Although it is my preference that Hamas be hoisted with the petards of the IDF and their own misfires, here we address a different form of elevation: prestige. 

Reports suggest that the Israelis removed to Gaza are “prisoners of war.”  This is incorrect.  They are, and will remain, hostages. 

There are some key differences between a prisoner of war (POW) and a hostage: 

• Legal status — POWs have rights and protections under the Geneva Conventions and international humanitarian law.  Hostages have no official legal status. 
• Purpose — POWs are detained by a state to remove them from battle during wartime.  Hostages are seized by non-state actors for leverage, influence, or ransom. 
• Location — POWs are typically held in designated POW camps run by militaries.  Hostages are often held secretly in undisclosed locations. 
• Treatment — POWs must be humanely treated and cannot be tortured or killed.  Hostages can face mistreatment, torture, and execution.  
• Release — POWs are to be released and repatriated after hostilities end.  Hostages are released conditionally based on captors’ demands being met. 
• Identity — POWs are enemy combatants identified by uniforms/ID tags.  Hostages can be combatants or civilians targeted more indiscriminately.  
• Conditions — POWs have rights to adequate food, shelter, and medical care per the Geneva Conventions.  Hostage conditions are often harsh. 

POWs have recognized legal protections and rights under international law, the Geneva Conventions, while hostages have uncertain status and face greater risks of mistreatment at the hands of non-state captors.  The motives and aims of detention also differ between the two categories. 

At the simplest, it cannot be clearer that the Israeli hostages are being mistreated. 

Hence, individuals captured or detained by Hamas would not be considered prisoners of war, for a few key reasons: 

Hamas is not a recognized state actor or national military force.  It is designated as a terrorist organization by countries and groups of countries including the U.S., the E.U., Canada, and Japan.  

The Geneva Conventions give prisoner-of-war status only to combatants captured in armed conflict among states.  The conventions do not apply to non-international conflicts with non-state actors like terrorist or rebel groups. 

People detained by Hamas have not necessarily engaged in lawful combat against Hamas.  They could be civilians rather than enemy combatants.  POW status requires being a lawful combatant. 

Hamas does not follow the Geneva Conventions in its treatment of detainees.  So it does not confer POW rights even if detainees would otherwise meet the criteria. 

The circumstances and motives surrounding Hamas detentions are often illegal (kidnapping, extortion, political leverage).  This differs from lawful detention of combatants. 

Individuals captured and held by Hamas are hostages, detained civilians, or unlawfully detained combatants denied their rights under international law.  But they do not meet the legal definitions to be granted prisoner of war status under the Geneva Conventions. 

By suggesting that the captured Israelis are POWs, those doing so are elevating Hamas to the position of a state actor instead of the terror organization it is. 

While on the topic of savagery, British colonel Richard Kemp stated regarding the practices of the IDF, “[it] did more to safeguard civilians than any other army in the history of warfare.” 

Hamas enjoys wide support in Gaza, as expressed by no less an authority than Iran stooge Robert Malley.  It may be time for the IDF to change its policy and risk fewer of its own casualties.  I sure hope so.

Image: Mary Madigan.