An Introduction to the report by Jenin Inquiry (JI) regarding the Israeli invasion of Jenin Refugee Camp, April 2002. By Brian
Wood
In memory of those who died and are dying to defend Jenin refugee camp, and to all inhabitants therein, a beacon of demanding dignity, cultural cohesion, and unswerving humanity.
Most of the members of JI had not met before. Rather, we each went to Jenin refugee camp due to the stories of massive destruction, an Israeli announced massacre, and immense hardship on the entire civilian population of the camp. In Jenin we formed the Jenin Inquiry. In the absence of trained disaster relief teams, JI was among the handful of international civilians who responded to the “earthquake” in the camp. Our members were the first—and in some cases, only—foreigners to meet with the thousands of displaced persons who were forced out of the camp and sent into surrounding areas. Our members were also the first to enter the camp after the onslaught, even while the Israeli army was still present. Almost immediately upon arrival, we found urgent necessity in recording the stories of the inhabitants of the camp. We did this to rebuild the stories of the narrator and his or her family and to formulate a clear picture about the detailed events of the entire 16-day invasion. Since our members arrived while the invasion was still happening, the testimonies were often told within one to five days of being experienced, making for accurate, detailed accounts. Interviewees reported only what they saw with their own eyes or experienced directly. Second-hand reporting was completely absent in our work. Through their testimonies, the survivors narrated this gruesome event in their collective history and testified against the Israeli soldiers and their commanders who perpetrated horrible atrocities, including war crimes, against them and their camp. In all, JI collected 40 detailed accounts from survivors of the assault that, carefully corroborated and investigated, resulted in the report of JI.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) released the first report on the event in question, but only after seven days of investigation. Findings published in their report cited prima facie evidence of war crimes violations by the Israeli army and called for further investigation. At the time, they anticipated the soon arrival of the UN investigative team. That investigative team was disbanded due to Israeli refusal to allow them admittance and no follow up from HRW occurred. Had there been a follow up or longer investigation, more definite conclusions could have been made. Despite their internationally approved investigative team being forbidden entry by Israel, the UN persisted in publishing a report. Unfortunately, the UN authors scoured through second and third-hand resources, never visiting the camp or talking to eyewitnesses. A report with such resources can hardly be described as conclusive. One of the main differences between JI and other investigative teams is that members of JI lived with inhabitants of the camp for as much as one year after the destruction of their camp. Other teams stayed in hotels in surrounding cities, missing the day and night narration of events from the mouths of the survivors. Sleeping outside of the camp also forced one to miss out on the nighttime activities of the Israeli army and the brave attempts of the survivors, deeply traumatized already, to defend themselves. The JI report further acts as another strand of corroboration with other reports, primary of which is from Amnesty International (AI). Together, a clear case is made for war crimes and attempts at ethnic cleansing by Israel. |
