So the verdict is a bit of a nothingburger then? Just essentially ordering Israel to do what it can to prevent a genocide?
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
Most people wouldn't argue that they do have a right to defend themselves, problem is the way that they are doing it. So ordering a cease-fire is a big leap.
My understanding of this process is that we've just had the preliminary hearing to see if there's a case to answer. That's now concluded by confirming that RSA have brought a plausible case that Israel has potentially committed genocide.
That trial will now start and take a very long time.
They could have called for a ceasefire too, but as @Denis79 says above, it's understandable (legally speaking, obviously there should be a ceasefire) why they haven't ruled on that.
Who are most people? Most people have argued for a ceasefire for weeks.
Basically, I agree with this
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
On the contrary, the verdict is quite serious. The court recognizes that the potential for genocide is there which is huge. They also call for measured and controlled reactions by the Israeli forces meaning the way they are fighting now is not acceptable according to the court, they also demand that provisions and aid are not stopped by Israel. But what surprised me the most is that it calls for the prosecution of leaders within Israel that call for genocide (Some high ranking officials have done this). I don't think Israel will abide by any of this but they are officially under scrutiny now which was the best we could hope for. It is also good that the court called for the release of the remaining hostages and I hope Hamas do this to show compliance.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
My knee jerk reaction is that in stopping short of calling for a ceasefire the court, in effect, ruled that in the near term Israel's right to defend itself trumps the Gazan's right to be protected from potential genocide.
The rest of the ruling pays lip service to the idea that Gazans have rights by demanding that Israel do XYZ. The thing is that Israel already claims to be doing XYZ, so precisely what change is this interim ruling effecting?
Edit: By far the most important part of the ruling is demonstrating that Israel has a case to answer, so that's good.
Any reason the Ugandan judge voted as hawkishly as she did? I mean not even the Israeli judge voted against opening up all humanitarian aid and ending genocidal speech.
The IOF are re-kidnapping Palestinian hostages after the last deal and Hamas should release all of their hostages unconditionally.
I don't think some people realize what Palestinians have been dealing with here for decades.
I don't think some people realize what Palestinians have been dealing with here for decades.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
There's also a possibility she has been bought or she harbors a deep hatred for Arabs and Muslims.
Yeah I read that. Don't think it cuts the mustard. Israel was already under scrutiny. My fear is that instead of preventing a genocide we'll end up recognising that one occurred.
Maybe I need to reflect more though.
Yeah just read the voting and even the Israel judge apparently voted "in favor" of some of the measures - i.e. the Ugandan judge voted against ALL. I don't much, if anything about the Ugandan judge. Is there anything that anyone knows i.t.o why she could be voting that way?
I completely understand the want for the atrocities to end. See it like this, Israel has been officially warned, what they do from now will be seen a completely different way, especially by other governments. Because until now it was just public opinion standing in their way.
Wicked witch
That or maybe a gripe with South Africa? But yeah, clear as day she's biased and not fit to serve on that council.
What are these other governments going to do when big brother US is with them giving them everything they need to keep the genocide going?
Even if the ICJ called for a cease-fire it wouldn't have changed much sadly, you are right. But considering how bad the situation is for those civilians, anything official that recognizes that Israel isn't acting lawfully is a step in the right direction, albeit small.
ICJ rulings carry a bit of weight. Thr US would have to be very careful in moving against that. Especially if it led to a resolution being tabled at the UN security Council. Vetoing a measure based on an ICJ ruling is not a good look.
I suspect it will all end with "oh genocide happened, ups" instead of the "hey, let's stop this genocide now". Israel and Us will twist themselves in pretzels to never recognize it and the rest of the world will move on pointing to decisions like this to say "well, it was a complicated situation, we did the best with the info we had at the time".
It's all a bit of a political joke really when we consider what's happening on the ground. I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
Just out of interest, as I don't know, was the ICJ used for Russia v Ukraine? If so what were the tone and words used?
it called for Russia to immediately suspend it's military operation.
By Order of March 16, 2022, the ICJ has already indicated among its provisional measures that “the Russian Federation shall immediately suspend the military operations it began on February 24, 2022 in the territory of Ukraine”.
Russia did not accept this order, and raised “preliminary objections” to the Court’s jurisdiction and the inadmissibility of the application. It is these arguments, already set out in part in a letter dated March 7, 2022, that the ICJ will be examining from September 18 to 27, during public hearings that will have a major international impact.
The ICJ rulings are never really actionable in of itself but it might change the political discourse we'll have to wait and see.
Given how much destruction and violence has already been committed its too little too late. Hopefully at some stage the culprits are held to account.
Given how much destruction and violence has already been committed its too little too late. Hopefully at some stage the culprits are held to account.
International Court of Justice Preliminary Decision in Ukraine Vs Russia (2022):
On 16 March 2022, after a fast-track procedure, the International Court of Justice ordered provisional measures in the Ukraine v Russia case. In bringing the case, Ukraine argued that Russia had wrongfully claimed a genocide in Ukraine to justify its invasion. Russia, meanwhile, rejected the Court's jurisdiction. Given the lack of evidence for Russia's genocide allegations, and the principle that any action to prevent genocide must be taken in good faith and in line with international law, the Court called on Russia to suspend military operations immediately.
Also, the ICC (not ICJ) have issued an arrest warrant for Putin and the woman who is the Russian commissioner for children's rights for the forcible transfer (kidnapping) of children from one country to another during a conflict - that's two war crimes under the Rome statute. Nothing will of course happen, but it did result in Putin being extremely careful on which countries he is traveling to (if at all).
You conveniently excluded the Red Cross...
They might need to place an order for some Abrams tanks to deal with those pesky feckers.
Thanks for the replies.
I need.a human rights lawyer.
What does this ICJ ruling say to Yemeni actions and their declarations before engaging? How are the potentially complicit nations continuing their actions against the Yemenis justifiable?
I’ve always enjoyed watching the civilised nations of the world lie(or politely termed- propaganda), though I personally benefit from the moral superiority it creates for me and fellow citizens. It’ll be interesting to understand how we can lie our way out of this one now.
What does this ICJ ruling say to Yemeni actions and their declarations before engaging? How are the potentially complicit nations continuing their actions against the Yemenis justifiable?
I’ve always enjoyed watching the civilised nations of the world lie(or politely termed- propaganda), though I personally benefit from the moral superiority it creates for me and fellow citizens. It’ll be interesting to understand how we can lie our way out of this one now.
The easiest way to look at these organizations is they don't have the ability to do anything to larger, more powerful countries. But they are used by those same larger countries to vilify smaller ones; often as a pretext to economically sanction or militarily attack them.
The ICC is investing Israel also, anyone know when it will be presented?
It’s always interesting. At least the legal arguments are out their for people to refuse being gaslit.
Anti Semitic
I mean surely they're expecting some diminishing returns with that explanation for anything and everything? Not to mentions it cheapens the very real anti-semitism thats rampant in Europe and North America.Anti Semitic
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Israel’s finance minister tells the ICJ to help him with ethnic cleansing if it wants to prevent Genocide.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
They’re not even trying anymore, I swearAnti Semitic
Damn antisemites infiltrating every single international institution and working against Israel. Very unfair.