The Humanitarian Dilemma at the Gaza Border 2018-2019

In this article, we analyze the inversion of Just War Theory (JWT) and International Humanitarian Law (IHL), and building on existing literature in Law, Communications and International Relations, we develop a new theoretical framework: humanitarian dilemma. Within the structure of mass media and well-established international human rights regime, actors—mainly human rights organizations seeking to identify human rights violations—can have the unintended and obverse effect of escalating human right violations. The mechanism through which the humanitarian dilemma operates, and affects the calculations of human rights organizations, is by increasing the motivation of the warring parties to entrap their opponents into documented human rights violations. Strong motivation to entrap the enemy leads to willingness to risk citizens’ wellbeing and expose them to human rights violations by tempting the enemy to strike in a way that invites such violations. The reward for the warring parties is to seriously damage the reputation and legitimacy of the other party. To support the validity of the theoretical arguments, we present evidence, backed by interviews with officials of human rights organizations from the confrontation along the Gaza fence 2018–2019.