There is another player. China is interested in resolving the Gaza conflict.[1] China's position is that, since the existing world order, the International Court of Justice and the United States, can't resolve this, China should become involved. Chinese container shipping lines COSCO and OOCL have suspended trade with Israel. China has already provided some aid to Gaza.[2] Gaza has a sizable coastline, and China has…
ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire
431–440 of 1001 posts
Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire
#432Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Spin this any way you like but The International Court of Justice said there is no genocide No, it didn't, that’s simply a lie. It said that the pleadings were sufficient plausible and that conditions present a sufficient risk of irreparable harm to warrant provisional measures against Israel. It didn't say that there is no genocide, and it didn't say that there is a genocide. The application for provisional measur…
> It didn't say that there is no genocide, and it didn't say that there is a genocide. It may change, but CURRENTLY, it does not think there's sufficient evidence to rule in favour of provisional measures, i.e., it does not think there is a genocide. Resorting to legalese isn't changing this fact.
False, it ruled that provisional measures against Israel were warranted and adopted four provisional measures against Israel by 15-2 vote, and two by 16-1 vote (the latter including the Israeli judge ad hoc in the majority.)
Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire
#433Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not exactly. They sent the guy who controls the local judiciary because not doing so would be impossible due to his immense political power. The Israeli judiciary is unique in nominating itself and having given itself the power to cancel any law or demand any changes to laws/policy on any arbitrary basis; since this state of affairs is backed up by a sufficient number of powerful institutions, it is effectively impos…
Wasn't that struck down? https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/1/israels-supreme-cour...
Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire
#434What's the ICJ's actual ability to enforce this? "Orders" sounds like they have some sort of weight to throw around if Israel doesn't comply, but I'm not familiar with the ICJ or what possible consequences could arise if Israel simply decided it was going to do what it wanted.
> What's the ICJ's actual ability to enforce this? Zero, the same as most courts. Enforcement is a matter for (ordinarily) the Security Council, or, in the case of deadlock, potentially the GA acting under Uniting for Peace. Well, decisions on enforcement; actual enforcement is left to individual UN members, acting on direction of those UN bodies. Note that enforcement in practice is often a problem, as with the prov…
Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire
#435Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The Israeli judiciary is unique in nominating itself this is at most lie and at least misconception. Supreme Court Judges are appointed by the President of Israel, from names submitted by the Judicial Selection Committee, which is composed of nine members: three Supreme Court Judges (including the President of the Supreme Court), two cabinet ministers (one of them being the Minister of Justice), two Knesset members…
In practice, the 3 Supreme Court Judges, the two representatives of the Israel Bar Association, and the 1 Knesset member "traditionally" representing one of the two major political camps [the one aligned with most Supreme Court Judges] always vote together, so most of the judiciary is appointed according to the wishes of the Supreme Court Judges. The veto on appointing Supreme Court Judges adds a modicum of balance,…
Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire
#436Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't quite understand that? Aharon Barak was chief justice, but retired in 2006 and is 87 years old.
Most of the judiciary are his loyalists. An example of his ongoing influence is the ridiculous legal doctrine invented just this year where the Israeli declaration of independence was retroactively declared to be the supreme law of the land, akin to a "meta-constitution"; his opinion on the matter was published after many months of campaigns where people would declare their "allegiance to the declaration of independe…
He has some influence but I don't think "loyalists" (or the other terminology used in your earlier comment) is that accurate. The supreme court justices today have a range of opinions and are largely independent and interpret law (and some other universal principles, like human rights, is really what Barak brought to the table).
The interesting bit to me here is this signals that if those cases were brought in front of Israel's supreme court the outcome would likely be similar to the ICJ (except Israel's supreme court's rulings must be followed, it's not optional or requires security council approval). I think that was partly the intent in sending Barak and really the main argument that people that oppose the government initiatives to restrict the Israeli Supreme Court have. And so there's really no need to take Israel to the ICJ since its independent supreme court would e.g. enforce the same standards anyways.
Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire
#437Respectfully, would you have made the same comment about 'finding a place in your heart for the humanity of the other' if we lived during the holocaust, where 'one side' was being maimed and killed by the other, more powerful side? Would you have made the same comment if we were talking about apartheid in South Africa? How about if we were talking about how slavery ought to be stopped prior to 1865? Should we _always…
Yes..
> Should we _always_ be looking to find the humanity in the other side, or is there something fundamentally different here?
Yes..
Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire
#438Earlier quoted context omitted.
Israel's tactic has always been deterrence: I will inflict you so much pain that you will think twice before doing this again. Despite being proven wrong, a "realist politician' will automatically think of adding more (and then some) deterrence as the only solution. I remember 20 years ago, during the first bombing of Gaza, they hit just ONE building and felt pressured enough to apologize for the handful of civilian…
No essentially it is as simple as how any abuser bully behaves. They will continue their behavior as long as they are allowed to. Look at US for enabling them.
The Israel-Hamas War is entirely a response to this event.
Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have read a bit about this and I understand the explanation but I still don’t understand how a group of people subject to genocide can turn around and a few generations later be behaving in many (obviously not all) of the same ways toward another group. I would think that if anything the Israeli people would have some empathy and try to find a two state solution that exists in peace.
Because propaganda works everywhere. Teach people that “the other” seeks their destruction and then reframe any violence as tragically necessary self-defense. The history books don’t mention the Nakba and civilian casualty statistics in Gaza are dismissed as Hamas propaganda. And I don’t mean to suggest Israel is unique in this. There are many parallels for instance with American “world police” patriotism.
I think recent events have taught this to Israel without any help from propagandists.
Re: ICJ orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza, stops short of ordering ceasefire
#440Perhaps I am unlearned in this area but I am unclear why the Jewish state, after its people experienced the atrocities of World War II, would act in this manner toward the Palestinians. Can anyone shed light on this? I understand completely the need to rid the world of Hamas terrorists, but in the process they have shown a reckless disregard (to put it mildly) for Palestinian people and their wellbeing.
My understanding is that the colossal tradegy of Holocaust made Jews realise that not fighting back is an existential threat for them.
When Israel was established then Arabs did not accept its existence nor the existence of Jews in the region. What followed was a genocidal war to exterminate Jews in Palestine and destroy Israel. We know this war today as Israel war of independence.
The Arabs who participated against Jews in this war fleed in fear of retribution and were not allowed by Israel to return. We know these people and their descendants today as Palestinian refugees (they have special inheritable status given by UN).
After the war Israel was established nearly within the borders of UN assigned Jewish territories and UN assigned Arab territories were annexed by Egypt (Gaza) and Jordan (West Bank). But it was still not tolerable for the Arabs who again in 1967 attempted to exterminate Jewish state with the war.
After the failure Isreal took control over larger territory that was then inhabited largely by Palestinian refugees (Palestinians) - West Bank and Gaza and also part of Egypt over the Suez canal and part of Syria called Golan Heights. The reasons where twofold. First the UN assigned territory was clearly not realistically defendable and second the large part of the previously not controlled territories like Bethlehem or Jerusalem were believed to be Jewish lands (historically Jewish lands were between Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea). Territories belonging to Egypt were later returned by bilateral treatis (but Israel kept control over Gaza).
Fast forward to today and it appears that Palestinians have not abolished the idea of genocide against Jews. It has been clearly established that the 7th October attack was a genocidal act to eliminate as many Jews as possible. Around 3000 Palestinian men took part in it, Hamas had around 40000 fighters. This demonstrates that they had wide support among Palestinians.
This leads us back to Holocaust. Jews promised to themselves that they will not let the genocide happen against themselves ever again. Yet it happened.
What is going on in Gaza is a systematic work to eliminate this threat.
They do this with minimal risk to their soldiers who are mainly reservist e.g. common people with military training. They can't afford to lose thousands of people. Palestinians in contrast value martyrdom and are willing to take very high risks (like attacking an armored vehicle with a RGP within a group of civilians next to the hospital entrance (this has been documented by the video evidence)).
It is not a police operation. It is a military operation against heavily armed and trained opponent. The weapons are chosen accordingly. The urban landscape makes it especially difficult and destructive. Regardless as far I have observed then Jewish military has made great efforts to systemically minimise civilian casualties.
What they did not realise first was that in addition to the military operation on the ground there is also sizeable information war against them and when the enemy can find many willing sympathisers then the enemy can produce what ever claims they please regardless of the truth as was demonstrated by the al-Ahli Arab Hospital explosion.
I haven't observed the situation closely for months but by then Jewish armed forces evolved to be more open in their communication and to communicate more clearly the threats they had to fight against.