Attack dogs: how Europe supplies Israel with brutal canine weapons

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Concerns Rise Over Use of Military Dogs in Israeli Operations Against Palestinians"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 5.3
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

In February 2023, Amani Hashash experienced a traumatic incident when Israeli soldiers conducted a military raid on her home in the Balata refugee camp, West Bank. During the raid, a large, unmuzzled dog attacked her three-year-old son, Ibrahim, who was asleep in her lap. Despite her desperate pleas for the soldiers to intervene, the dog mauled Ibrahim, leaving him unconscious and in critical condition with extensive injuries that required 42 stitches. Over a year later, Ibrahim continues to suffer from nightmares and the psychological scars of the attack, which Hashash believes was intended to instill fear in her family. The attack has raised significant concerns regarding the use of military dogs by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF), particularly as rights organizations report an increase in such incidents since the outbreak of conflict in Gaza, with multiple documented cases of civilians, including children, being attacked by dogs trained for military purposes.

Investigations reveal that many of the attack dogs, often Belgian Malinois, are sourced from Europe, with 99% of the approximately 70 military dogs acquired each year coming from European companies. Human rights groups have condemned the practice, citing it as a violation of international law and a form of cruelty against both the animals and the victims. The military's justification for using these animals is framed around anti-terrorism efforts, yet reports indicate that the dogs are employed in ways that terrorize Palestinian civilians. Experts and organizations like Amnesty International advocate for stricter regulations on the export of military dogs, emphasizing the moral implications of weaponizing animals in conflict and calling for accountability from European nations that supply these dogs. The IDF maintains that its use of dogs complies with operational ethics and international law, but the ongoing reports of civilian attacks raise serious questions about the reality of their deployment and the impact on affected families.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The incident reported in the article highlights a disturbing event involving the Israeli military and their use of trained attack dogs during raids in Palestinian territories. This story not only serves to illustrate the traumatic experience of a family impacted by such violence but also reflects broader themes of military tactics and human rights violations.

Purpose of the Article

The article aims to shed light on the brutal tactics employed by the Israeli military in their operations against Palestinian civilians. By narrating a specific incident involving a child being attacked by a dog, the piece seeks to evoke sympathy and outrage, emphasizing the psychological and physical harm inflicted on innocent civilians. It highlights the perceived inhumanity and brutality of military actions, aiming to draw attention to the ongoing conflict and its humanitarian implications.

Perception Creation

This narrative is crafted to generate a strong emotional response from readers, particularly those sympathetic to Palestinian rights. The vivid description of the child’s injuries and the mother's distress is likely intended to mobilize public opinion against the Israeli military's tactics. The article plays on themes of vulnerability and victimization, which resonate deeply with audiences who oppose violence and advocate for human rights.

Potential Omissions

While the article focuses on a specific incident, it may downplay the broader context of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, including the reasons behind military operations or the complexities of security measures. By emphasizing this singular, harrowing experience, the article could be seen as selectively presenting information that supports a particular narrative while obscuring other relevant factors.

Manipulation Assessment

The emotional and graphic nature of the account raises the question of manipulation. The language used—emphasizing terror, injury, and helplessness—suggests an intent to provoke outrage. This approach can be seen as a form of emotional manipulation, aiming to elicit a specific response from the audience. The article’s framing may lead readers to view the Israeli military's actions as inherently brutal, potentially oversimplifying a complex situation.

Credibility of the Reporting

While the article recounts a specific and troubling event, credibility hinges on the sourcing of information and the context provided. If corroborated by reliable sources and evidence, the report could be considered credible. However, without a wider spectrum of perspectives from the conflict, readers may find it challenging to ascertain the full truth behind the reported incident.

Impact on Society and Politics

The publication of such reports can influence public opinion, potentially leading to increased calls for accountability regarding military actions and human rights abuses. It may mobilize support for Palestinian advocacy groups and affect diplomatic relations, particularly as global awareness of the situation grows. This can also have implications for political leaders, who may face pressure to respond to public sentiment.

Audience Reception

This type of reporting is likely to resonate with human rights advocates, activists, and those critical of military interventions. It appeals to communities focused on humanitarian issues and social justice, potentially galvanizing support for movements that seek to address the plight of Palestinians.

Market Implications

While this article may not directly impact stock markets, it could influence sectors such as defense contractors or companies involved in military technology, especially if public sentiment translates into policy changes or calls for sanctions against Israel.

Geopolitical Considerations

The narrative ties into ongoing conversations about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the international community's response to it. As global awareness increases, such reports could affect diplomatic dynamics and the positioning of various states regarding the conflict.

In terms of artificial intelligence involvement, it is plausible that AI tools could assist in generating content or analyzing data related to public sentiment. However, the emotional depth and specificity of the reporting suggest a human touch in crafting the narrative.

Overall, the article presents a compelling, albeit potentially one-sided, view of a traumatic incident within a larger conflict. The focus on emotional storytelling raises questions about its broader implications and the complexities of the situation being reported.

Unanalyzed Article Content

It was only seconds after soldiers entered the Hashash family’s home in the Balata refugee camp in the West Bank that the dog attack began. As military raids rolled out across her neighbourhood one morning in February 2023, Amani Hashash says she took her four children into a bedroom. When she heard Israeli military coming into their home she called out that they were inside and posed no threat.

Moments later the bedroom door was opened and a large, unmuzzled dog launched itself into the room, plunging its teeth into her three-year-old son, Ibrahim, who was asleep in her lap.

Hashash fought to get the animal away as it mauled and shook her screaming son and started to drag him out of the room. “But it was such a big dog, not like any other dog I have seen,” she says. “It kept biting and pulling my son away from me. I screamed and hit it, but it kept pulling at him.”

She says she begged the soldiers to call off the attack but they couldn’t control the animal. By the time they managed to drag the dog away, Ibrahim was unconscious and bleeding heavily. The soldiers injected Ibrahim with sedatives and called an ambulance, which took him to hospital where he was rushed into surgery.

“When I saw his wounds I was distraught because they were so extensive,” says Hashash. “The doctors said his condition was critical. One wound was six and a half centimetres, another was four centimetres. There were so many wounds the dog had caused, it hadn’t left any of Ibrahim’s back untouched.”

Ibrahim needed 42 stitches for internal and external injuries and 21 injections to treat an infection contracted from the bites. Photoraphs of the injuries sustained in the attack seen by the Guardian and ARIJ show extensive wounding and bite marks.

More than a year later, Hashash says Ibrahim still has nightmares and his wounds have not healed. “They did this to terrorise us,” she says. Hashash says one of the Israeli commanders had told herthat the dog had been trained to attack the first person it saw. “He’s just a child,” she says. “He hasn’t done anything wrong.”

The IDF refused to comment on the case.

The dog that attacked Ibrahim is likely to have been a Belgian malinois, which Hashash identified from pictures of different dogs used by the military. Originally used to herd sheep, the breed is now widely used by Oketz, Israel’s specialist canine unit, feted in Israel and widely feared across thePalestinian territories.

According to an investigation by Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism (ARIJ) and the Guardian, it is also likely that the animal used was sent to Israel fromEurope, where a steady flow of dogs are traded from specialist trainers into the ranks of the Israeli military.

Last year, commanders in the Oketz unittold US urban warfare researcher John Spencer, who has embedded with the IDF on multiple operations, that 99% of the approximately 70 military dogs it buys every year were sourced from companies in Europe, a figure that the IDF did not dispute when asked to confirm.

Oketz insists it only deploys attack dogs in anti-terrorism operations, human rights organisations insideGazaand the West Bank say the use of the animals to attack, terrorise and humiliate Palestinian civilians has increased since the beginning of the war in Gaza, leading to multiple injuries and some fatalities.

One organisation, Euro Med Human Rights Monitor, says it has documented 146 cases of attack dogs being usedagainst civilians by the Israeli army since October 2023.

In one incident, in July 2024,an IDF dog attacked Muhammed Bhar, a young man with Down’s syndrome and autism, at his home in Shejaiya in Gaza City. In the aftermath of the attack, IDF soldiers forced his family out of their home, leaving Bhar to die alone of his wounds.

A video publishedin June 2024 appeared to show an Israeli military dog attacking Dawlat Al Tanani, a 68-year-old woman, in her home in the Jabalia refugee camp in Gaza, leaving her with injuries.

Animal welfare experts have criticised the weaponising of dogs by training them to attack civilians, calling the process “a moral violation”. Dogs reportedly undergo extensive training with Oketz after they arrive in Israel before being deployed in operations.

Charities have also raised concern about the high numbers of dogs dying in military operations. InJanuary, Israeli military reports said the Oketz unit had lost 42 military dogs, since the beginning of the war on Gaza, although online references to the number of Oketz dogs who have died have recently been removed.

“It is unethical to turn dogs, which are naturally social creatures, into instruments of aggression to be used in wars that are solely caused by humans,” says animal behaviour expert Dr Jonathan Balcombe. “Dogs don’t choose to fight, they are made victims in conflicts they don’t understand.”

Tahrir Husni was pregnant when she says Israeli soldiers stormed her house in Khan Younis in 2023 and set a dog on her, which then mauled her in an attack that lasted more than 10 minutes.

“It was so big, it was impossible to push or kick it away,” she says. “When it was attacking me, I lost all feeling in my leg. When it was over, I sat down on the couch and then I could see my blood and flesh all over the floor.”

Husni says hours later she miscarried. “I lost the child I’d waited six years for,” she says. “My leg is so disfigured I can’t bear to look at it. I can’t walk, and the pain is always there.”

Sign up toGlobal Dispatch

Get a different world view with a roundup of the best news, features and pictures, curated by our global development team

after newsletter promotion

In the West Bank, the Palestinian human rights organisation Al-Haq has also documented 18 cases of military dog attacks on civilians since October 2023, including children.

The UN says that the use of military dogs against Palestinian prisoners in Israeli detention throughout the warconstitutes a violation of international human rights law. According to testimonies from former detaineesreported by Physicians for Human Rights, dogs have been ordered to bite and maul prisoners and urinated and defecated on them.

Amnesty International says that the use of dogsagainst civilians needs to be urgently recognised in legal instruments and laws regulating the use and sale of conventional weapons.

“They should be part of international treaties regulating the use [of weapons], to stop them being used in violation of human rights,” says Patrick Wilcken, an expert on military and security issues at Amnesty.

“There is a clear risk that these exports help to promote practices that violate international and human rights law, so companies and states should seriously consider whether their activities are linked to unlawful acts committed by Israel.”

Richard Falk, a former UN special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, says European companies should stop exporting military dogs to Israel, adding that continuing to do so makes them complicit in human rights abuses.

“From the perspective of general international law, I have no doubt whatsoever that companies exporting these dogs are complicit, because they know exactly how they are used,” says Falk.

The investigation found that a large number of military and police dogs have been sent to Israel by companies in Germany and the Netherlands since the war in Gaza began.

The Animal and Plant Health Agency has confirmed 294 dogs were exported from the UK to Israel as pets between February 2022 and December 2024, but says it does not track their breed or purpose. Other countries such as Belgium and the Czech Republic that export dogs to Israel also say they do not have details on what breeds were sent or whether they were trained as military animals.

Under current EU regulations, such dogs are not classified as strategic or controlled dual-use items or weapons and therefore do not require export licences, and governments do not have to keep records of numbers exported and for what purposes.

According todocuments obtainedby the Dutch Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations thinktank (Somo) , the Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority (NVWA) issued 110 veterinary certificates between October 2023 and February 2025. These are the documents required for the export of dogs to Israel by Dutch companies specialising in military and police canines.

Of these certificates 100 were granted to the company Four Winds K9, a police dog training centre in the Dutch village of Geffen. Four Winds K9 and the NVWA declined to comment on the export of trained dogs to Israel.

The German company Diensthunde.euconfirmed it exported Belgian malinois and German shepherd dogs to Israel between 2020 and 2024. The company denies they were used for “protection or offensive purposes”, saying they were for explosives and narcotics detection only, and that the company excluded any training or sale of dogs for protection or offensive purposes in full compliance with German law.

ARIJ approached the European Commission for information on EU exports of military dogs to Israel but it says it does not have this information.

In a statement, the Israeli military said, “The IDF, including the Oketz unit, employs all necessary operational tools required to address threats in the field – this is conducted in accordance with binding orders, operational ethics, and international law. The IDF does not use dogs for punitive purposes or to harm civilians. All use of dogs is based solely on clear operational necessity, under close supervision, and following comprehensive training for both fighters and dogs alike.”

The IDF said that it places “great importance on the wellbeing of the operational dogs – who are an integral part of the combat apparatus – and the unit continues to operate with constant efforts to minimise harm to all components of the force, including its dogs.”Additional reporting byAziza Nofal, Zarifa Hassan and Tom Levitt

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian