The US state department has failed to act on internal reports of human rights abuses by Israeli army and police units, according to a new report, raising new questions over whether Washington’s continued supply of arms to Israel is breaking US law.
The ProPublica investigative journalism site quoted officials as saying that a special panel set up by the Biden administration had recommended that multiple Israeli military and police units be denied US funding because of serious human rights abuses. But the state department has yet to act on the recommendations.
The incidents involving alleged abuses mostly took place in the West Bank before the 7 October Hamas attack and the outbreak of the Gaza war. They included extrajudicial killings by the border police, a case in which an elderly Palestinian-American man was gagged, handcuffed and left to die, and an allegation that interrogators tortured and raped a teenager accused of throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails.
The Biden administration set up another mechanism in August last year for monitoring civilian casualties around the world caused by US-supplied weapons, in what was billed as an important new human rights safeguard. But the system, Civilian Harm Incident Response Guidance (CHIRG), has been run since then by just a half-dozen staffers working on it part-time, and was overwhelmed soon after its creation by the outbreak of the Gaza conflict, in which more than 34,000 people have been killed.
Josh Paul, a former state department official, said: “I am deeply sceptical that the administration is paying these issues the attention that they deserve.” As a consequence of the lack of scrutiny, he said: “There’s such a culture of impunity that has developed where the Israeli soldiers at the lowest level feel free to act without any concern of repercussions.”
Asked about CHIRG staffing, a state department spokesperson said: “As we have said previously, we are reviewing a number of incidents worldwide pursuant the CHIRG process, including in the Gaza conflict, but we aren’t going to comment on specifics of ongoing reviews.”
Until now, the Biden administration has justified the continued flow of weapons to Israel – despite widespread allegations of abuses – on the grounds that the US has internal mechanisms constantly monitoring the conflict and they have yet to find Israel in violation of international humanitarian law.
Critics have complained that the internal processes were deliberately designed to work slowly and not reach conclusions, particularly in Israel’s case. The ProPublica report suggests for the first time that a recommendation had been made to take action on Israel, but it had been ignored.
The panel which reportedly made the recommendation to cut funding to the Israeli border police and other units in the West Bank is known as Israel Leahy Vetting Forum (ILVF), made up of Middle East and human rights experts, under 1997 laws written by a former Democratic senator, Patrick Leahy.
The Democratic senator Chris Van Hollen told the Guardian in a written statement: “The Leahy laws were passed to ensure US military aid is not provided to foreign military units that commit gross violations of human rights – contrary to American values and interests.
“Reports that the administration is sitting on its hands in the face of known violations are deeply troubling and, if true, would undermine the credibility of America’s commitment to applying our human rights laws in a uniform and unbiased manner.”
Senator Van Hollen said: “I’m seeking answers from the state department on this issue at once.”
A Guardian investigation in January found that under the ILVF panel, alleged abuses carried out by Israeli forces were judged by “different rules” than those committed by other governments.
Asked about the ProPublica report, a state department official said: “The Department of State takes seriously its commitment to upholding the ‘Leahy law’. This process is one that demands a careful and full review, and the department undergoes a fact-specific investigation applying the same standards and procedures regardless of the country in question.”
Next month, the administration faces a deadline for providing a formal assessment to Congress of assurances from Israel and other countries receiving US arms supplies that they are using them in accordance with international law.
The requirement for the report was established by Joe Biden in a national security memorandum, NSM-20, issued in February. On receiving Israel’s written assurances in March, the state department spokesperson, Matthew Miller, said: “We have not found them to be in violation of international humanitarian law, either when it comes to the conduct of the war or when it comes to the provision of humanitarian assistance.”
After an outcry from Van Hollen and other senior Democrats, the state department clarified that it would make no formal determination on the matter until the NSM-20 report was due on 8 May.
Human rights activists say they fear that the administration will try to dodge any form of direct finding against Israeli forces.
“Everything I’ve seen leading up to 8 May tells me that they are trying to avoid a conclusion,” Sarah Yager, the Washington director at Human Rights Watch, said.
“The fact is that we and Oxfam and Amnesty and all of these groups have shown them evidence of violations of international law with extensive methodologies. The state department believes us on everything else – they cite us in their annual human rights reports.
“But when we submit evidence on Israel, they say we haven’t seen any violations of international law.”
