We can learn a lot if we pay close attention to what one of the dead men said. Unfortunately, his words have been largely ignored, here and elsewhere. We can also learn a lot by looking at the details of what the UN reported, in the days prior to the incident. But those words have also been largely ignored.
I've read SusanHu's diary ("Kofi Annan: Don't You Dare Criticize Israel") and I notice that certain critical information is missing not just from the diary itself, but also, for the most part, from the 900 comments (last time I checked) that are attached. (A handful of the comments allude to the following issues, but for whatever reason those comments seem to have received little attention.)
DEAD CANADIAN SOLDIER WARNED THAT THIS WAS HAPPENING, SEVEN DAYS EARLIER
"Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener, a Canadian Forces soldier serving with the UN in South Lebanon ... [is] missing and presumed dead" (CTV). Hess-von Kruedener is one of the four UN observers who was killed Tuesday. A week before he was killed, he sent a highly detailed email to CTV. (This was mentioned in passing by True North, in a comment on SusanHu's diary, but I think not too many people noticed.)
This is what Hess-von Kruedener wrote a week before he was killed:
... we have on a daily basis had numerous occasions where our position has come under direct or indirect fire from both artillery and aerial bombing. The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters of our position and the closest 1000 lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters from our patrol base.
(Emphasis added.) In other words, "direct" fire on the UN position did not start 7 (or 8, or 9, as it is variously reported) hours before he died. It started at least seven days before he died.
Hess-von Kruedener also wrote this:
This has not been deliberate targeting, but has rather been due to tactical necessity.
Here's what that means, translated from military jargon into English: "the Israelis are shooting at us, but we understand that it's not because they're trying to hit us. We understand that it's because they're trying to hit Hezbollah positions that are very close to us."
Hess-von Kruedener specifically indicated that Hezbollah was positioned not just near his base, but actually "in" the UN base (presumably that means not actually inside the building, but rather on the property considered part of the UN base):
... [we have] a commanding view of the IDF positions [nearby] as well as, most of the Hezbollah static positions in and around our patrol Base.
(Emphasis added.) In other words, at least a week before he was killed, he could clearly observe fixed, established ("static") positions taken by Hezbollah not just near but also "in" the UN base.
It is utterly understandable and predictable that Hezbollah would do everything they could to establish positions as close as possible to UN positions. Hezbollah did so, and it was no secret they did so. (Hess-von Kruedener's email was published in full by CTV soon after they received it, which was a week before he died. Below I'll cite other indications that Hezbollah's positions were no secret.) The natural, predictable consequence of Hezbollah establishing positions very close to UN positions is that Israeli fire would come very close to UN positions. Above I quoted Hess-von Kruedener describing exactly how close: "within two meters of our position."
Also, this was not some secondary or fringe area:
It appears that the lion's share of fighting between the IDF and Hezbollah has taken place in our area.
That's because this is an area of high strategic importance:
Historically, the area of the El Khiam and Hasbani valleys to the north and the Houla valley to the south have been the main axis for invasion in to Lebanon and Palestinian Territories.
In other words, UN Patrol Base Khiam was located in a critical position in a central battlefield. Both parties (Hezbollah and Israel) have a large military incentive to maintain control of this position, because it's the main land gateway connecting Israel and Lebanon.
Needless to say, it was also on high ground, which is why Hess-von Kruedener was able to report that he had "a commanding view" of a large area. The high ground of this position is another reason why Hezbollah established positions as closely as they could to the UN bunker (there is obviously a military advantage to occupying the highest ground). Accordingly, it was an important military objective for Israel to attack the Hezbollah positions in this area. The Hezbollah positions highest on the hill were the ones that were the greatest danger to Israeli positions, and of course being positioned high on the hill meant being positioned as closely as possible to the UN structure.
THE UN WAS WELL-AWARE THAT HEZBOLLAH WAS USING IT AS A SHIELD
Hess-von Kruedener's email essentially reported this, a week ahead of time. And the UN admits being aware of this:
'We did repeatedly in recent days say (to Israel) that this was an exposed position, that Hezbollah militants were 500 metres away shielding themselves near UN workers and civilians,' UN humanitarian chief Jan Egeland said. 'That's why it is so inexplicable that what happened happened.'
(Emphasis added.) In my opinion it's far from "inexplicable." Also, the UN was aware that Hezbollah was not just "500 metres away." According to Hess-von Kruedener, a week earlier Hezbollah was in "static" positions "on" the UN base. Surely being "on" the base meant being a lot closer than "500 metres away." Also, Hess-von Kruedener explicitly stated his belief that Israeli shells landing "within 2 meters of [his] position" were being directed there "due to tactical necessity." In other words, he is explicitly suggesting that Hezbollah was positioned within 2 meters (!) of his position.
YES, OF COURSE ISRAEL KNEW THE UN WAS THERE
Many reports and comments are filled with statements such as this:
The UN released a picture of the position showing the letters "UN" emblazoned in large black letters on all sides, and officials said a light blue UN flag hung from a nearby flagpole was roughly 50ft high.
In my opinion, this is a highly misleading and propagandistic slant, because it tends to create the impression that Israel (or anyone) is claiming they didn't know the UN was there. But no one is making that claim. As I've explained, all parties knew, for at least a week, that the UN people in this building were sitting ducks in perhaps the most strategic spot in perhaps the most strategic battlefield in this war. This was an accident waiting to happen.
The text I cited tends to imply the following question: "how could it be that Israel didn't know the UN was there, or why would Israel be pretending that it didn't know the UN was there?" But those questions lead to confusion and misunderstanding, because no one is suggesting that this happened as a result of Israel not knowing (or pretending to not know) that the UN was there.
SOMEONE IS ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTION
That someone is PM Harper:
We want to find out why this United Nations post was attacked and also why it remained manned during what is now, more or less, a war during obvious danger to these individuals.
(Emphasis added.) Obviously there is some 20/20 hindsight involved, but it's now clear that it was a mistake to keep UN forces inside that building, in the middle of a major, central battlefield that was getting more and more intense, day after day. They were serving little or no purpose (Hess-von Kruedener explicitly said it was too dangerous to move around, and all they could do was observe). They didn't belong there anymore (their primary original mission, to disarm Hizbollah, had long since been understood to have failed). The UN made a mistake by keeping them there once the shooting started, and Israel made a mistake by not strongly urging the UN to remove them. Regarding the latter error, I think IDF might have wanted to show off how precise they are. And for 7 days, they were indeed very precise, and the UN people inside the building weren't hurt.
The UN claims they didn't remove them because Israel had granted assurances that UN people wouldn't be targeted. I think this suggests some degree of carelessness and overconfidence on both sides.
EVEN ISRAEL DOESN'T ALWAYS SHOOT STRAIGHT
Two Israeli helicopter pilots died in a crash a couple of days ago (link). It appears to have been a friendly-fire incident. There have been one or more other friendly-fire incidents where Israelis have been wounded (and I think killed).
When Israel spent a week firing at Hezbollah positions in the very close vicinity (within two meters!) of UN Patrol Base Khiam, everyone knew that this presented a danger to the UN people on that base (Israel knew that, the UN knew that, and Hezbollah knew that). In my opinion, Israel and the UN both overestimated the IDF's ability to keep doing what they were doing without ever making a mistake. After seven days of this, luck ran out and mistakes were made.
UNARMED UN OBSERVER SERIOUSLY WOUNDED BY HEZBOLLAH FIRE
(Please note: the following incident happened not at Khiam, but at another UN location.) It's a little hard to understand why this incident is getting essentially zero attention. It would seem appropriate to mention this in stories that talk about the 4 UN observers who died. From a UN press release, 7/24, (pdf):
One unarmed UN military observer, a member of the Observer Group Lebanon (OGL), was seriously wounded by small arms fire in the patrol base in the Marun Al Ras area yesterday afternoon. According to preliminary reports, the fire originated from the Hezbollah side during an exchange with the IDF. He was evacuated by the UN to the Israeli side, from where he was taken by an IDF ambulance helicopter to a hospital in Haifa. He was operated on, and his condition is now reported as stable.
Keep in mind that if someone is wounded by small arms fire, that more-or-less means, by definition, that the shooter is close enough to be able to see the person he's shooting. In other words, the circumstances suggest that the shooting was deliberate. Below there is information about another instance of Hezbollah shooting at the UN, where there seems to be no doubt that the shooting was deliberate.
MORE INDICATIONS THAT EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT THIS WAS AN ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN
(Please note: the following section describes a number of incidents. Most of these incidents happened not at Khiam, but rather at other UN locations. However, they are relevant because they show that the same pattern was repeated in many places: UN was getting caught in the crossfire.) The UN had reported a long series of prior incidents indicating danger. This includes over a hundred incidents "of firing close to UNIFIL positions," and this includes multiple instances of UN positions suffering direct hits.
From a UN press release, 7/17 (pdf):
There is also a growing concern about the safety of UN personnel deployed in the area. Yesterday, there were 17 incidents of firing close to UNIFIL positions, and two direct impacts inside UNIFIL positions. There was significant material damage, and one member of the Indian battalion with UNIFIL was seriously wounded by shrapnels from the tank fire from the Israeli side.
From a UN press release, 7/18 (pdf):
There were 15 incidents of firing close to UNIFIL positions, and a position close to the village of Marwahin suffered one direct hit from the Israeli side causing material damage, but no injuries.
From a UN press release, 7/19 (pdf):
There were seven incidents of firing close to UN positions. Impacts of Israeli aerial bombardment detonated around 20 land mines in the immediate vicinity of a UNIFIL position south west of the village of Yarun, and caused an outbreak of fire. The troops were able to extinguish the fire before it reached the position.
From a UN press release, 7/20 (pdf):
There were 31 incidents of firing close to UN positions during the past 24 hours, with three positions suffered direct hits from the Israeli side. Ten artillery shells impacted inside UN position of the Ghanaian battalion on the coast in Ras Naqoura, causing extensive damage. Four artillery shells impacted inside the patrol base of the Observer Group Lebanon in the Marun al Ras area, including three direct impacts on the building which caused extensive damage and cut electricity and communication connections. At the time of the shelling, there were 36 civilians inside the position, most of whom were women and children from the village of Marun Al Ras. There were no casualties. One artillery shell impacted inside the UNIFIL Headquarters compound in Naqoura, causing extensive damage and danger to the UNIFIL hospital where the doctors were operating at the time. Splinters of artillery shells also damaged the boundary wall of the Naqoura camp. Extensive shelling damage was reported in the Ghanaian battalion position south of Alma Ash Shab. Hezbollah firing was also reported from the immediate vicinity of the UN positions in Naqoura and Maroun Al Ras areas at the time of the incidents.
(Emphasis added.) This is another indication that Hezbollah was firing from positions very close to ("immediate vicinity") UN positions. The UN obviously knew this, and also understood that the Israelis were returning fire that had been directed at them ("at the time of the incidents").
From a UN press release, 7/21 (pdf):
There were seven incidents of firing close to UN positions during the past 24 hours, with three positions suffering direct hits from the Israeli side. Three artillery shells impacted on the building inside the patrol base of the Observer Group Lebanon (OGL) in the Marun Al Ras area, causing extensive damage to the buildings and vehicles, but with no casualties. Four artillery shells also hit this position a day earlier. There are 34 civilians from the village of Marun Al Ras inside the position. One artillery shell impacted inside the UNIFIL Headquarters compound in Naqoura yesterday evening, and one impacted inside a Ghanaian battalion position in the area of the village of Marwahin this morning. No casualties were reported, but there was material damage. UN equipment and vehicles were also damaged by splinters in the Ghanaian battalion position in the area of At Tiri in the central sector, and in the patrol base of the OGL in the Khiyam area in the eastern sector.
From a UN press release, 7/22 (pdf):
There were fifteen incidents of firing close to UN positions from the Israeli side during the past 24 hours, including a direct impact from an artillery shell inside a Ghanaian battalion position in the Marwahin area. No casualties were reported, but there was some material damage. Thirty two Lebanese civilians from the village of Marun Al Ras, who took shelter inside a patrol base of the Observer Group Lebanon (OGL) for the last three days, decided to leave the UN position at their own will this morning, and relocate north. In the last three days, this position suffered direct hits by seven artillery shells on two different occasions.
From a UN press release, 7/23 (pdf):
There were seven incidents of firing close to UN positions from the Israeli side during the past 24 hours, mainly due to aerial bombardment in the area of the patrol base of the Observer Group Lebanon in Khiam.
From a UN press release, 7/24 (pdf):
There were nine other incidents [in addition to the incident of a UN observer being seriously wounded by Hezbollah fire, an incident which I mentioned above] of firing close to UN positions during the past 24 hours, with two positions suffering direct hits from the Israeli side. Two aerial bombs impacted inside the Ghanaian battalion headquarters in the area of Tibnin, and three mortar rounds impacted inside an Indian battalion position in the Adaisseh area, causing extensive damage to the buildings and vehicles in both cases, but no casualties. Four aerial bombs impacted in the immediate vicinity of a Ghanaian position in the area of Brashit, and eleven tank rounds impacted in the immediate vicinity of a Ghanaian battalion position in the Rmaich area causing significant material damage.
From a UN press release, 7/25 (pdf):
Four members of the Ghanaian battalion with UNFIIL were lightly injured yesterday evening, when a tank round from the Israeli side impacted inside their position south of Rmaich. They were evacuated to the UNIFIL hospital in Naqoura and their condition is stable. There was also extensive material damage to the position. There were six other incidents of firing close to UN positions from the Israeli side during the past 24 hours. This morning, Hezbollah opened small arms fire at a UNIFIL convoy consisting of two armored personnel carriers (APC) on the road between Kunin and Bint Jubayl. There was some damage to the APCs, but no casualties, and the convoy was obliged to return to Kunin.
(Emphasis added.) The UN has reported receiving fire from Hezbollah on two occasions. On at least one of the two occasions (the shooting at the convoy), the fire seems to have been deliberate. These incidents have received essentially zero attention, as far as I can tell.
MORE ABOUT HEZBOLLAH ATTACKING THE UN
From a UN statement, 7/26:
She [a UN spokesperson] emphasized that UNIFIL has also come under direct attacks by small arms fire from Hezbollah forcing the mission to abort the escort of Lebanese civilians to safe areas and movement of troops on other humanitarian missions.
A LITTLE CONTEXT IS HELPFUL
My biggest gripe with SusanHu's diary is that nowhere does the diary even hint that Hezbollah had established fixed positions on (or even anywhere near) the UN base. One can read the diary and get the impression that Israel was firing at a UN position for no reason at all, because there were no Hezbollah fighters anywhere the vicinity. (This exact criticism also applies to many or most media reports about the incident.)
I would hope that SusanHu would update her diary to addess this important omission.