“Israel’s” war on Lebanon, launched on September 23, 2024, was presented as a “limited campaign against Hizbullah targets in South Lebanon.” “Israel” claimed the destruction of buildings was necessary because they housed fighters, weapons, or tunnels. But @amnesty’s investigation published today found that the reality was far from “limited or targeted.” Below is an attempt to summarise with some comments. 1/
As per the report, satellite imagery, videos, & witness testimony show that “Israeli” forces used bulldozers & manually laid explosives to flatten vast civilian areas, often while in full control of the land. “Israeli” soldiers were filmed blowing up homes, ripping apart roads & football pitches, & even celebrating the destruction. Residents described not only the loss of houses but also the uprooting of trees, the burning of Hussainiyas, & the dismantling of basic infrastructure like electricity poles. 2/
Amnesty’s analysis of 26 municipalities along the Lebanese border revealed widespread devastation: 10,803 structures were damaged or destroyed between late September 2024 & late January 2025. The worst-hit towns (Yarin, Dhayra & Bustan) lost more than 70% of their buildings. Seven other municipalities saw over half of their structures destroyed. By contrast, Rmeish & Alma El Shaab, both Christian villages, suffered minimal damage, as did Btaychiyeh & Ras El Naqoura, where UNIFIL bases are located. 3/
Comment: Under IHL, the systematic devastation of Shia-majority villages in South Lebanon raises serious concerns of unlawful targeting & collective punishment. “Israel’s” selective pattern indicates that destruction was not dictated by imperative military necessity but rather by the demographic & perceived political affiliation of the population. Such conduct amounts to a violation of the principles of distinction & proportionality, & may constitute collective punishment or persecution, both prosecutable as war crimes under the Geneva Conventions & the Rome Statute. 4/
IHL governs armed conflicts & sets strict rules for when & how property can be destroyed. @amnesty’s report summarises those as follows:
1. During attacks
- Armies must always distinguish between military targets & civilian objects.
- Only military objectives (things that directly help military action) can be attacked. Civilian property is protected.
- Even when targeting a military site, attacks must be proportionate (not causing excessive civilian damage) & precautionary (minimising harm).
- Indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks on civilian property are war crimes.
2. Outside attacks (when fighting has paused or an area is under control)
- Destroying an adversary’s property is forbidden unless there is imperative military necessity.
- “Imperative” means destruction is the only possible option to achieve a concrete military goal. Broad aims like deterrence, prevention, or creating buffer zones do not justify it.
- Each act of destruction must be assessed case by case; destroying whole villages or farmland without specific necessity is unlawful.
- Property destruction without imperative necessity can be prosecuted as a war crime under the Geneva Conventions & the Rome Statute.
3. Cultural property
- Religious sites, schools, monuments, & other cultural heritage enjoy special protection.
- Attacking or damaging them is prohibited unless they are directly used for military purposes & there is no alternative.
- Targeting cultural property without such necessity is also a war crime. 5/
1. During attacks
- Armies must always distinguish between military targets & civilian objects.
- Only military objectives (things that directly help military action) can be attacked. Civilian property is protected.
- Even when targeting a military site, attacks must be proportionate (not causing excessive civilian damage) & precautionary (minimising harm).
- Indiscriminate or disproportionate attacks on civilian property are war crimes.
2. Outside attacks (when fighting has paused or an area is under control)
- Destroying an adversary’s property is forbidden unless there is imperative military necessity.
- “Imperative” means destruction is the only possible option to achieve a concrete military goal. Broad aims like deterrence, prevention, or creating buffer zones do not justify it.
- Each act of destruction must be assessed case by case; destroying whole villages or farmland without specific necessity is unlawful.
- Property destruction without imperative necessity can be prosecuted as a war crime under the Geneva Conventions & the Rome Statute.
3. Cultural property
- Religious sites, schools, monuments, & other cultural heritage enjoy special protection.
- Attacking or damaging them is prohibited unless they are directly used for military purposes & there is no alternative.
- Targeting cultural property without such necessity is also a war crime. 5/
The destruction is clearly visible in satellite data. This map shows border municipalities shaded by percentage of destruction, with Shia-majority villages bearing the brunt. 6/
@amnesty This map overlays “Israeli” ground advances in yellow with the locations of damaged buildings in red, making the pattern of devastation unmistakable. 7/
The devastation extended to agriculture. A UNDP assessment in December 2024 found that 58% of agricultural assets in Nabatieh, 52% in Tyre, & 33% in Bint Jbeil had been destroyed. These regions are central to Lebanon’s food production, meaning the consequences will be long-term & severe. 8/
Kfar Kila, a Shia-majority village of around 10,000 people less than one kilometre from Occupied Palestine, suffered devastating destruction between September 26, 2024 & January 27, 2025. Over 1,300 structures (52% of buildings) & 133 acres of orchards were heavily damaged or destroyed, leaving a 300–500 metre stretch along the border almost completely razed. Destruction included homes, roads, olive groves, a football field, & even a cemetery. Much of this occurred after a ceasefire was in effect. 9/
“Israel” claimed the damage targeted Hizbullah infrastructure, including tunnels & weapons caches. However, satellite imagery & videos show that destruction far exceeded any military objectives, with soldiers celebrating & deliberately damaging civilian property, including non-military sites like a soccer field & parking area. The prior military use of some buildings does not justify demolishing entire areas. The village is now largely deserted. The destruction has caused long-term displacement & cultural loss, as civilian property & public spaces were obliterated. Under IHL, the destruction of property under the occupying party’s control outside active combat must meet the high standard of imperative military necessity, meaning there must be no other option to achieve a specific, definite military goal. @amnesty’s investigation found no evidence that the destruction of most civilian structures in Kfar Kila met this standard. Feasible alternatives, such as removing weapons, were often available. The scale & selective nature of the destruction thus suggests violations of IHL. The deliberate or reckless destruction of civilian property, including homes, orchards, & cultural sites, should be investigated as a potential war crime. 10/
Maroun El Ras, a Shia-majority village, saw 700 structures (67% of buildings) heavily damaged or destroyed between September 29, 2024 & January 30, 2025. Most destruction occurred in the first weeks of the “Israeli” ground invasion, with continued demolitions in November & December, & even after a ceasefire was in effect. Damage included homes, roads, a mosque, cemeteries, & a recreational area with playgrounds, a soccer field, & a replica of the Al Aqsa Mosque.
“Israel” claimed the destruction targeted Hizbullah infrastructure, including tunnels & weapons caches. However, evidence shows that much of the destruction went far beyond any military objective, including symbolic civilian sites like the Iranian Garden, which was destroyed as a “symbolic achievement” rather than a military necessity. In some cases, tunnels were neutralized with cement, showing alternatives existed that did not require widespread damage to surrounding civilian property.
Residents & satellite imagery confirm that much of the destruction occurred while the village was under “Israeli” control & outside active combat, meaning it could only be justified under the high IHL standard of imperative military necessity. Amnesty International found no evidence that the destruction of the majority of civilian structures met this standard. The scale, timing, & nature of the destruction in Maroun El Ras (including homes, cultural spaces, & public amenities) likely violated IHL & should be investigated as a potential war crime. 11/
“Israel” claimed the destruction targeted Hizbullah infrastructure, including tunnels & weapons caches. However, evidence shows that much of the destruction went far beyond any military objective, including symbolic civilian sites like the Iranian Garden, which was destroyed as a “symbolic achievement” rather than a military necessity. In some cases, tunnels were neutralized with cement, showing alternatives existed that did not require widespread damage to surrounding civilian property.
Residents & satellite imagery confirm that much of the destruction occurred while the village was under “Israeli” control & outside active combat, meaning it could only be justified under the high IHL standard of imperative military necessity. Amnesty International found no evidence that the destruction of the majority of civilian structures met this standard. The scale, timing, & nature of the destruction in Maroun El Ras (including homes, cultural spaces, & public amenities) likely violated IHL & should be investigated as a potential war crime. 11/
Odaisseh, a village along the border, experienced heavy destruction, with over 580 structures (52% of buildings) damaged or destroyed between September 26, 2024 & January 27, 2025. This included homes, a mosque, a cemetery, & orchards. Most of the destruction occurred in early October during the “Israeli” ground invasion, continued in November, & persisted into mid-January 2025, well after a ceasefire, while “Israel” maintained full control of the area.
“Israel” did not publicly link the destruction to ongoing combat in Odaisseh. Some demolitions, including the destruction of the Baalbaki family’s home & surrounding buildings, were carried out with manually laid explosives in a controlled manner, outside the context of an attack. Satellite imagery shows the military was close by, & there were no evident military objectives in the immediate vicinity of the demolished structures.
Under IHL, destroying civilian property outside active combat can only be justified if it meets the high standard of imperative military necessity, meaning there is no other way to achieve a specific military goal. Amnesty International found no evidence that the destruction in Odaisseh met this standard. “Israel” did not respond to requests for explanation.
The impact on residents was devastating. Homes, orchards, & communal spaces (built over hundreds of years) were destroyed, erasing both property & the social & historical fabric of the village. Amnesty International concludes that “Israel’s” actions in Odaisseh likely violated IHL & may constitute a war crime. 12/
“Israel” did not publicly link the destruction to ongoing combat in Odaisseh. Some demolitions, including the destruction of the Baalbaki family’s home & surrounding buildings, were carried out with manually laid explosives in a controlled manner, outside the context of an attack. Satellite imagery shows the military was close by, & there were no evident military objectives in the immediate vicinity of the demolished structures.
Under IHL, destroying civilian property outside active combat can only be justified if it meets the high standard of imperative military necessity, meaning there is no other way to achieve a specific military goal. Amnesty International found no evidence that the destruction in Odaisseh met this standard. “Israel” did not respond to requests for explanation.
The impact on residents was devastating. Homes, orchards, & communal spaces (built over hundreds of years) were destroyed, erasing both property & the social & historical fabric of the village. Amnesty International concludes that “Israel’s” actions in Odaisseh likely violated IHL & may constitute a war crime. 12/
Aita El Shaab, home to roughly 12,000 people, suffered severe destruction during “Israel’s” ground invasion. Over 1,000 structures (48% of the village) were heavily damaged or destroyed between September 26, 2024 & January 30, 2025, including homes, 4 mosques, schools, public squares, a football field, & agricultural land.
Satellite imagery shows that demolitions occurred in waves, beginning with roads & border access points in mid-October 2024, continuing through late January 2025, over six weeks after a ceasefire took effect. Lebanese media reported 17 demolitions via manually laid explosives or bulldozing during this period, 14 of them after the ceasefire.
While some locations were identified by “Israel” as Hizbullah military positions or weapons storage, satellite imagery & analysis show that most destruction occurred in areas far beyond these alleged military objectives. Videos & social media posts from “Israeli” soldiers depicted demolitions carried out with apparent ease, including raising the “Israeli” flag on a water tank & excavators destroying buildings while soldiers sang, demonstrating full control of the village.
Amnesty International found that many demolitions were outside the context of active combat, using controlled methods such as explosives & bulldozers.
Under IHL, destruction of civilian property is only lawful if there is imperative military necessity, which is a high standard requiring that destruction be the only way to achieve a definite military advantage (see tweet #5 of this thread). The evidence shows that “Israel’s” destruction in Aita El Shaab far exceeded any claimed military objectives, making the actions likely unlawful & potentially constituting a war crime.
The human impact was devastating. Residents, including the mayor Hajj Muhammad Srour, described returning to the village to find almost all homes, schools, mosques, & public spaces destroyed, leaving only a handful of families living in intact houses. “Israel” erased centuries of history, memories, livelihoods, & community infrastructure. 13/
Satellite imagery shows that demolitions occurred in waves, beginning with roads & border access points in mid-October 2024, continuing through late January 2025, over six weeks after a ceasefire took effect. Lebanese media reported 17 demolitions via manually laid explosives or bulldozing during this period, 14 of them after the ceasefire.
While some locations were identified by “Israel” as Hizbullah military positions or weapons storage, satellite imagery & analysis show that most destruction occurred in areas far beyond these alleged military objectives. Videos & social media posts from “Israeli” soldiers depicted demolitions carried out with apparent ease, including raising the “Israeli” flag on a water tank & excavators destroying buildings while soldiers sang, demonstrating full control of the village.
Amnesty International found that many demolitions were outside the context of active combat, using controlled methods such as explosives & bulldozers.
Under IHL, destruction of civilian property is only lawful if there is imperative military necessity, which is a high standard requiring that destruction be the only way to achieve a definite military advantage (see tweet #5 of this thread). The evidence shows that “Israel’s” destruction in Aita El Shaab far exceeded any claimed military objectives, making the actions likely unlawful & potentially constituting a war crime.
The human impact was devastating. Residents, including the mayor Hajj Muhammad Srour, described returning to the village to find almost all homes, schools, mosques, & public spaces destroyed, leaving only a handful of families living in intact houses. “Israel” erased centuries of history, memories, livelihoods, & community infrastructure. 13/
Satellite imagery shows that the village of Dhayra suffered heavy destruction between October 4, 2024 & January 30, 2025. A total of 264 buildings, or 71% of the municipality’s structures, were destroyed. Approximately 45 acres of agricultural land & native vegetation near the “Israeli” border were razed, along with an additional 15 acres of orchards further from the border. Lebanese media reported five demolitions carried out by manually laid explosives or bulldozing during this period, four of which occurred after the ceasefire in Lebanon took effect.
On October 13, videos published by an “Israeli” journalist showed the destruction of the Ahel El Quran mosque on the outskirts of Dhayra using manually laid explosives. Satellite imagery confirms that the mosque & nearby structures were destroyed between 11 & 13 October, indicating that the “Israeli” military had control of part of the municipality by that time. UNIFIL peacekeepers stationed nearby reported that “Israeli” soldiers fired at them on October 22.
“Israel” did not include Dhayra among the 205 villages for evacuation orders between October 1 & November 12, 2024. However, on November 29, two days after the ceasefire took effect, they listed Dhayra among the villages to which residents were not allowed to return. “Israeli” forces continued destroying parts of Dhayra into mid-January 2025.
Videos also show “Israeli” soldiers blowing up two additional mosques in Dhayra, including the Noble Messenger mosque, the village’s oldest mosque. Soldiers appear at ease & in control of the area while carrying out these demolitions, singing & laughing during the destruction. Satellite imagery confirms that two mosques & several other structures were destroyed between October 23 & 25.
The visual evidence analysed by Amnesty International shows that the destruction of homes, agricultural land, & mosques occurred outside the context of active combat & appears to lack any imperative military necessity. The demolition of mosques, a form of cultural property, without military justification, violates IHL & may constitute a war crime. 14/
On October 13, videos published by an “Israeli” journalist showed the destruction of the Ahel El Quran mosque on the outskirts of Dhayra using manually laid explosives. Satellite imagery confirms that the mosque & nearby structures were destroyed between 11 & 13 October, indicating that the “Israeli” military had control of part of the municipality by that time. UNIFIL peacekeepers stationed nearby reported that “Israeli” soldiers fired at them on October 22.
“Israel” did not include Dhayra among the 205 villages for evacuation orders between October 1 & November 12, 2024. However, on November 29, two days after the ceasefire took effect, they listed Dhayra among the villages to which residents were not allowed to return. “Israeli” forces continued destroying parts of Dhayra into mid-January 2025.
Videos also show “Israeli” soldiers blowing up two additional mosques in Dhayra, including the Noble Messenger mosque, the village’s oldest mosque. Soldiers appear at ease & in control of the area while carrying out these demolitions, singing & laughing during the destruction. Satellite imagery confirms that two mosques & several other structures were destroyed between October 23 & 25.
The visual evidence analysed by Amnesty International shows that the destruction of homes, agricultural land, & mosques occurred outside the context of active combat & appears to lack any imperative military necessity. The demolition of mosques, a form of cultural property, without military justification, violates IHL & may constitute a war crime. 14/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
