blitz that

would force Israel to withdraw and sign an agreement. Both times

their bet paid off.

Such tactics were not unprecedented, but nevertheless Hamas and

Hizbullah used Human Shields as a defensive strategy on a scope and

scale that demonstrated just how vital it had become. Hamas and

Hizbullah understood that they could not defeat Israel on the battlefield.

The one ace in their deck was the civilian population they
could employ both offensively and defensively. While the US

had disregarded Saddam's use of Human Shields, rendering it a

virtual non-factor by Baathist forces and terrorists-- Israel
failed to do so, and was rewarded with a more extensive use of

Human Shields than ever.

The problem is that rewarding Human Shields strategies
quickly lets terrorists know that they can use entire populations

as Human Shields. The more you allow it to succeed, the

larger the use of Human Shield grows, as terrorists begin using
thousands to protect high value targets. The end result of failing to

suppress the use of Human Shields is that soon you're dealing with

entire populations turned into Human Shields.

And the only real way to put a stop to it, is to cut the Gordian Knot by

never allowing Human Shields to be used as a successful strategy in

the first place. Once it's already in use, only ruthlessly demonstrating

that it is futile, will end it. This will unquestionably carry a severe toll

in the lives of non-combatants, but in the end it spares more lives by

terminating the Human Shields strategy. Only by demonstrating that

the use of Human Shields will not stay our hand, will terrorists stop

employing Human Shields in the first place.

President Jefferson understood that the cycle of ransom and

kidnapping could only be broken by cutting through
the pirate's premise, that kidnapping would result in rich rewards,
rather than death. Terrorist groups who use Human Shields must get

the same message, that this tactic will no longer grant them any

special protection. That media outrage will make no difference

and that soldiers will do their job regardless of Human Shields.

Only then will terrorists begin to see Human Shields as a useless

handicap, rather than as a handy defense. And only then will

the use of Human Shields and the civilian death toll that results

from their use, finally come to an end.