Initial amazement at Israel’s “beeper attack,” in which Hezbollah pagers exploded on thousands of their operatives, has quickly turned into accusation of war crimes. Media reports have shifted from speculation on how Israel accomplished such a feat to human rights advocates proclaiming that these “terrifying” mini-bombings constituted “illegal,” “indiscriminate,” “disproportional,” and “unlawful” use of weapons against “illegitimate targets.” Former Secretary of Defense and CIA director Leon Panetta even condemned them as a “form of terrorism.” These misguided accusations should alarm anyone concerned with the ability of the West to fight wars against terrorist organizations.

The full details of the attack are not yet fully known. Initial reports from Lebanon indicated that three dozen were killed and thousands more wounded. A recent Reuters report suggested that 1,500 Hezbollah fighters were no longer able to fight. According to the most extensive investigation by Israel’s Channel 12 news, Israeli and foreign sources asserted that each of the pagers was individually detonated. Attackers knew who was targeted, their location, and whether others were likely in proximity. Even if that was not always the case, videos widely circulated on social media show operatives being struck in fruit stores or supermarkets while nearby cashiers escape unscathed.

Such precision would explain why there have been few reports of widespread civilian casualties, something that Hezbollah propaganda would have surely promoted had this occurred. Yes, in at least one tragic circumstance, a nine-year old girl was reportedly killed after she picked up her father’s beeper. It’s fair to assume that there were other such stories. These sad but apparently exceptional incidents support the contention that the explosions were largely contained to their intended targets.

This being the case, hasty accusations of war crimes are nonsense. Israel’s targeting of both the operatives and their communication devices conforms to major principles of the laws of war. Firstly, it fulfills the requirements of necessity that limit military activity to achieving legitimate war aims. By taking out Hezbollah’s primary communicative methods, Israel undermined the group’s ability to mobilize its operatives quickly. Many are now also wounded, further limiting Hezbollah’s response to subsequent Israeli air strikes.

Secondly, it was consistent with the principle of distinction, which requires targeting military objectives. Belligerents and their communication devices are military targets. Israel undermined Hezbollah’s capabilities through this cutting-edge maneuver.