Protection of civilians

Point: 

I am not a lawyer.

The first duty of a State is to protect its citizens. When they framed the Geneva conventions I'm sure no-one ever imagined that there would be a Sovereign State which didn't protect its own citizens in time of war. Germany certainly did.

So the provisions in the Geneva Conventions which say that a warring state  has to (in a sense) "protect" the civilians of its opponent have to be seen  in the context above. There is a PRIMARY obligation for a State (Lebanon)  to protect its own citizens, and a SECONDARY obligation for the warring State (Israel) to respect the (assumed) arrangements which are in place to protect civilians.

That a State would put / leave its civilians in harm's way was completely out of their world view.

Counterpoint:

I am a lawyer.

Yes, what you say makes perfect sense.  Under social contract theory, the purpose of government is to protect citizens from dangers they can not face on their own as individuals.  Therefore, individuals band together and form alliances for their mutual protection.  That is the basis of the state.  This is clearly stated, btw, in the ultimate social contract document, the US Constitution, which in the preamble describes the purpose of the Constitution as "providing for the common defense and insuring domestic tranquility" etc.

I also agree that the framers of the Geneva Conventions could not have foreseen a military force with as little sense of obligation to the civilians among which it thrives as the terror organizations of our day.  Since the obligation of a government to protect its own citizens was self-evident, the "protection" extended enemy civilians was clearly secondary.

Terror organizations are trying to use the Geneva conventions as both a sword and a shield and the degenerate west is allowing it.