On Tuesday, the White House acknowledged as much stating that Israel’s use of a U.S. supplied F-16 against a densely populated civilian area in Gaza was at odds with the pursuit of peace. "The President views this as a heavy-handed action that is not consistent with dedication to peace in the Middle East," noted White House Spokesperson Ari Fleischer.
Once more, the AECA provides for the transfer of U.S. weapons for "internal security" and "legitimate self-defense" reasons. Israel’s most recent use of a U.S. F-16 fighter and one ton bomb to carry out the extra judicial killing of an accused militant resulted in the deaths of at least 14 civilians in Gaza. This act certainly seems to exceed the bounds of the AECA. Interestingly, the White House was deliberate in distinguishing this incident from other military actions that may accidentally result in unintended civilian casualties. Speaking on behalf of the White House, Fleischer argued:
It is inaccurate to compare the two [Gaza and Afghanistan]. And the crucial difference here being that in this instance, in Gaza, this was a deliberate attack against a building in which civilians were known to be located. And that does separate it from the activities taken [in Afghanistan]…. What's always important is in pursuit of the military objectives, as the United States does in Afghanistan, to always exercise every restraint to minimize those losses of life. But in this case, what happened in Gaza was a knowing attack against a building in which innocents were found.
Once more, the AECA provides for the transfer of U.S. weapons for "internal security" and "legitimate self-defense" reasons. Israel’s most recent use of a U.S. F-16 fighter and one ton bomb to carry out the extra judicial killing of an accused militant resulted in the deaths of at least 14 civilians in Gaza. This act certainly seems to exceed the bounds of the AECA. Interestingly, the White House was deliberate in distinguishing this incident from other military actions that may accidentally result in unintended civilian casualties. Speaking on behalf of the White House, Fleischer argued:
It is inaccurate to compare the two [Gaza and Afghanistan]. And the crucial difference here being that in this instance, in Gaza, this was a deliberate attack against a building in which civilians were known to be located. And that does separate it from the activities taken [in Afghanistan]…. What's always important is in pursuit of the military objectives, as the United States does in Afghanistan, to always exercise every restraint to minimize those losses of life. But in this case, what happened in Gaza was a knowing attack against a building in which innocents were found.