Use of 500lb Bomb in Gaza Cafe Strike Raises Serious Legal Concerns, May Constitute War Crime, Experts Say

 GAZA CITY — The Israeli military’s recent airstrike on a crowded beachfront café in Gaza, which killed dozens of civilians, has drawn sharp scrutiny from international law experts following evidence that a 500lb (230kg) U.S.-made bomb was used in the attack.

Fragments of the weapon recovered from the ruins of the al-Baqa café and reviewed by The Guardian have been identified by ordnance specialists as components of an MK-82 general-purpose bomb, a widely used munition known for its large blast radius and shrapnel dispersal.

The strike, which occurred on Monday evening, left a deep crater at the site, further supporting the use of a high-yield bomb. Medical sources reported between 24 and 36 fatalities, including a prominent filmmaker, a housewife, a four-year-old child, and a number of injured minors. The al-Baqa café, a long-standing, family-run establishment, was known for serving soft drinks and tea, and was a rare leisure outlet for families in Gaza amid worsening humanitarian conditions.

International humanitarian law, grounded in the Geneva Conventions, prohibits military attacks expected to cause civilian harm that is excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage. Legal experts say the use of a heavy, wide-impact weapon in a known civilian gathering spot likely violates these principles.

“The Israeli military has not clarified its intended target, but its own admission of prior aerial surveillance suggests it was aware the café was full of civilians,” said Gerry Simpson, associate director at Human Rights Watch. “Using such a powerful munition in a densely populated area risks constituting a disproportionate or indiscriminate attack — a potential war crime that demands investigation.”

Dr. Andrew Forde, assistant professor of human rights law at Dublin City University, echoed this concern, stating: “Deploying heavy munitions in a known civilian area, regardless of targeting precision, produces indiscriminate outcomes incompatible with international legal obligations.”

An IDF spokesperson confirmed the incident is under review and noted that precautionary measures, including aerial surveillance, were undertaken to minimize civilian harm. However, the spokesperson emphasized that operational decisions regarding munitions are based on the intended objective of the strike.

Earlier this year, the IDF issued a statement affirming that the selection of munitions is dictated by operational necessity and the nature of the target — particularly when engaging hardened structures or subterranean infrastructure.

Despite such assurances, experts remain skeptical. “It is extremely difficult to see how the use of a 500lb bomb could be legally justified in this context,” said Marc Schack, associate professor of international law at the University of Copenhagen. “Typically, such levels of civilian casualties could only be considered in operations targeting extremely high-value strategic objectives — and even then, only under exceptional circumstances.”

Weapons expert Trevor Ball, a former U.S. Army explosive ordnance disposal technician, identified key components in the debris — including a JDAM tail section — suggesting the use of either an MK-82 or Israel’s locally developed MPR500 precision bomb. Another analyst, also familiar with ordnance from recent global conflicts, concurred.

The IDF has access to a wide range of munitions, including smaller, precision-guided weapons, which it has previously employed in targeted strikes across Gaza, Lebanon, and Iran. Critics have questioned why, given this capability, a large-scale bomb was chosen for a target situated in an open, visibly crowded civilian area.

The port area housing the café had not been designated for evacuation under existing Israeli Defense Forces warnings — further raising questions about the proportionality of the strike.

On Tuesday, a spokesperson for the Israeli government reiterated the country’s position: “The IDF never, ever targets civilians.” Israeli authorities have consistently accused Hamas of using civilian areas as shields for military operations — an allegation the group denies.

The al-Baqa incident has intensified calls for independent investigation into the legality of Israel’s military conduct amid the ongoing conflict in Gaza, as international watchdogs and human rights organisations continue to monitor the growing civilian toll.