Proportionality in the conduct of war is one of the most willfully misunderstood areas of IHL, largely because of how oblique it is and how near-impossible it is to pursue with any real objective clarity.
I'm not arguing that Israel is or isn't acting proportionately. What I'm saying is that the Law itself is almost impossible to uphold, since it seeks to establish objective practical policy based on a subjective emotional assessment, which is ludicrous and totally counter intuitive.
The interrelationship between CDE and NCV (if you don't know what those stand for, you don't know enough about this section of IHL to possibly comment) is nuanced, complex and entirely subjective. They were NATO's attempts to pass Proportionality into law. The results were simply bizarre, with policy makers suggesting a ratio similar to 30 civilians:1 Osama bin Laden would be considered 'proportionate'.
Who the feck makes up those numbers? Who sits there plucking ratios out of thin air to then decide what is or isn't 'lawful'?
If Osama bin Laden is sitting in a room with 31 civilians, do we abort the mission and let him go free?
Can you not see how infuriatingly illogical the whole thing is?
Bottom line is, it is a noble and well-intended area of IHL that purports to be scientific but is actually totally emotional and therefore impossible to legislate.
