‘Hannibal Directive’: Did Israel kill its own?

In the days that followed the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, Hamas was blamed for the killing of approximately 1400 Israelis. Many of these deaths apparently occurred at Kibbutz Beeri.

Israel has used this in part to “justify” its ongoing military attack of Gaza, which (time of writing) has claimed the lives of nearly 7000 Palestinians, 2665 of whom are children.

An eye-opening article, however, published by Mondoweiss has thrown into question how responsible Hamas is for the Israeli deaths. Authored by someone who decided to remain anonymous to avoid reprisal, the piece specifically points to how it was not Hamas necessarily behind them.

Instead, it was Israeli forces themselves.

This is consistent with the experience of Jerusalem-based journalist, Quique Kierszenbaum, who visited the area of Kibbutz Beeri on October 11.

“Building after building has been destroyed, whether in the Hamas assault or in the fighting that followed [between Hamas and Israeli forces], nearby trees splintered and walls reduced to concrete rubble from where Israeli tanks blasted the Hamas fighters where they were hiding,” wrote Kierszenbaum in his recent piece for The Guardian.

“Floors collapsed on floors. Roof beams were tangled and exposed like rib cages.”

The possibility that Israeli forces killed the hostages is also consistent with the testimony of one of the Hamas hostages: Yasmin Porat.

“They [Israeli forces] eliminated everyone, including the hostages,” shared Porat during a radio interview transcribed by The Electronic Intifada. “Because there was very, very heavy crossfire.

“I was freed at approximately 5:30. The fighting apparently ended at 8:30. After insane crossfire, two tank shells were shot into the house. It’s a small kibbutz house, nothing big”.

The approach or procedure alluded to by Porat, whereby Israeli forces unleash lethal force that kills Israelis and non-Israelis alike, is known as the “Hannibal Directive”.

Technically, the directive refers to the killing of Israeli soldiers. However, given that those killed in the Kibbutz Beeri are a diverse group of Israelis – not all of whom are soldiers – such violence still recalls the directive and mimics it insofar as it targets Israelis who do not necessarily pose any threat whatsoever.

Further, as where the directive is enacted strictly against Israeli soldiers (among other non-Israeli victims such as Palestinian civilians), what ensued at Kibbutz Beeri may confirm that Israel is willing, as it were, to kill its own. It arguably would rather do this than to negotiate with Hamas to save the lives of Israeli hostages, in return for what Hamas is reasonably asking for such as Palestinian prisoners who’ve been imprisoned by Israel without trial or charge.

Dovetailing with this view is a troubling but important observation made by Jonathan Cook.

“The Hannibal directive [enacted at Kibbutz Beeri] was likely to have been applied as policy towards Israeli civilians captured by Hamas and held hostage in their own homes inside Israel,” writes Cook.

“In other words, the army appears to have preferred to kill both Israeli civilians and the Hamas militants holding them rather than try to negotiate a release”.

Pushing this point further, it means Israel is willing to murder civilians, whatever their ethnic or religious background, if it achieves state or militaristic ends. One might be tempted to call this “Machiavaellian” but that would be overstated.

As ruthless as Machiavellian philosophy is when it comes to warfare it doesn’t openly advocate for the killing of innocent civilians. In fact, as Niccolo Machiavelli himself – the Italian political thinker who pioneered the philosophy and conveys through much of his work – killing such civilians is not advisable. It can cause deep resentment among people who, in turn, turn against leaders who order or sanction the cruel act.

The Hannibal Directive is akin to cowardice. It requires needlessly sacrificing human life when dialogue or negotiation – non-violent and civil means – is still possible. In the case of Kibbutz Beeri, Israeli forces may very well have chosen to bypass that.

And if that is the case it amounts to a possible war crime that ought to be investigated, holding appropriate Israeli military and other personnel accountable.

It’s crucial to stress that, if the directive was in fact enacted, it not be ruled out that a massacre occurred as a result.

This concords with the testimony of one of Kibbutz Beeri residents, known as “Tuval”. Though the person was apparently not present when the killing of Israelis took place, their partner was.

Relating his testimony, Nir Hasson of Haaretz writes that: “According to him [Tuval], only … after the commanders in the field made difficult decisions — including shelling houses with all their occupants inside in order to eliminate the terrorists along with the hostages — did the IDF complete the takeover of the kibbutz. The price was terrible: at least 112 Beeri people were killed.

Others were kidnapped … 11 days after the massacre, the bodies of a mother and her son were discovered in one of the destroyed houses. It is believed that more bodies are still lying in the rubble.”

If enough concrete evidence surfaces to show that Israel employed the directive, Palestinians and Israelis alike can potentially come together and demand justice for loved ones they lost in the massacre.

In the process, Israel will be further exposed as a fraudulent “democracy”, woefully failing to recognise human life if doing so advances its impersonal interests.

Not only is this intolerable. It sadly undermines the possibility that diverse peoples will one day live peacefully together in historic Palestine.

Unlike the Hannibal Directive, that honours and recognises our shared humanity.