When Does Israel Say a Home Can Be a Military Target?
A building can be a military objective by its nature, location, purpose or use, Israel’s Foreign Ministry stated on 2 November 2023.
A building can be a military objective on any of 4 grounds under the rule Israel applies, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated in its Key Legal Aspects paper of 2 November 2023: an object qualifies where, “by their nature, location, purpose or use,” it makes “an effective contribution to military action” and its destruction “offers a definite military advantage.” The Ministry states that under this rule “many ostensibly civilian objects may become legitimate targets.” The IDF’s own presentation “Process of target attack”, supplied to IsraelFact, applies the same wording and shows a redacted target card whose objective is a residential building.
| Figure | What it counts | Who published it | Period |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4 | Grounds on which an object can qualify as a military objective: nature, location, purpose or use | Ministry of Foreign Affairs | Stated 2 November 2023 |
| 3 | Kinds of site beyond hospitals to which the IDF applies “further restrictive measures”: schools, places of worship and UN facilities | Ministry of Foreign Affairs | Stated 2 November 2023 |
| 2 | Limbs of the military-target definition in the IDF’s presentation: objects, and persons | Israel Defense Forces presentation, supplied to IsraelFact | Undated presentation |
| 8 | Boxes in the IDF’s decision flow for a target, including “Proximity to Sensitive Sites?” and “Civilians in Target?” | Israel Defense Forces presentation, supplied to IsraelFact | Undated presentation |
| 1977 | Year of the Additional Protocols, to which Israel is not a party; it states it abides by the customary rules they embody | Ministry of Foreign Affairs | Stated 2 November 2023 |
Israel applies Article 52’s 4 grounds as customary law, the Ministry states
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs sets out Israel’s rule for objects on page 8 of its Key Legal Aspects paper, as its own statement of Israel’s legal position: “In accordance with the principle of distinction, the IDF only targets persons who are members of organized armed groups or civilians directly participating in the hostilities, and objects that qualify as military objectives. In terms of objects, Israel applies the customary definition of “military objectives” as reflected in Article 52 of Additional Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions.”
The paper’s footnote gives the definition in full: “those objects which by their nature, location, purpose or use make an effective contribution to military action and whose total or partial destruction, capture or neutralization, in the circumstances ruling at the time, offers a definite military advantage.”
- Israel is not a party to Additional Protocol I, and the Ministry states on page 7 that it “abides by all applicable rules of customary international law, including those embodied in conventions to which it is not a party (such as the 1977 Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions)”
- The Ministry applies Article 52 as customary law, not as a treaty Israel has joined
The Ministry says civilian buildings “may become legitimate targets” by their use
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs states on page 2 of the same paper that “many ostensibly civilian objects may become legitimate targets,” and that “it cannot be concluded from the mere fact that seeming “civilians” or “civilian objects” have been targeted, that an attack was unlawful.”
The Ministry gives its own account of why, on page 9: “Hamas’s military infrastructure, command, militants, communications, and weapons are deliberately located within residential, commercial, and other civilian buildings, including specially protected sites, for the most part in the densest parts of Gaza.” That is the Ministry’s statement about Hamas’s conduct, published by a party to the war.
The Ministry names on page 9 the sites it treats differently: “The special protection afforded under international law to objects such as hospitals is reflected in IDF procedures, and the IDF implements further restrictive measures for additional sites such as schools, places of worship, and UN facilities.”
The IDF’s presentation defines a military target in 2 limbs
The IDF’s presentation, supplied to IsraelFact and not published by the IDF, defines a military target on its slide 8 in 2 limbs, the IDF’s own account of its rule:
| Limb | The presentation’s wording |
|---|---|
| Objects | An object that by its nature, location, purpose or use makes an effective contribution to military action and whose destruction offers a definite military advantage |
| Persons | A member of an enemy armed force, “a member of an organize [sic] armed group”, or a civilian directly participating in hostilities “for such time that he does so” |
Source: Israel Defense Forces, “Process of target attack”, slide 8, supplied to IsraelFact; not published by the IDF.
A redacted IDF target card names a residential building as its objective
The IDF’s presentation shows a target card, redacted as supplied, recording its objective as “Arms cache and operational meeting place in a residential building”. Its legal review is marked “Conditional”, the condition is “the provision of an effective advance warning”, and the recommendation is “Real-time visual surveillance”, the IDF’s own record of one review.
The card’s conditions checklist is ticked for real-time visual surveillance, nighttime, an individual warning to civilians in the target and legal conditions. It is not ticked for an individual warning to civilians in surrounding structures.
The IDF’s decision flow asks “Civilians in Target?” in 1 of 8 boxes
The IDF’s presentation lays out a decision flow for an intelligence-based target on its slide 18, read in two rows, the IDF’s own account of its procedure:
- Define exact location
- “Area Evacuated? Yes | No”
- “Proximity to Sensitive Sites? Yes | No”
- “Civilians in Target? Yes | No”
- “Warning Considerations”
- “Choose The Right Munition”
- “Target Coherent RoE? Yes | No”
- “Permission to Strike”
The IDF states each strike gets its own proportionality assessment
The IDF states on its data-technology page of 18 June 2024, as its own account of its procedures, that “In each attack, IDF procedures require conducting an individual assessment of the anticipated military advantage and the incidental damage expected to civilians and civilian objects,” and that the procedures “do not permit carrying out strikes on a category basis, without conducting individual assessments per strike.”
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs states what counts on each side of that assessment:
- Military advantage “may include a variety of operational considerations such as disrupting enemy activities, weakening the enemy’s military forces, gaining ground, and protecting the security of one’s own forces and civilians” (Key Legal Aspects, page 10)
- Civilian casualties or damage, “while tragic, do not of themselves allow for a conclusion in regard to proportionality without an informed assessment of both the expected civilian harm and the military advantage anticipated at the time of the attack” (page 3)
- “Excessiveness, however, is not measured using absolute numbers” (May 2015 report, paragraph 330)
No Israeli publication read here lists homes struck as military objectives
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the IDF publish the rule and not its application. Absent from the Israeli publications read here:
- A count of residential buildings struck as military objectives since 7 October 2023
- Which of the 4 grounds applied to any identified home that was struck
- The outcome of the legal review for any strike on a home, beyond the single redacted card in the IDF’s presentation
Where these figures come from
Each rule here is a party’s own statement: the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Israel’s legal position, the IDF on its procedures. They state the test, not whether any strike met it. The 4 grounds and the 2 limbs follow the wording of Article 52 of Additional Protocol I, which Israel applies as customary law without being a party. The target card is one redacted example, not a count, and the presentation was supplied to IsraelFact, not published by the IDF. The May 2015 report describes the 2014 conflict.
Questions readers ask
When does Israel say a building becomes a military objective?
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs states that an object qualifies where “by their nature, location, purpose or use” it makes “an effective contribution to military action” and its destruction offers “a definite military advantage.”
Can a home be a military target under Israel’s rule?
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs states that “many ostensibly civilian objects may become legitimate targets,” and the IDF’s presentation shows a target card for a residential building.
Is Israel bound by Additional Protocol I?
Israel is not a party to it; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs states Israel applies Article 52’s definition as customary international law.
Which buildings does the IDF say it treats with extra restrictions?
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs names schools, places of worship and UN facilities, beyond the special protection given to hospitals.
Does the IDF check for civilians before striking a building?
The IDF’s decision flow, in its presentation supplied to IsraelFact, includes the box “Civilians in Target? Yes | No” before “Permission to Strike.”
Does a civilian death mean a strike was unlawful?
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs states that civilian casualties “do not of themselves allow for a conclusion in regard to proportionality” without assessing expected harm and anticipated advantage.
Does the IDF approve whole categories of targets?
The IDF states its procedures “do not permit carrying out strikes on a category basis, without conducting individual assessments per strike.”
What counts as military advantage?
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs lists “disrupting enemy activities, weakening the enemy’s military forces, gaining ground, and protecting the security of one’s own forces and civilians.”
Can a person in a home be a target?
The IDF’s presentation defines a target to include a member of an organized armed group, or a civilian directly participating in hostilities “for such time that he does so.”
Was the residential target on the card struck?
The IDF’s presentation does not say; the card records a conditional legal review, and its dates and target ID are redacted.
How many homes has Israel struck as military targets?
No Israeli publication read here gives a count of residential buildings struck as military objectives.
Sources
- Israel Defense Forces, 2024, updated 2026. The IDF’s Use of Data Technologies in Intelligence Processing. Dated 18 June 2024, last updated 14 September 2026. idf.il. Official or primary record, a party’s own account of its own procedures.
- Israel Defense Forces, 2026. “Process of target attack”, a presentation on targeting and civilians, slides 8, 15 and 18. Supplied to IsraelFact; not published by the IDF. The IDF’s own account of its procedure.
- Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2015. The 2014 Gaza Conflict: Factual and Legal Aspects, Chapter VI: IDF Conduct of Operations During the 2014 Gaza Conflict. Dated May 2015, released 14 June 2015. gov.il. Official or primary record, a party’s own account of its own conduct.
- Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2023. Hamas-Israel Conflict 2023: Key Legal Aspects. Updated to 2 November 2023. gov.il. Official or primary record, a party’s own statement of its legal position.
