The Israeli/Palestinian Conflict: The Evidence

  evidence-based reports | authored and compiled by
constantine kaniklidis
scholars for peace in the middle east (spme) | director, progressive voices for peace in the middle east (pvpme)


false authorities: AI


►The Facts

AI celebrates 50th anniversary this (2011) year. No cause for celebration:

(1) AI charged Israel of war crimes for attacks against Lebanese civilian infrastructure, but under international humanitarian law (IHL) regulating the conduct of armed hostilities, collectively known as the law of armed conflict/LOAC (1949 Geneva Conventions), disabling enemy electrical and communication networks, transportation and resupply routes and civilian infrastructure supporting enemy military capability is legitimate (done by Lebanon and other Arab countries), otherwise terrorists would be encouraged to hide from retaliation within civilians infrastructures.

(2) Yet AI wholly ignored Hezbollah's own direct targeting of Israeli civilians (AI continues to use it's own definition of "disproportionate" force, rejected by IHL and international law experts), finally acknowledged under international approbation of their bias, and "posthumously" (the war was over) charged Hezbollah with war crimes via civilian targeting.

(3) Lacking significant professional researchers, AI relies on "eyewitness" reports, in violation of international law canons of evidentiary verifiability and independent corroboration (its few "researchers" are or were employees of the PLO front group Al-Haq).

(4) AI Secretary-General Claudio Cordone supported Taliban-supporter Moazzam Begg and his advocacy of "defensive jihad" whereby Islamists reserve the right to determine when Islam is 'under siege,' upon which violent jihad is justified, yet AI claims that America's and Israel's own self-defense when comparably 'under siege' is indefensible.

(5) In the AI sponsored anti-Israel "Complicity in Oppression” conference, AI promoted panel member Abdel Bari Atwan who explicitly favors the Iranian nuclear annihilation of Israel.

(6) AI indoctrinated elementary school children at El Castell School (Valencia) in scurrilous anti-Semitic letter writing (acknowledged by the school principle), the school belonging to the AI School Network, engaged in anti-Israel political proselytism in institutions throughout Spain.

(7) AI knowingly provided false data in the claim that Gaza has “an infant mortality rate among the highest in the world", recanted by the CBC Canadian network who reported it, and disproven by Global Research in International Affairs Center / GLORIA (the infant mortality rate is lower than Turkey, Egypt, Brazil, Iran and even Romania).

(8) AI accused Israel in Gaza of unlawfully killing unarmed civilians and non-combatant "police personnel", by the perverse relabeling of Hamas terrorist operatives as "civilian" police officers, yet Hamas-supported websites acknowledged openly that they were members of Hamas' Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam brigade, and despite binding obligations for Israel to combat terrorism under international law (Security Council Resolution 1373).

(9) AI issued the horrific charge that Israel bore sole responsibility for Palestinian rapes and "honor killings", conducted by Palestinians themselves (a charge so outrageous that neutralist Salman Rushdie accused Amnesty of “moral bankruptcy").

(10) AI ignores independently verified human rights violations by Saudi Arabia, Libya, Syria, Egypt, and Gaza, demonstrating that ideology rather than universal human rights defines AI’s imbalanced resource focus.

►The Lessons
With an ideological anti-Israel agenda, AI has lost credibility and no longer upholds the tenets of universality in human rights and non-prejudicial reporting.


evidence-based reports: our reporting


Imperative in this context is a new equity in geopolitics that eschews disproportionate approbation of one actor to the exclusion of all others while also acknowledging the competitive narratives of national ambition and identity in the Middle East, with the need for new engagement and negotiation. 

This misplaced and uncritical reliance on ideological and prejudicial sources has evolved to be a formidable obstacle to peace in the Middle East. It has led to what others have termed a new “soft powerlessness” for Israel whose legitimacy has been successively eroded and who stands accused and convicted in the international arena. And it helps account for the current moribund state of peace negotiation. We therefore realized that what is needed to overcome these barriers to peace is effective confrontation through the exposure and refutation of lawfare as practiced by anti-peace NGOs and obstructionist initiatives like BDS. This will in turn require a new rational and equitable discourse in addressing the clash of competitive nationalist aspirations for self-determination in the same land, in order to achieve a fair and durable peace in the Middle East for Israel, and for the Palestinians.

To that end, I as Director of Progressive Voices for Peace in the Middle East (PVPME) and a member of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East (SPME), have authored and compiled a series of evidence-based reports (EBRs) on the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict which are founded on an objective critical systemic review of the core issues and a critical appraisal of the relevant arguments, sustained by scrupulous attention to and respect for principles of international and human rights law.  This demands (1) systematic review of all credible sources on an issue, (2) critical appraisal of all sources extracted for factual basis, (3) cross-confirmation of accuracy wherever viable, and (4) use of the highest caliber of sources available, with preference to peer-reviewed literature.

These evidence-based reports hone to the principles of the evidence-based paradigm and methodology as it has evolved from initial domain of application (medicine) into a broad spectrum of evidence-based practice and research
, in the form of evidence-based sociology, evidence-based education and evidence-based teaching, evidence-based psychology, evidence-based crime policy / policing, evidence-based  decision making /policy, evidence-based social work, among many others. We  also commit to industry-standards promulgated by the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) in their SPJ Code of Ethics, the guidelines for online  journalism issued by Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism in their What are the ethics of online journalism?, and the elements of PIRC (Public-Interest Responsible Communication), especially the Verification Of The Reliability Of Sources, the Independent Verification of Factual Assertions, the Transparency with Sources, and Assessing Objectivity. (For a good summary, see Elements of "Responsible" Journalism of the Canadian Journalism Project, a project of The Canadian Journalism Foundation in collaboration with leading Canadian journalism schools and organizations). 


progressive voices for peace (PVPME)

Progressive Voices for Peace in the Middle East (PVPME), a Brooklyn based initiative, grew out of the recognition that these next-generation obstacles to peace require effective confrontation through counter-lawfare initiatives and the need for a new rational and equitable discourse in addressing the clash of competitive nationalist aspirations for self-determination in the same land.

Director, Constantine Kaniklidis



Support PVPME










Constantine Kaniklidis | Progressive Voices for Peace in the Middle East | 2016.  All rights reserved.