The Lawfare Podcast

Episode: Lessons for Civilian Harm Mitigation in Urban Warfare, from Gaza and Beyond

Date: February 13, 2026
Host: Lawfare Institute
Moderator: Scott R. Andersen, Senior Editor, Lawfare
Panelists:

• Claire Finkelstein (Professor, Founder/Director, Center for Ethics and the Rule of Law)
• Chris Maier (Former US Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations & Low Intensity Conflict)
• Larry Lewis (Principal Research Scientist, CNA, specialist in civilian harm mitigation)
• Jeffrey Korn (Professor, Texas Tech University School of Law; Army JAG, Lawfare Expert)

Overview

This episode explores the lessons of civilian harm mitigation in the context of urban warfare, focusing on the Gaza conflict and implications for future conflicts. Drawing on the expertise of legal, military, and policy professionals, the panel examines U.S. and Israeli experiences, operational realities, legal frameworks, challenges like human shielding, and evolving approaches to mitigating civilian casualties in highly complex environments.

Key Discussion Points and Insights

I. Defining the Problem: Civilian Harm in Modern Urban Warfare

• Complexity of Modern Battlefields

  • Civilians are increasingly present in and adjacent to combat zones.
  • The blurring of “battlefield” boundaries challenges traditional laws of armed conflict.

    “Where is the battlefield? There's no more actual limits to the battlefield.” — Claire Finkelstein [02:12]

• Operational and Strategic Drivers

  • Both moral imperatives and strategic considerations drive civilian harm mitigation.
  • Commanders are challenged by the need to balance military necessity with civilian protection.

II. U.S. Approach to Civilian Harm Mitigation

A. Genesis of Change: From Reckoning to Policy (03:31–13:10)

• Jeffrey Korn’s Insights:

  • Early focus on creating decision-making strategies for commanders regarding civilian risk.
  • Proposal: Develop dedicated staff experts to advise commanders—paralleling other specialties (e.g., fire support, intelligence).

    “If this is such an important interest...where is that expert [in civilian harm mitigation]?” — Jeffrey Korn [06:00]

  • Emphasis on feasible measures without compromising military advantage.

• Chris Maier’s Perspective:

  • The U.S. Civilian Harm Mitigation and Response Action Plan (CHMR-AP) originated after Afghanistan’s Kabul strike, amidst scrutiny of civilian casualties.
  • Civilian harm mitigation became a strategic priority due to evolving warfare—e.g., potential conflicts involving China.

    “No modern war had been fought in anybody's recollection that didn't have civilians at least adjacent, if not central to it.” — Chris Maier [10:00]

  • Congressional support for mitigation efforts persists despite departmental downsizing.

III. Case Study: Israeli Operations in Gaza

A. Operational Realities in Gaza (14:23–23:56)

• Jeffrey Korn’s On-the-Ground Observations:
  • Unique proximity of combat to civilian urban centers.
  • Vastly underestimated scale of Hamas’s military structure (35–40,000 fighters, 28–30 battalions, extensive tunnel networks).
  • Destruction likened to Berlin at WWII’s end, with every building affected.
  • Extensive booby-trapping and use of civilian disguise by combatants.
  • Critique:
    • Major concern is not the proportionality of Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) strikes per se, but the lack of speed and transparency in IDF investigations and discipline around errors.

      “You cannot fight a campaign of that scale, density and duration without having errors. And my biggest criticism of the IDF was the lack of speed and transparency in investigations and discipline.” — Jeffrey Korn [22:54]

  • Warns against drawing sweeping conclusions from aggregate destruction; calls for individualized analysis of incidents.

B. Challenges and Learning Processes

• Larry Lewis’s Guide for Assessment:

  • Advocates for data-driven lessons learned—never encountered a situation where more couldn’t be done to protect civilians.
  • Stresses the need to evaluate effectiveness of precautionary measures (e.g., warnings, leaflets), rather than assuming their efficacy.
  • Encourages longitudinal (“pattern-finding”) investigations, not just incident-focused probes.

    “There are lessons we learnt...finding patterns is how you creatively mitigate civilian harm and also remain effective.” — Larry Lewis [29:40]

  • Points out chronic failures in militaries around communication with humanitarian entities and use of incompatible signage/sensor systems (e.g., World Central Kitchen incident).

• IDF’s Institutional Learning (clarified by Korn):

  • Creation of a high-level investigative body post-Turkel Commission.
  • Establishment of a dedicated civilian harm mitigation cell (notably devised the Gaza grid-system for evacuations).
  • Nonetheless, transparency and communication shortfalls remain persistent.

IV. Special Challenges

A. Human Shielding (39:22–44:51)

• Unique Aspects in Gaza (Finkelstein):
  • Massive, layered tunnel systems under civilian infrastructure—a structural “built-in” human shielding scenario.
  • Ubiquitous commingling of military assets/weapons in civilian locations (homes, schools, hospitals).

    “It's a built-in human shielding situation that really hasn't been seen at this level until this conflict.” — Claire Finkelstein [41:05]

  • Deliberate disguises, perfidy (e.g., fake press vests, press serving as combatants/hostage-takers) contribute to confusion and risk for genuine civilians and journalists.

B. Humanitarian Assistance (44:51–48:12)

• Civilian Infrastructure and Aid Challenges (Maier):
  • Emphasis on early planning—knowing where civilians are and what infrastructures they rely on prior to conflict.
  • The necessity of integrating civilian needs into strategic military planning to maintain legitimacy and effectiveness.

    “You have to understand what [operating near civilians] means—not just don’t shoot the civilians, but all the associated livelihood functions that go along with that.” — Chris Maier [46:20]

  • External perceptions of indifference or neglect can inflict strategic damage on otherwise tactically successful operations.

V. Key Lessons & Forward-Looking Conclusions (48:12–End)

A. Leadership & Strategic Imperative

• Jeffrey Korn:
  • Leadership at every level is paramount—strategies for civilian risk mitigation are rooted in values, not just technical compliance.
  • Perception matters: failing to address civilian harm can nullify tactical victories and damage legitimacy.

    “Single most essential aspect of civilian risk mitigation is leadership...If you contribute to...a perception of indifference to human suffering, you can quickly win a campaign on the battlefield and lose the campaign strategically.” — Jeffrey Korn [49:17]

  • Quoted the former IDF Chief of Staff’s mother: “I want you to fight them and feed them.”

    The dual obligation: defeat the enemy while mitigating human suffering.

B. Necessity of Doctrine, Training, and Creativity

• Larry Lewis:
  • Creative solutions to challenging environments (like human shielding) have emerged in the field—but doctrine/training must catch up to support such adaptations.

    “We're going to face these dilemmas...we need to be experimenting and we need to be developing solutions so we can address this.” — Larry Lewis [54:21]

C. Keeping Pace with Technological Change

• Chris Maier:
  • As advanced capabilities (e.g., drone swarms, AI decision support) become war-fighting staples, civilian protection capability must keep up.
  • Exemplary conduct by U.S. and allies can set a standard, forcing adversaries to question their own ability to achieve similar precision/humanity.

    “Making sure the civilian protection and...understanding of the civilian environment keeps up...will continue to make us lethal and...an example for allies and partners.” — Chris Maier [55:38]

D. The Future of Law

• Claire Finkelstein:
  • Traditional principles (e.g., distinction between civilians and combatants) are severely challenged by new realities—advanced military tactics and cyber blur the lines further.
  • The Gaza conflict highlights these complexities; there is no longer a clear battleground nor clear separation of civilian/combatant.

    “Everything I learned about war was too simple. And I wonder whether or not things like the principle of distinction actually continues to hold in future warfare.” — Claire Finkelstein [56:40]

  • Urges continued learning, clarity, and consensus-building for future conflicts.

Memorable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

• “Where is the battlefield? There's no more actual limits to the battlefield.” — Claire Finkelstein [02:12]
• “If this is such an important interest...where is that expert [in civilian harm mitigation]?” — Jeffrey Korn [06:00]
• “No modern war had been fought in anybody's recollection that didn't have civilians at least adjacent, if not central to it.” — Chris Maier [10:00]
• “You cannot fight a campaign of that scale, density and duration without having errors. And my biggest criticism of the IDF was the lack of speed and transparency in investigations and discipline.” — Jeffrey Korn [22:54]
• “You have to understand what [operating near civilians] means—not just don’t shoot the civilians, but all the associated livelihood functions that go along with that.” — Chris Maier [46:20]
• “Single most essential aspect of civilian risk mitigation is leadership...If you contribute to...a perception of indifference to human suffering, you can quickly win a campaign on the battlefield and lose the campaign strategically.” — Jeffrey Korn [49:17]
• “Everything I learned about war was too simple. And I wonder whether or not things like the principle of distinction actually continues to hold in future warfare.” — Claire Finkelstein [56:40]

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 01:09–02:12 | Opening discussion on evolving legal/operational challenges and loss of clear battlefield distinctions.
• 03:31–07:39 | U.S. experience and innovations: integrating civilian harm experts into command staff (Korn).
• 08:13–13:10 | Civilian Harm Mitigation Response Action Plan; evolution and congressional support (Maier).
• 14:23–23:56 | Firsthand observations of urban combat, Hamas’s military entrenchment, scale of destruction, lessons and critiques from Gaza (Korn).
• 24:47–33:26 | Data-driven lessons, effectiveness of precautionary measures, necessity for longitudinal investigations (Lewis); Israeli institutional responses (Korn).
• 39:22–44:51 | Human shielding as a structural and tactical challenge in Gaza (Finkelstein).
• 44:51–48:12 | Humanitarian assistance, its integration into strategy, and relevance to Gaza and future conflicts (Maier).
• 48:57–60:04 | Closing reflections: leadership, doctrine, moral/strategic imperatives, challenges to international law, and future conflict preparedness.

Conclusion

This panel offers a sobering, detailed, and nuanced analysis of lessons from recent urban conflicts—especially Gaza—regarding civilian harm mitigation. Key themes include the indispensability of adaptable leadership, institutionalized expertise, transparent accountability processes, continuous data-driven learning, and the need to rethink and modernize the legal and ethical frameworks for war as battlefields and combatants become inseparably entwined with civilian life.

Future military effectiveness, legitimacy, and moral authority depend not only on technical compliance with the law but proactive, innovative efforts to mitigate harm—lessons vital for the U.S., its allies, and adversaries alike.