ICC - does it help?

[mids2019]

It doesn't take the most brilliant legal aid in history to determine Hamas are war criminals by any definition but to draw parallels between a democratic leader of a country that has defended itself against a terrorist attack really does not help peace as well as demonizing Israel.

Netanyahu is not going to be arrested as his major ally is not a signatory to the ICC so the warrant is moot. It also signifies terrorists by effectively treating them as state leaders.

As the president of the most powerful democratic nation of the world denounced the charges has the ICC lost credibility? When anti semitism is on the rise worldwide has a in reality practically meaningless warrant helped in any way?

Bush and Blair weren't indicted if you consider their wars illegal. If you start criminalizing leaders of our democracies for responses to attack where does that leave our international system? The ICC needs political support for its existence and moved like this will make countries consider withdrawing from it.

Well are the charges justified - that is the moot point ? That rather sounds like a Donald Trump, the courts is biased against me arguement. I'm no legal expert but if Amal Clooney thinks there is a cast iron case then that's good enough for me.

If we are going to rip up the international structures set up after Nuremberg to prevent war crimes every happening again or at least bring the guilty to justice what are we going to replace it with ? If countries don't agree with the result then they should resign from the ICC and say exactly why. Putin must be loving this equivocation as he is currently under warrant and Russia is not a signatory nor is China for that matter.

From the judgement- the charges levelled against Hamas are without complaint from any reasonable person and their justice is coming, of that we can be sure.

From the judgement ;

The effects of the use of starvation as a method of warfare, together with other attacks and collective punishment against the civilian population of Gaza are acute, visible and widely known, and have been confirmed by multiple witnesses interviewed by my Office, including local and international medical doctors. They include malnutrition, dehydration, profound suffering and an increasing number of deaths among the Palestinian population, including babies, other children, and women.

Famine is present in some areas of Gaza and is imminent in other areas. As UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned more than two months ago, “1.1 million people in Gaza are facing catastrophic hunger – the highest number of people ever recorded – anywhere, anytime” as a result of an “entirely manmade disaster”. Today, my Office seeks to charge two of those most responsible, NETANYAHU and GALLANT, both as co-perpetrators and as superiors pursuant to Articles 25 and 28 of the Rome Statute.

Israel, like all States, has a right to take action to defend its population. That right, however, does not absolve Israel or any State of its obligation to comply with international humanitarian law. Notwithstanding any military goals they may have, the means Israel chose to achieve them in Gaza – namely, intentionally causing death, starvation, great suffering, and serious injury to body or health of the civilian population – are criminal.

What Hamas did is indefensible.

What Israel is doing is not mere self-defence and I do think Netenyahu is guilty of war crimes.

Are we setting a precedent that civilian casualties have to be avoided in war at all costs and how can any future war be 'legal'. Civilians have died in this conflict absolutely but it is an active combat zone in the most densely populated region of the planet.

If the Israelis want rid of their leadership of is up to them. Israel is a democracy, a functioning one in the middle East, and that shouldn't be forgotten. Literally all war crimes previously have been committed by autocrats of one type of another.

We also have to look at using a criminal court born out of the outrage of the holocaust criminalizing a leader of a nation born out of the same epic genocide.

In reality this doesn't help getting Israel to engage in ceasefire talks as it has just inflamed the situatiion. Netanyahu is the guy who can call off attacks on Gaza and we have just labelled him a war criminal.....good call.

I am not a lawyer but politically it's a disaster.

Are we setting a precedent that civilian casualties have to be avoided in war at all costs

——-

shouldnt this be the case ? But Israel is not only been prosecuted for the civilian deaths but for many other things I.e starvation

you’re not a lawyer. Iccs lawyers think what Israel’s government is doing to civilians is q war crime. To me it’s not a disaster. It’s what I expect lawyers to do.

Is there any action Netanyahu could take that you would accept is a war crime?

Obviously, you find starvation is a valid weapon of war, so I have to ask, what qualifies as a war crime- for you personally? Or is it that the attack of October 7th was so heinous that we’re in a position that by definition an action taken by Israel won’t be a war crime, and questioning that line is anti-Semitic?

Netanyahu and his cronies are committing horrific acts which meet legal definitions for war crimes.

He, and they, should therefore face the relevant legal proceedings.

Being 'democratically elected' is irrelevant to that.

Don't worry, though, he, and they, will hide behind their money and their friends and escape any actual consequences, leaving them free to continue their 'democratic' racially-prejudiced, religiously-biased, elitist activities.

Netanhayu is beyond help and does what he wants to do anyway that is very clear now , if Biden can't convince him then the ICC is just a side show. US and Britain did warn him as supportative friends right after October 7th. The evidence and narrative is utterly compelling and backed up by voluminous , neticulouslky prepared details. But I think you're right in one respect the truth about bombing in modern warfare is that the results are abominable by any reasonable standards of decency.

What we did in Libya and Iraq caused massive collateral damage and loss of innocent life - it's just back then we didn't have the evidence of a million mobile phones to document the horrors , and to be fair to the US and Britain we have prosecuted our own soldiers for war crimes that committed there a long time after the evnts.

https://twitter.com/SaulStaniforth/status/1792523028653375942

We also have to look at using a criminal court born out of the outrage of the holocaust criminalizing a leader of a nation born out of the same epic genocide.

———

also this, so Israel can do anything ? If Israel committed genocide against their own population like other countries are doing. Would you say oh well we can’t prosecute them because this country was created as part of the outrage of the holocaust. ?

id expect a court to be unbiased and to prosecute those that are committing war crimes independently of who they’re and who they’re doing it against.

If the Israelis want rid of their leadership of is up to them. Israel is a democracy, a functioning one in the middle East, and that shouldn't be forgotten. Literally all war crimes previously have been committed by autocrats of one type of another.

I am not sure how Israel getting rid of Netanyahu as their leader absolves his war crimes (if proven). Israel hasn't been issued a warrant Netanyahu has and even if he is no longer Prime Minister he can still stand trial. Whether you are a leader of a democratic nation or a dictator is irrelevant if a crime has been committed.

There is a requirement to ensure civilian casualties are minimised. That does not mean no civilian can ever be killed within a conflict zone (although it would of course be better if no civilians died in such things). What that means for a military force is demonstrating that they have considered alternatives, attempted mitigation, and have chosen to proceed with a strategy that is defensible in terms of balancing the achievement of objectives against the potential for loss of civilian life. It means military forces have obligations in terms of not obstructing aid, healthcare, etc. it means there are meant to be rules regarding the treatment of detainees, people seeking help, people surrendering, etc.

If you think all war crimes are committed by autocrats then you really haven't paid attention to world events (except those that fit your narrative of "yay for UK/USA/Israel and boo to those nasty other people").

A criminal court should apply to anyone to whom it needs to apply. That's how justice should work. Don't worry, he'll be fine, though. Nothing will happen, and you'll be able to add this to your list of ways in which people have been mean to a government that's openly bombing a region "back to the Stone Age", killing thousands of children and other civilians, executing healthcare workers and carrying out airstrikes on aid vehicles.

And if you are going to commit war crimes it might be wise not to broadcast to all and sundry in advance of your intentions.

https://twitter.com/Roellchen2011/status/1792565536863216034

In reality this doesn't help getting Israel to engage in ceasefire talks as it has just inflamed the situation.
Maybe it would be wise to engage as a form of damage limitation. I am sure if he throws his toys out of his pram and refuses to engage in talks that can bring about peace, get hostages released and save more lies it wouldn't look well for him.

Netanyahu is the guy who can call off attacks on Gaza and we have just labelled him a war criminal.
Not sure what you mean by this? Are you suggesting he could use a judgement by the ICC as a reason to carry out more attacks on gaza?

I am not a lawyer but politically it's a disaster.
It isn't about politics it is about committing crimes.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw4490z75v3o

Labour has backed the judgement.

Labour has called for Benjamin Netanyahu to be arrested if the International Criminal Court (ICC) issues a warrant for his arrest.

David Lammy, the shadow foreign secretary, said that the UK and all parties to the Rome Statute, which underpins the ICC, “have a legal obligation” to comply with its warrants.

He spoke out after the UK Government said that it did not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC in the conflict between Israel and Hamas, and refused to confirm whether it would comply with a warrant should one be issued.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/05/20/labour-backs-icc-arrest-netanyahu-lammy-hamas-war-crimes/

The UK Government said that it did not recognise the jurisdiction of the ICC in the conflict between Israel and Hamas, and refused to confirm whether it would comply with a warrant should one be issued.
WTF!

That's 'Western democracy and justice' for you.

Isn't it grand?

I thought the days of the USA asking the UK to jump for the UK to reply "how high" were over. I was wrong.
At least, Tory Light Stammer appears to accept the ICC decision.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/attorney-general-presents-uk-intervention-in-ukraine-case-against-russia-at-international-court-of-justice

Attorney General, Victoria Prentis MP, KC said:
Today was an important day for the international rule of law. It was an honour to present the UK’s arguments before the International Court of Justice.

The Genocide Convention is an important treaty that obliges States to prevent and punish genocide. As such, it stands as a bulwark against mass atrocity.

Alongside 31 other intervening States, the UK has demonstrated its commitment to the proper interpretation and application of the provisions of that Convention by intervening in this case.

A not-insignificant number of important figures in the current UK government have close personal links with the US and/or Israel, so on a personal level it's not unexpected that there would be a desire to help protect the Israeli government and to do what the US wants. And these are not people who have a track record of integrity or professionalism.

Many of the people in government have strong anti-Muslim, pro- (the right wing in) Israel, pro- (the right wing in) USA views, and have demonstrated time and again that their views and prejudices have more weight on their decisions in government than real evidence, expert opinion or the law can hope for.

There will be no justice, safety or parity of esteem for demographics that do not fit with their preferences, while this corrupt government remains in power.

I see the ICC panel is being smeared all over X, the usual claims of antisemitism.

One panel member is a KC and a practicing Jew.

Another was legal advisor to Israel after 1967, and is a holocaust survivor.

I wish I had your eloquence! And, yes I agree with you.

The ICC panel is deeply antisemitic. A token holocaust survivor does not remove this. Gabor Mate is one and he's deeply discredited as damaged and antisemitic.

You cannot have ceasefire talks with terrorists, that is the reality. Hamas have been offered many ceasefires and refused, and this cycle of violence has been on-going for 20 years. The only option is to remove them by military force.