The Jenin Shooting: A Watershed Moment in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict 

In a stark incident captured on video during a November 2025 Israeli military raid in Jenin, two Palestinian men, later claimed as fighters by Palestinian Islamic Jihad, were shot dead by Israeli border police moments after they had surrendered by crawling from a building with their hands raised and shirts lifted to show they were unarmed; the event ignited international condemnation as an apparent summary execution and a potential war crime, with Israel’s far-right minister Itamar Ben-Gvir defending the killing by stating “terrorists must die,” while the Israeli military announced a review, highlighting a profound divergence in narratives and placing the event within a broader, troubling pattern of violence and a documented lack of accountability for such actions in the occupied West Bank.

The Jenin Shooting: A Watershed Moment in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict 

Introduction: A Disturbing Visual Record 

The grainy footage that emerged from Jenin on November 27, 2025, captures more than just another violent episode in the long-standing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It presents a stark visual narrative that has ignited international outrage and renewed debates about military conduct in occupied territories. The video shows two Palestinian men, Al-Muntasir Abdullah (26) and Youssef Asasa (37), emerging from a building with hands raised, shirts lifted to prove they were unarmed, following hours of Israeli military siege. What transpired next—their apparent surrender, followed by their deaths by Israeli gunfire—represents what the United Nations has termed an “apparent summary execution.” This incident transcends the typical reporting of violence in the region, offering rare documented evidence of a confrontation that lays bare the deepening humanitarian and legal crises in the West Bank at a time when international attention remains focused on the region. 

The power of this particular event lies in its visual documentation, which has forced a conversation that extends beyond the usual partisan divides. As the UN human rights office spokesperson Jeremy Laurence stated, “We’re appalled by the brazen killing by Israeli border police yesterday of two Palestinian men in Jenin in the occupied West Bank in yet another apparent summary execution” . The footage has created a evidentiary record that distinguishes this incident from countless others that occur without such clear documentation, presenting the international community with unambiguous footage that demands response and accountability. 

The Incident: A Minute-by-Minute Account 

The Surrender 

The events unfolded during a large-scale Israeli military operation in the northern West Bank city of Jenin, part of what Israel describes as ongoing “counterterrorism” activities . According to multiple sources, Israeli forces surrounded a building described as a storage facility or garage, where the two men had taken refuge. The surrender procedure reportedly lasted several hours, with Israeli forces using “engineering tools” on the structure—visible in videos as a mechanical digger breaching a garage-style door . 

The critical moments were captured on video from multiple angles. The footage shows: 

• The two men crawling out from under the damaged door on their hands and knees 

• Both men with hands raised in universal surrender posture 

• One man lifting his shirt to visibly demonstrate he carried no explosives or weapons 

• Israeli border guards surrounding the kneeling men 

• One officer, described as “bald-headed and bearded,” kicking the men while they knelt 

• The soldiers ordering the men back toward the damaged building 

• As the men crawled back toward the structure, multiple soldiers raising rifles and opening fire 

• The two men slumping to the ground, apparently lifeless 

The Immediate Aftermath 

Following the gunfire, the mechanical digger subsequently collapsed the roller door onto the bodies, after which soldiers cleared the scene and covered the men with blankets . The Israeli military acknowledged the shooting in a joint statement with Israeli police, stating that “following their exit, fire was directed toward the suspects” . The statement identified the men as “wanted individuals” who had “carried out terror activities, including hurling explosives and firing at security forces” and noted the incident was “under review” . 

Palestinian Islamic Jihad later claimed the two men as members of its armed wing, the al-Quds Brigades, identifying Asasa as a field commander and Abdullah as a fighter in its Jenin brigade . The Israeli lawyer representing the three border police personnel involved claimed his clients “genuinely believed their lives were in danger” and that “the shooting was conducted merely for the sake of neutralizing them and not with the intention to kill” . 

International Law and the Principle of Distinction 

The Legal Framework 

The Jenin shooting raises fundamental questions about compliance with international humanitarian law (IHL), particularly regarding the treatment of individuals who have surrendered. According to Professor Mara R. Revkin, an expert in armed conflict at Duke Law School, “The primary legal framework governing the conduct of armed forces in the conflict between Israel and Hamas is International Humanitarian Law (IHL), sometimes described as the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC), which seeks to regulate and limit the harmful consequences of war” . 

Under IHL, which includes the Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols, fundamental principles govern the treatment of combatants who surrender: 

• The principle of distinction: Requires parties to distinguish between combatants and civilians, permitting attacks only against military objectives  

• Prohibition of perfidy: Forbids feigning surrender or civilian status to gain military advantage 

• Protection of persons hors de combat: Combatants who have surrendered are entitled to protection from violence 

As Revkin explains, “The Geneva Conventions were designed for inter-state wars and some provisions may not fully bind non-state actors such as Hamas. However, customary international humanitarian law… does apply equally to states and non-state actors” . This distinction is crucial in understanding the legal obligations of both parties in the conflict. 

Application to the Jenin Case 

The central legal question revolves around the moment the two men surrendered. Video evidence appears to show they had clearly communicated their surrender through universal gestures—raised hands and displayed unarmed status. At this point, under IHL, they would typically be considered hors de combat (outside of combat) and entitled to protection from violence. 

The UN human rights office directly addressed this issue, stating the incident appeared to be a “summary execution” . Similarly, the Palestinian Authority’s Government Communication Centre described it as “an outright extrajudicial killing in blatant violation of international law” . Even in active conflict situations, the execution of unarmed prisoners is generally considered a war crime under international law . 

Table: International Humanitarian Law Principles Relevant to the Jenin Incident 

Divergent Narratives: The Political Response 

Israeli Official Reactions 

The response from Israeli officials reveals sharply divided perspectives within the Israeli government. On one side, Israel’s far-right National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir offered unqualified support for the officers involved, writing on social media: “I fully back the Border Police fighters and IDF soldiers who fired at wanted terrorists who came out of a building in Jenin. The fighters acted exactly as expected of them – terrorists must die!” . Ben-Gvir, who was convicted in 2007 of incitement to racism and supporting a terrorist organization, has long advocated for harsh measures against Palestinians . 

The contrasting institutional response came from the Israeli military and police, who announced they were opening an investigation into the deaths . A joint statement described a lengthy surrender procedure and noted the incident was “under review by the commanders on the ground and will be transferred to the relevant professional bodies” . This more measured response reflects the military establishment’s awareness of the potential international legal consequences and the damaging nature of the video evidence. 

Palestinian and International Reaction 

The Palestinian response has been one of unambiguous condemnation. The Palestinian Authority described the killings as “brutal field executions” and accused Israeli forces of committing a “war crime” . The PA’s ambassador to the United Kingdom, Husam Zomlot, called the incident “summary executions” and stated it was a “war crime and part of a pattern across the occupied territory” . 

The international community has expressed similar concerns. The UN human rights office spokesperson stated they were “appalled by the brazen killing” , while human rights organizations have been even more direct. Yuli Novak, executive director of B’Tselem, an Israeli human rights group, stated: “The execution documented today is the result of an accelerated process of dehumanisation of Palestinians and the complete abandonment of their lives by the Israeli regime” . She further noted that “In Israel, there is no mechanism that acts to stop the killing of Palestinians or is capable of prosecuting those responsible” . 

Historical Context: A Pattern of Unaccountability 

Precedent Cases 

The Jenin killings did not occur in isolation but rather fit into a documented pattern of similar incidents over many years. Human rights organizations point to numerous cases where Palestinian civilians and surrendering combatants have been killed under questionable circumstances with minimal accountability: 

• In 2017, Israeli soldier Elor Azaria was convicted of manslaughter for fatally shooting an already wounded Palestinian attacker, but served only nine months in prison in a case that “deeply divided the nation”  

• In 2018, Mohammed Habali, a mentally challenged man, was shot in the back of the head while walking away from Israeli soldiers in Tulkarem  

• In 2020, Eyad al-Halaq, a Palestinian with autism, was shot and killed by Israeli police while heading to his special needs school in East Jerusalem  

• In March 2024, two unarmed men in Gaza were killed despite surrender attempts, in an incident also caught on camera  

• In December 2023, three Israeli captives who had escaped in Gaza were shot and killed by Israeli soldiers while attempting to surrender, with one holding a white flag 

The Accountability Deficit 

A consistent theme across these incidents is the lack of meaningful accountability. According to the rights group Yesh Din, between 2018 and 2022 the Israeli army received 862 complaints about alleged offences by soldiers against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank . Of these: 

• Only 258 criminal probes were opened (about 30%) 

• Just 13 led to indictments, involving 29 soldiers 

• Only one case concerned a Palestinian killing 

• This represents roughly 1.5% of complaints resulting in prosecution 

For fatal cases, the rate was even lower: one indictment out of 219 deaths brought to the army’s attention, or about 0.4% . This statistical pattern suggests what Shai Parnes of B’Tselem describes as “total impunity” for violence against Palestinians . He argues that “the entire ‘investigating mechanisms’ in Israel are whitewashed… and their goal is to pretend like they’re investigating [while] actually [giving] the perpetrators total impunity” . 

The Broader Context: West Bank Escalation 

Rising Violence 

The Jenin shooting occurred against a backdrop of significantly escalated violence in the West Bank since the Hamas attack on southern Israel in October 2023. According to UN data, Israeli troops or settlers have killed more than 1,000 Palestinians in the West Bank since October 2023 . The UN Human Rights office verified that “since 7 October, 2023, and up until 27 November this year, Israeli forces and settlers have killed 1,030 Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem… Among these victims were 223 children” . 

This violence has been accompanied by increased military operations and settlement activity. The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) reported that as of September 2025, 186 Palestinians and 16 Israelis had been killed in conflict-related incidents in the West Bank since the start of 2025 . During this period, Israeli forces installed at least 27 new closures across the West Bank, including 18 road gates that “pose a serious risk of movement restrictions if closed – potentially further disrupting access to services, workplaces, and key road arteries” . 

Systemic Issues 

Beyond individual incidents of violence, human rights organizations point to structural problems that enable continued harm against Palestinians. The UN’s Committee on Torture recently noted its alarm about reports indicating a “de facto State policy of organized and widespread torture and ill-treatment [of Palestinians] during the reporting period, which had gravely intensified since 7 October 2023” . 

Aida Touma-Suleiman, a Palestinian member of the Israeli parliament, described the political climate: “Two weeks ago, on the same days that the UN was considering cases of torture against Israel, I tried introducing a private members bill criminalising torture… I was attacked viciously by a government minister who said I was trying to tie the hands of the state of Israel in dealing with ‘terrorists'” . This political environment makes accountability increasingly unlikely. 

Conclusion: Implications and the Path Forward 

The Jenin shooting represents more than just another tragic episode in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It serves as a microcosm of broader patterns of violence, dehumanization, and accountability failure. The clear video evidence challenges the international community to move beyond routine expressions of concern toward meaningful action. 

The incident highlights the gaping void between the theoretical protections of international humanitarian law and the reality on the ground. As Professor Revkin notes, “An overarching challenge is that IHL lacks an enforcement mechanism, and compliance depends largely on the extent to which individual militaries have internalized the rules through training and disciplinary procedures, and their sensitivity to criticism or public shaming by the international community including allies” . 

For the two men killed in Jenin—Al-Muntasir Abdullah and Youssef Asasa—the video evidence provides a posthumous testimony that distinguishes their case from countless others. But without meaningful accountability, their deaths risk becoming merely additional data points in a statistical pattern of violence. As B’Tselem’s Novak starkly observed, “It is therefore the duty of the international community to end Israel’s impunity and hold accountable those responsible for planning and carrying out its criminal policies against the Palestinian people” . 

The challenge moving forward is whether this graphic documentation of apparent summary execution will trigger more substantive international action, or whether it will simply join the archive of unresolved incidents in a conflict characterized by cyclical violence and persistent impunity.