Will James Miller's Family Ever Get the Justice They Deserve?

Lord Goldsmith seems an unlikely recipient of applause from someone who has persistently questioned why Britain ever went to war in Iraq, but his support for the family of James Miller definitely deserves a few plaudits. Miller was shot dead in Gaza in May 2003 by the second of seven shots all of which were captured on video and featured in the award-winning Channel 4 television documentary Death in Gaza. The Israelis have always claimed that Miller was caught in a firefight and that the first two shots, the second of which killed Miller, were not fired by an Israeli soldier, the implication being that he was killed by a Palestinian.

But in April 2006, the inquest into Miller's death found that he was killed unlawfully and the coroner Andrew Reid wrote to Goldsmith asking him to intervene, which he did do in spades, visiting Israel to argue the case with his Israeli counterpart Meni Mazuz and when that didn't work asking the Metropolitan Police to conduct a preliminary investigation, looking particularly at the reliability of the Israeli claim the first two shots came from a different location to the other five, which the Israelis accept were fired by Captain Hib a-Heib. At the time of the killing he was a lieutenant but has since been promoted in an indication of how likely it is that Israel will prosecute him.

Scotland Yard commissioned new tests which show all seven shots came from the Israeli armoured vehicle. Goldsmith told the Israelis in June that in the light of the new evidence they should now a) prosecute the Israeli officer who fired the shots and b) pay compensation to the Miller family. He gave them six weeks to respond, or a prosecution would be sought in the UK. The deadline is this Tuesday. At the same time as writing to the Israelis, Goldsmith wrote to Commander Dave Johnston, the head of the Yard's homicide and serious crimes command asking him to launch a full investigation. Goldsmith also asked the Director of Public Prosecutions to review the case.

The letter from Goldsmith was notable for its blunt approach, which as James Miller's brother John points out is a move away from the normal Foreign Office-influenced namby-pamby approach to such matters. But remarkably, even the Foreign Office has stood up to be counted with the Foreign Office Director-General forcibly reminding Israeli ambassador last week that the deadline for a response was this Tuesday. The Israelis are it seems unlikely to meet the deadline so the key issue here is how will Goldsmith's successor Baroness Scotland respond? The answer to that question will give us all a clearer idea of how willing Gordon Brown's new government is to stand up for its own citizens.

Comments

[ray smith]

After reading Mick Smith write up on this murder of the reporter, and Lord Goldsmith's message to Israel Authorties.
Can anyone expect any justice from the Uk or Israel side, considering Lord Goldsmith's relationship with the then British Prime Minister ete, etc.
Bearing in Mind Gulf War II, NO WITNESSES?

[Chuck Unsworth]

A couple of points:

As I understand it a Lieutenant Heib has been named as responsible, and the shots were heavy calibre originating from an APC. Is it suggested that this junior officer fired the shots or ordered the shooting?

Surprising that Goldsmith would take robust action. The question is why? He had not shown such strength of conviction elsewhere. So maybe this is all about diplomatic relations rather than justice. It may just suit the Government's book to make an issue of this. As Mick rightly notes, it's Baroness Scotland who's theoretically in the driving seat now, but one must remember whose hands are on her reins...

[Evin Daly]

Britain Threatens to Seek Extradition of IDF Soldiers - a response.

I am writing with regard to the news story in the AFP Yahoo news “Israel receives new British request over 2003 journalist killing” which refers to the killing of journalist James Miller in Gaza in May, 2003.

I saw the US HBO special (twice) in which Mr. Miller was shot. To anyone with any common sense Mr. Miller and his entourage were clearly responsible for his death. Let me explain. James Miller has been filming a story on the experience of Palestinian families during a time where Israel was destroying Arab homes in Gaza in an effort to curtail Arab infiltration of Israel territory in order to carry out terrorist activities. Part of the documentary was to do a similar story about Israeli families.

For a reason only known to the journalist group and the late Mr. Miller, they decided to cross over to Israel, not at a recognized border crossing but across the Israeli patrolled no-mans-land. At night. Yahoo news neglected to mention the “at night” part of the story. So did the story from the British courts. In the HBO documentary you can see, with difficulty, Mr. Miller approach, in the darkness, a hidden IDF armored vehicle with his camera on his shoulder, one of his entourage carrying a white flag on a stick, calling out “we are British journalists.” Seconds later a shot rang out and Mr. Miller falls to the ground fatally wounded.

Mr. Millar was shot by a member of the Bedouin Desert Reconnaissance Battalion, one of the units the IDF uses when dealing with Arabic communities, as the soldiers themselves are Arab. This fact is also missing from the news report.

Looking at the approach from the soldiers point of view. They’re sitting in the darkness monitoring their section of the Gaza strip. Suddenly out of the darkness they are approached by a figure carrying a camera on his shoulder, someone waving a flag while crying out “we are British journalists” and another waving a flashlight. My response would be to shoot anyone foolist enough to venture toward me like that. To me they would have looked like a threat – someone carrying any unknown object on his shoulder toward my vechicle, at night, in a recognized killing zone for both Israelis and Palestinains alike. I believe the soldier responded the only way possible. What were the journalists expecting – an invitation to tea?

More to the point should be why Mr. Miller allowed himself to be killed. Because he was directly responsible for his own death. The soldier responded in the way that he or she was trained. Why did James Miller not choose to cross to Israel at an approved crossing? Why cross a patrolled no-mans-land, that is patrolled to watch for terrorists crossing into Israel? Why at night in pitch darkness? Why did he assume that proclaiming that he and his group were British Jouralists would make any difference? Why did they assume that the soldiers, Arab in this case, spoke English? Why did they assume that the soldiers would think that anyone in their right mind would approach a patrol vechicle in such a manner and such a place and at such a time and not get the respose they got? What was going through a seasoned journalists mind at such a time? Why did the Palestinians let them go?

Blaming the soldier and the IDF is pointless. Try approaching a US or British post in Iraq with such a tactic and see the reaction. A sorry waste of talent and human life. But avoidable and the blame, if there is any, lies directly at Mr. Millers feet. As a matter of reference there are families in Northern Ireland waiting for a response from Britain for the killing of 13 civilians who were marching peacefully in daylight 30 odd years ago.

Evin Daly is the editor of lookisrael.com.

[Chuck Unsworth]

Two questions for Evin Daly:

What were the Rules of Engagement for the Bedouin Desert Reconnaissance Battalion?

Did a an official State of War exist and, if so, between which parties?

[Evin Daly]

Response to Chuck Unsworth.

A .223 or 5.56mm M16 rifle round is a "high powered" round not a heavy caliber round - I read that an M16 was involved here.

Rules of Engagement are what there for the entire IDF or any army - respond in a defensive posture to a threat but not to the point of being killed. The soldiers were clearly threatened by Mr. Miller's actions. Mr. Miller knew he was approaching an APC. He filmed Arabs earlier in the day attacking Israeli bulldozers. The area in which he was located was a recognized crossing point for Arab terrorists. I made the point about the Bedouin Battalion because of Mr. Miller’s assumption that calling out “we are British journalists” in English would be understood. He made no attempt to do so in Hebrew or Arabic. What reaction did he expect other than the one he received?

With regard to your question “Did a an official State of War exist and, if so, between which parties?” I must answer with a question. Does it matter? The issue here is that Mr. Miller was in a combat zone in which Israel was responding to the killing of their civilians by suicide bombers. In the bombers minds, in Palestinian terrorists minds, a state of war existed as did the goal of eliminating Israel and all Jews. Israel responds to this the way any country would to terrorist activities. Mr. Miller’s error was to step in the way of this response and for a seasoned journalist he should have known better.

[Chuck Unsworth]

Evin Daly:

I recognise that you feel that an M16 round is a small calibre item, and I'd acknowledge that we ought to reflect on muzzle velocities. I understand that some reports indicate a larger calibre weapon than an M16 was used, but I'm happy to take your personal assurances as to the weapon used to kill this non-combatant journalist.

Your point about the Bedouin unit is reasonable, were it not for the fact that apparently the journalists did not solely 'call out' to the unit but made other attempts to demonstrate a peaceful intent, although in the event that was apparently not clear to the person(s) who ordered and carried out the shooting. We are assuming here that no-one in that unit understood what was being shouted, of course, although you may have evidence for this proposition.

You indicate that this was a 'combat zone'. Are there 'combat zones' which are nothing to do with a State of War, then? How does one define such zones?

I'm interested in your knowledge of what might be in other people's minds. Is it the case that the IDF and its associated units discern all civilians in its area of operations (inside and outside of Israeli sovereign territory) as being hostile? If so how does it ensure that those civilians are warned and aware of its lethal intent? For that matter, what threat (perceived or actual) did these people present to this heavily armed military unit?

I'd agree that a seasoned journalist may/should have handled things differently, but equally the IDF has developed an unfortunate reputation over the years for shooting indiscriminately at civilian targets and on territory which is outside of its borders. This is not the first time such an incident has happened. Probably it will not be the last.

The question for Israel then comes to this - how many enemies does it wish to have? Or does it seriously believe that it will be able to militarily defeat all opposition, all of its perceived enemies? Thus far it has been unable to do so, well, what are its chances?

[Evin Daly]

Chuck Unsworth - I am responding to your posting by paragraph.

James Miller did indeed make other attempts to, as you say, demonstrate a peaceful intent. He and his group waved a white flog and a small flashlight and approached the military vehicle huddled together with a camera on one of their shoulders. Having spent some of my life in Ireland I can tell you that 10 years ago, approaching a British military vehicle in Northern Ireland in the dark in such a manner would have got you shot. Soldiers err on the side of caution – to make sure that they avoid being killed. Their job is to protect, not get killed.

A state of war exists as declared by the Arabs against Israel. As such the term combat zone is used to describe any area where combat has the potential to occur.

Anyone approaching a military vehicle should display an element of caution. Anyone approaching a military vehicle in the dead of night, from an area from which previous hostilities have been launched, is playing a deadly game. The IDF, to the best of my knowledge, treats all civilians with respect except those from whom they can expect hostile intent. My personal experience with the IDF has been favorable. Soldiers are not in the public relations business. The fact that a soldier has a weapon is indication enough that common sense should be used when approaching them. I have no idea how heavily armed this military unit was. I believe that that they were a patrolling unit armed with rifles and side arms. James Miller should have approached the vehicle during daylight hours or crossed into Israel at a check point like everyone else. Perhaps he should have called the IDF during the day and made arrangements to be picked up and driven across. The fact is he didn’t do any of these things – what happened has been gone over thoroughly above.

As I have mentioned, soldiers in general, have a job to do in providing protection for the people they serve and for themselves. The British army in Northern Ireland, had a reputation for shooting indiscriminately during their tenure there – killing 13 unarmed civilians in daylight in one afternoon is one example. Soldiers have to make decisions based on the information they have available in the split second that they decide if the person(s) approaching are friend or foe. Based on the video I saw, I believe that James Miller did the wrong thing. He made mistakes that forced the militaries hand.

Israel will respond, I suspect, as long as it is attacked. Israel’s enemy’s are not perceived, they’re very real and fully declared as such. The reason that the Arab and Islamic countries want rid of Israel is because Israel’s inhabitants are Jewish. Israel has no real natural resources, not a drop of oil. It’s economic successes have been hard won. It is the only democracy in the Middle East that allows women to vote or drive a car. It has successfully beaten off invasions by it’s neighbors and has even given back land won in the defense of Israel in an attempt to gain peace. 20% of the Israeli population are Arabs all of whom can vote and some of whom serve in the IDF.