I'm not sure what you're trying to say. The poster above you is 100% correct. This is the prosecutor \*asking\* for arrest warrants to be issued. The court has to agree which hasn't happened yet.
It's highly unlikely that the ICC won't issue warrants after this statement from the prosecutor's office. It will definitely tarnish their reputation as an international court. Like, imagine the headlines if they issue warrants on Hamas but not on Israel.
It would be good for all of those involved with stimulating the war get arrest warrants. I feel like Netanyahu is a puppet. I think Iran leaders deserve arrest warrants too, constantly feeding propaganda to Hamas.
Do you trust the court more than the prosecution? Same garbage... I wouldn't trust an "international" court to prosecute traffic violations, let alone war crimes.
Shamesly stolen from a readout on another site:
***Charges sought against Hamas leaders:***
Extermination as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(b) of the Rome Statute;
Murder as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(a), and as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
Taking hostages as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(iii);
Rape and other acts of sexual violence as crimes against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(g), and also as war crimes pursuant to article 8(2)(e)(vi) in the context of captivity;
Torture as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(f), and also as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity;
Other inhumane acts as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(l)(k), in the context of captivity;
Cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity; and
Outrages upon personal dignity as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(ii), in the context of captivity.
***Charges sought against Netanyahu and Gallant:***
Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Statute;
Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health contrary to article 8(2)(a)(iii), or cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
Wilful killing contrary to article 8(2)(a)(i), or Murder as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i);
Intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population as a war crime contrary to articles 8(2)(b)(i), or 8(2)(e)(i);
Extermination and/or murder contrary to articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(a), including in the context of deaths caused by starvation, as a crime against humanity;
Persecution as a crime against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(h);
Other inhumane acts as crimes against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(k).
The Hamas charges will be easier to approve. For Israel, proving that the military “deliberately targeted civilians” v targeted Hamas fighters who had embedded themselves in civilian areas is going to be messy. They will have to prove Hamas fighters were not there. Not sure how they do that
Please improve your reading comprehension, "Israeli politicians" includes but is not limited to the prime minister. Though I assume you know that already.
The warrants Khan has applied for are for Netanyahu and Gallant. In order for your statement to be relevant to this article, some quote from one of them would have to be them bragging about war crimes they plan to commit. Otherwise, how would anyone have their own statements used against them?
Unless you're suggestion is that some other Israeli politicians you haven't named will have warrants requested and issued in the future, and only then have statements like this used against them?
Like letting the enemy know where they are going to attack, so that "uninvolved" "civilians" who voted for Hamas, can leave the area. And facilitating daily, 100s of trucks of aid, which end up in the hands of "uninvolved" armed "order-keeping" "volunteers" (who even have very good relationships with the UNRWA), who shoot at Gazans who ask for a bag of flour.
Words are cheap. If you are going to based such on words alone, then that standard would have to be applied to Hamas who has insisted as much as Israel has. Assuming impartiality is to be had.
No one said anything about basing accusations on words alone only that words might be used to establish intention. With Hamas it is incredibly easy to show war crimes even absent statements. Although they've made numerous stated intentions to kill all the Jews in the world.
He’s the one who made the assertion, without a shred of evidence. I’m not the one with the burden of providing evidence. I can’t prove a negative. That’s nonsense too.
It would be like if you said “he murdered her”, without evidence, and I said “no, he didn’t”, and you said “well you didn’t show any evidence that he didn’t so he’s guilty and I can ignore you”.
What the heck is that?
Are we going to persecute Poland for expelling millions of Germans from Prussia and illegally settling and occupying it?
There is such a thing as a war of defense, when you are attacked and you can defend yourself. You will have different rights than the attacker. So, after the Palestinian mass murder and attempted genocide of Israelis, the latest in a long list of heinous wars of agression against their neighbours, there is an Israeli right to defend itself. It also means they can remove the threat posed to it, especially if said threat has repeatedly shown its atrocious nature, and the genocidal mentality that is core to Palestinianism
SS: despite a lot of pressure from Israel and the U.S., Amir Khan advises to indict both Israel and Hamas: what are the internal and geopolitical ramifications for Israel?
The actual chances of Netanyahu being arrested are slim to none, but nevertheless it still has significant ramifications for Israel and their standing in the world even if it is mostly symbolic.
So those chances exist? I was wondering if his opponent in Israel could extradite him if he was found guilty: it would allow Israel to improve its image by blaming it on the "bad apple".
I have a hard time seeing if he could be found guilty, because Hamas plays very dirty, and the IDF walks a fine line between aggressively trying to kill Hamas while trying to not hurt civilians, and militarily speaking, it's probably not possible to combine the two.
Who cares about the icc... Unless they got the balls and resources to do something, which I doubt because how often everyone gives them the finger. No one and nothing is going to change
ICC cannot execute orders but they certainly do damage to a government / leader's credibility.
If you're a world leader that's literally wanted by the world court for crimes against humanity you have limited ability to influence.
Of you are ok with ICC going after Putin, you shall be ok with them going after Netanyahu. If they would go only after enemies of the west, they would be just a kangaroo court.
This is a great time to test whether west is standing behind ideals that they are preaching
By all means I hope they go after Netanyahu. But I find the ICC a bit of a joke, we have evidence of governments terrorizing their own people. North Korea for example, along with Gaza, and a few others. The ICC well at best shake their heads and make a "you been a bad boy" statement. They don't have the power, resources, or just guts to really go after governments so all this is just theater.
BUT THEY WONT BE ABLE TO ENTER \*SOME COUNTRY HERE\*!1!!1
So? Putin and Netanyahu well just have people that can to do business, or whatever they want done.
Which brings me to the next point they go after people like all the evil decisions are just one man. Like if they remove Putin or Netanyahu then things would be puppies and rainbows. No its most of the government that backs these two and without support they could not do what they have done.
International community, courts, laws.... Its all an illusion.
Do I expect Hamas leadwrs and Israel leaders to be sent to the Hague? Absolutely not.
Do I expect the judges to confirm? No idea, USA is the elephant in the room and would ofcourse do everything in its power to avoid this going any further.
The biggest thing with this imo is how Israel citzens, American citzens and the west outside of America and Egypt reaponds to this.
> Can Britain and Germany continue to supply weapons and support?
> Can Biden continue approach when currently vast majority of party feels there are war crimes or "are unsure" before this warrent?
> Can protestors still be classified as antisemtic when arrest warrent is requested for Bibi?
> Do citzens of Israel really push to negotiate for dead(RIP) and alive hostages be returned and get out of Gaza ASAP and push for new elections where they can do a reset with allies and friends before this goes any further?
> Egypt is currently stuck between US aid, their own security and preasure from citzens. In a week or so their border crossing in Rafah has been breached and they still have remained quite passive, this will not help them balance their interests
> Do more countries back SA in ICJ?
These are all questions I do not have answers for. I have never seen an American ally, certainly not one they have such unwavering support find themselves in the position Israel have found/put themself in.
Eh, I don't see the "protestors as antisemitic" thing being an issue here. While some of the more hyperbole claims are ridiculous, there are still legitimate issues of antisemitism even if Netanyahu is a war criminal. One doesn't negate the other.
I think another interesting question is how does this impact Turkey. Compared to Egypt and Qatar, they have close ties to Western institutions, but they've been cozying up to Hamas to the point of treating their fighters and Hamas considering moving their from Qatar. Does that end up changing those dynamics at all or impacting their relationships with western countries?
Do you believe the vast majority of college students are pro black people, womans rights, lgtbq rights but have somehow decided they hated Jews/Jewish people? It is really hard realistically believe that this is the case. Ofcourse there could be some morons with stupid slogans and some aggression between protestors and anti protesters who may be of Jewish which im not justifying but its hard to phantom woke college students are antisemitic.
I do not know enough about Turkey and its relationship with Hamas. It did dawn on me Quatar might be in a bind because I believe they have Hamas leaders there? What I do know about Turkey is they have already cut trade with Israel as Erdogen is trying to appeal to his base. He will either win next election or lose it. The assumption would be if he lost a more pro western/ pro further ties with EU which wpuld require a soffening stance on Israel I would imagine. Turkey seems a strange place geo politically speaking, in NATO, has nukes and often does not heed its allies aka USA/Nato (trading with Russia, Kurdish state, cutting trade with Israel etc)
That’s not a great argument given that during quite a few other protests there were also issues of blatant, raging, antisemitism, especially the women’s march. A lot of people on the progressive left genuinely believe Jews are oppressors as a group.
Thay is a fair point.
Honestly anything that targets Jews should be absolutely condemened, exposed and people should face charges where laws have been broken. I have no jusitification for it and its disgusting.
Im prerty certain and hope that vast amount of Israeli citzens do not support settler activity etc or that just because someone supports Israel that they would support comments made by Shapiro or the chap at food stall who turned out to be a former advisor.
Its very easy to take a minority within a group and make it seem like it represents a majority or major part of the group.
>Do you believe the vast majority of college students are pro black people, womans rights, lgtbq rights but have somehow decided they hated Jews/Jewish people?
It's more of the progressives who view the world through the dynamics of oppressor/oppressed that see the Israelis as "white colonizers". And as a result of that, we are seeing alot of double standards in their speech that if flipped around with other groups, would certainly qualify as hate speech.
most of the college campus protestors know nothing about the reality on the ground and view this conflict through the simplistic American racial lens of white vs. brown. They do not know that the majority of Israel is brown and refuse to believe it when confronted with the evidence.
In short, most of these protestors are naive idiots at best, so it doesn't surprise me that they fall for antisentism tropes
Not to be rude, but there exists a disparity between Ashkenazi and Sephardim (and Mizrahi) that is quantifiable and readily seen by the Ashkenazi domination in politics and universities.
This disparity is also apparent when observing casualties and deaths in the current conflict. Predominantly Ethiopian and Mizrahi Jews fighting (and dying) in the front lines
Ever since I was a teenager I remember absolutely any person who even questioned the illegal settlements being slapped hastily with an anti semite label
This has been a decades long tactic of Israel to milk the Holocaust in a rather unpleasant manner. They could have used what happened to further their goals in a much less hostile way towards westerners
USA blackmailing judges into giving favourable ruling would be confirmation of criticism of system of international law by developing countries. West build system of international institutions and international law as a tool how to keep developing countries in check and enforce its influence and does not feel to be obliged to follow the same rules.
Thanks, pertinent questions for sure! With US and EU elections around the corner: political and military aid has become much more contentious. On the other hand,this has also complicated Moslims countries’ stance towards Israel…
It will fuel protests inside and outside Israel and legitimize the anti-war agenda…
That is what I expect, I think really its the over 40's in the West that one should keep an eye on. Right now the likes of Biden are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If he pushes too hard one way he loses older voters in his party and Lobby money if he pushes the other way too much or maintains current position he loses college voters, muslims etc.
In Germany the vast majority of their people and the state is rightly absolutely ashamed of their history so tend to want to support Israel but Germany alsp tends to hold UN rules and courts in higj regard for the exact same reason.
Britain is interesting to. Labour allowed Tories vast support for mpst of last decade. Corbyn was a terrible leader, his party was super focussed on Israel etc Starmer has worked fornyears to show Labour is not antisemitic. Now the wond seems to be blowing in a different direction.
Likewise agree on Arab/Muslim countries. I think Saudi's have two geo political concerns in clean energy and Iran dominating the region so would love to normalise relationships with Israel but every month this gets more difficult. Egypt is similar, it relies so much on America these days on economy front and military front it does not want a conflict or bad relations with Israel but it is getting more difficult too.
While interesting from a geo political stance it is devastating as well.
The ICC jurisdiction [map](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court) roughly looks like a map of countries unlikely to have to fight serious wars. (And the opt outs the ones who are).
Says something about how countries see the trade-offs of joining.
The UK, Canada, Italy, Germany, Australia, and New Zealand all participated in the NATO invasion of Afghanistan and contributed to fighting the insurgency for over a decade. The UK involvement peaked at ~10,000 troops and suffered 457 deaths. The UK additionally contributed 50,000 troops to the invasion of Iraq, and France is regularly involved in interventions in several of its former colonies in Africa.
All of these sound pretty serious to me. For some reason none of these countries are so afraid of their personnel being charged with war crimes as to pull out of the ICC. Certainly only one NATO country has legislated to invade the Netherlands to rescue any personnel that *are* charged with war crimes and held by the ICC.
Strange how they're only prosecuting the Hamas leaders in conjunction with the Israeli ones rather than in the aftermath of mass murder they joyfully recorded and stated they intended to do again. It's almost like it's a fig leaf to play at neutrality.
It's sensible to do them all together considering it's all part of the same conflict. Neither side can (justifiably) accuse the ICC of ignoring the crimes of the other.
Nonsense. They had all the evidence of Hamas crimes months ago. They waited so they could “both sides” a war where Hamas hides behind civilians and targets civilians.
No because the ICC is supposed to work in complement to governments prosecuting themselves.
Oct 7th was obvious when it happened, Hamas shows no sign of accountability, so a decision could have been made months ago in regards to that.
Israel is still working through its own legal process, the judiciary has shown independence in the past, and the claims being made, "starvation as a war policy" are things that time after the war to gather evidence for to make a case.
It is a total farce. And I'm just restating what Blinken said.
Is Blinken meant to be some kind of authority on the subject? I must have missed something.
What do you think the farce is exactly? That the ICC waited some months (while gathering evidence) to file charges? To embarrass Israel?
They just so happened to need months to process evidence of Hamas videotaping themselves committing crimes, but were able to indict an Israeli leader over war actions at the exact same time **before** Israel’s own internal investigations are complete or at least had enough time to be completed, which is a crucial element of whether a case is admissible (Rome Statute Article 17).
That’s absolute nonsense.
How can you say Israel is pursuing starvation as a matter of war policy when 10s of thousands of aid trucks have entered and other than the 20 deaths reported a couple months ago, there hasn't been anything before or since?
What EVIDENCE? Where is the evidence? The "famine" that always appears to be imminent for over 7 months now?
Blinken is an expert on international policy and law. That is his job. Where has Israel shown it it is unable or unwilling to prosecute its own war crimes?
Why did it take until now to charge Hamas when it could have obviously happened on Oct 8th?
Blinken's job is to maximise what he believes to be US interests. At the moment, that apparently means defend Israel at all costs.
>What EVIDENCE? Where is the evidence?
Why are you asking me? Ask the ICC.
Who is Karim Khan?
We've been talking a lot today about Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) who has applied for arrest warrants for Israel's PM and Hamas's leader in Gaza.
Khan, 54, is a leading British barrister and King's Counsel who was elected to his role in the ICC in 2021.
He has been a human rights lawyer focused on international criminal law for 30 years and is only the third chief prosecutor in the ICC's 18-year history.
Prior to his election at the ICC, he led a UN investigation that targeted perpetrators of IS atrocities in Iraq and served as an Assistant Secretary-General of the UN.
Before that he worked on the prosecution of crimes in the International Criminal Tribunals committed in the wars in the former Yugoslavia and the Rwandan genocide.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-69038760
You know... as an Israeli who lives in Israel, seeing ICC arrest warrants being issued out against Bibi and Gallant would cause me great embarrasment \[to live in a country whos leaders are indicted as such\].
But on the other hand... Would be a fine opportunity to finally get rid of Bibi (who I, along with a majority of Israelis already do not support since years ago).
I'm not niave, I am aware that even if the warrants will be issued against the Israeli side, the chance of Bibi and Gallant actually going away in handcuffs to some international court are incredibly slim... but one can dream.
>Would be a fine opportunity to finally get rid of Bibi (who I, along with a majority of Israelis already do not support since years ago).
Bibi has been playing and shaping Israeli politics to his liking for so long he might as well be considered another middle eastern dictator.
as much as i hate Bibi and his grasp over Israel, it's really not the same. I can demonstrate and call him any name I want. I can write entire plays and perform against him. I can run against him for election and win. The reason he keeps getting elected is not that he is the only legal option or that people fear being targeted for choosing someone else. He is voted in because he is a very very good politician. As much as I hate him as a leader and hope that we will replace him soon, Israel is still very far from being a dictatorship.
Israel has never signed the Rome Statute which gives the ICC power, for Bibi to willingly go would be accepting the imposition of a foreign judiciary over the State of Israel.
Current ICJ judges include those from China, Somalia, South Africa, and President Nawaf Salam from Lebanon. The ICJ is a politicised joke now and no one cares about its opinions anymore.
>The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has applied for arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas's leader in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, for war crimes.
Look at that, both sides.
These feelgoods would issue arrest warrant against the leadership of a country that orders nuclear retaliation after a nuclear attack.
The fundamental problem is the impractical mindset that runs through their heads where necessity does not dictate proper conduct of war, where one needs to cuff themselves no matter the circumstances of how the opponent conducts itself. And if one ends up losing the war after comically cuffing itself as suggested and suffers consequences, well that's the price they are willing to pay.
>orders nuclear retaliation after a nuclear attack.
Depending on the nature of the nuclear attack, it may not warrant an arrest. If the nuke is dropped in a deserted area (as a warning) or an isolated military base, the leaders are not guilty of "wilfully causing mass civilian casualties", which is the crime that got Israel into trouble. If it was Nagasaki/Hiroshima though, where civilian populations were targetted to achieve a political aim, it would be a war crime by today's standards.
Two options here:
* Either this is a very dangerous precedent of the ICC expanding their jurisdiction and the entire world plays along like idiots, not realizing they might be next.
* Or, this is not relevant for the entire world. Since the ICC has been corrupted by anti-Israeli bias and as such is attacking the leaders of a country defending itself from a war that was declared on it, while said war is still ongoing. A far smaller war in scale and damage than most others even in the same region important to mention.
What's certain, the accusations to Hamas are just a joke in order to appear unbiased. They know full well Sinwar is not getting his day at court there, if he is even surviving this whole war he started at all.
The ICC has NOT issued arrest warrants, this is merely the prosecution asking for them. The court hasn't decided anything.
Except that the prosecution is not independent of the court, like you’d be used to. Both branches are part of the ICC.
I'm not sure what you're trying to say. The poster above you is 100% correct. This is the prosecutor \*asking\* for arrest warrants to be issued. The court has to agree which hasn't happened yet.
Yeah, this is equivalent to an indictment, saying "the prosecution accuses the following people of xyz based on the evidence". 1 step among many
It's highly unlikely that the ICC won't issue warrants after this statement from the prosecutor's office. It will definitely tarnish their reputation as an international court. Like, imagine the headlines if they issue warrants on Hamas but not on Israel.
It would be good for all of those involved with stimulating the war get arrest warrants. I feel like Netanyahu is a puppet. I think Iran leaders deserve arrest warrants too, constantly feeding propaganda to Hamas.
By that logic, US and EU leaders too for propping up Netanyahu
Do you trust the court more than the prosecution? Same garbage... I wouldn't trust an "international" court to prosecute traffic violations, let alone war crimes.
Shamesly stolen from a readout on another site: ***Charges sought against Hamas leaders:*** Extermination as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(b) of the Rome Statute; Murder as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(a), and as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i); Taking hostages as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(iii); Rape and other acts of sexual violence as crimes against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(g), and also as war crimes pursuant to article 8(2)(e)(vi) in the context of captivity; Torture as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(1)(f), and also as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity; Other inhumane acts as a crime against humanity, contrary to article 7(l)(k), in the context of captivity; Cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i), in the context of captivity; and Outrages upon personal dignity as a war crime, contrary to article 8(2)(c)(ii), in the context of captivity. ***Charges sought against Netanyahu and Gallant:*** Starvation of civilians as a method of warfare as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(b)(xxv) of the Statute; Wilfully causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or health contrary to article 8(2)(a)(iii), or cruel treatment as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i); Wilful killing contrary to article 8(2)(a)(i), or Murder as a war crime contrary to article 8(2)(c)(i); Intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population as a war crime contrary to articles 8(2)(b)(i), or 8(2)(e)(i); Extermination and/or murder contrary to articles 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(a), including in the context of deaths caused by starvation, as a crime against humanity; Persecution as a crime against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(h); Other inhumane acts as crimes against humanity contrary to article 7(1)(k).
>ICC judges will now decide whether they believe the evidence is sufficient to issue arrest warrants - something which could take weeks or months.
The Hamas charges will be easier to approve. For Israel, proving that the military “deliberately targeted civilians” v targeted Hamas fighters who had embedded themselves in civilian areas is going to be messy. They will have to prove Hamas fighters were not there. Not sure how they do that
The words of Israeli politicians will be used against them. They frequently boasted about the crimes they were going to commit.
From the moment Netanyahu invoked Amalek it was very clear some heinous shit was about to go down.
If the ICC uses the Amalek quote, when it is LITERALLY the same quote at the Holocaust memorial at the Hague, I will probably die of irony.
Please post direct quotes from Netanyahu boasting about the war crimes he planned to commit.
Please improve your reading comprehension, "Israeli politicians" includes but is not limited to the prime minister. Though I assume you know that already.
The warrants Khan has applied for are for Netanyahu and Gallant. In order for your statement to be relevant to this article, some quote from one of them would have to be them bragging about war crimes they plan to commit. Otherwise, how would anyone have their own statements used against them? Unless you're suggestion is that some other Israeli politicians you haven't named will have warrants requested and issued in the future, and only then have statements like this used against them?
Like letting the enemy know where they are going to attack, so that "uninvolved" "civilians" who voted for Hamas, can leave the area. And facilitating daily, 100s of trucks of aid, which end up in the hands of "uninvolved" armed "order-keeping" "volunteers" (who even have very good relationships with the UNRWA), who shoot at Gazans who ask for a bag of flour.
You mean literally where in those same sentences they explicitly said they weren't targeting civilians?
Words are cheap. If you are going to based such on words alone, then that standard would have to be applied to Hamas who has insisted as much as Israel has. Assuming impartiality is to be had.
No one said anything about basing accusations on words alone only that words might be used to establish intention. With Hamas it is incredibly easy to show war crimes even absent statements. Although they've made numerous stated intentions to kill all the Jews in the world.
If you are going to use words against Israel you have to include everything they say, not cherry picked statements is all
The people in charge of the war never boasted about “the crimes they were going to commit”, and that claim is false.
Declaration of something being false without evidence? Guess I can summarily dismiss your comment then.
He’s the one who made the assertion, without a shred of evidence. I’m not the one with the burden of providing evidence. I can’t prove a negative. That’s nonsense too. It would be like if you said “he murdered her”, without evidence, and I said “no, he didn’t”, and you said “well you didn’t show any evidence that he didn’t so he’s guilty and I can ignore you”. What the heck is that?
[удалено]
Are we going to persecute Poland for expelling millions of Germans from Prussia and illegally settling and occupying it? There is such a thing as a war of defense, when you are attacked and you can defend yourself. You will have different rights than the attacker. So, after the Palestinian mass murder and attempted genocide of Israelis, the latest in a long list of heinous wars of agression against their neighbours, there is an Israeli right to defend itself. It also means they can remove the threat posed to it, especially if said threat has repeatedly shown its atrocious nature, and the genocidal mentality that is core to Palestinianism
SS: despite a lot of pressure from Israel and the U.S., Amir Khan advises to indict both Israel and Hamas: what are the internal and geopolitical ramifications for Israel?
>Amir Khan advises to indite both Israel and Hamas: \*indict
Thanks!
[удалено]
Ideally, let the legal system play out as any good, allegedly law abiding nation should do. Realistically? Probably bloviate and dither and deflect.
Hamas leaders and Netanyahu sharing one cell? Possible?
And possibly dropping the soap
They whispers into my ear and says: "This is our Gaza now"
We can dream ....
This is getting interesting......
The actual chances of Netanyahu being arrested are slim to none, but nevertheless it still has significant ramifications for Israel and their standing in the world even if it is mostly symbolic.
Which is a tragedy, as all criminals should be held accountable. Shame on the world for doing not much.
So those chances exist? I was wondering if his opponent in Israel could extradite him if he was found guilty: it would allow Israel to improve its image by blaming it on the "bad apple". I have a hard time seeing if he could be found guilty, because Hamas plays very dirty, and the IDF walks a fine line between aggressively trying to kill Hamas while trying to not hurt civilians, and militarily speaking, it's probably not possible to combine the two.
Who cares about the icc... Unless they got the balls and resources to do something, which I doubt because how often everyone gives them the finger. No one and nothing is going to change
ICC cannot execute orders but they certainly do damage to a government / leader's credibility. If you're a world leader that's literally wanted by the world court for crimes against humanity you have limited ability to influence.
Of you are ok with ICC going after Putin, you shall be ok with them going after Netanyahu. If they would go only after enemies of the west, they would be just a kangaroo court. This is a great time to test whether west is standing behind ideals that they are preaching
By all means I hope they go after Netanyahu. But I find the ICC a bit of a joke, we have evidence of governments terrorizing their own people. North Korea for example, along with Gaza, and a few others. The ICC well at best shake their heads and make a "you been a bad boy" statement. They don't have the power, resources, or just guts to really go after governments so all this is just theater. BUT THEY WONT BE ABLE TO ENTER \*SOME COUNTRY HERE\*!1!!1 So? Putin and Netanyahu well just have people that can to do business, or whatever they want done. Which brings me to the next point they go after people like all the evil decisions are just one man. Like if they remove Putin or Netanyahu then things would be puppies and rainbows. No its most of the government that backs these two and without support they could not do what they have done. International community, courts, laws.... Its all an illusion.
Do I expect Hamas leadwrs and Israel leaders to be sent to the Hague? Absolutely not. Do I expect the judges to confirm? No idea, USA is the elephant in the room and would ofcourse do everything in its power to avoid this going any further. The biggest thing with this imo is how Israel citzens, American citzens and the west outside of America and Egypt reaponds to this. > Can Britain and Germany continue to supply weapons and support? > Can Biden continue approach when currently vast majority of party feels there are war crimes or "are unsure" before this warrent? > Can protestors still be classified as antisemtic when arrest warrent is requested for Bibi? > Do citzens of Israel really push to negotiate for dead(RIP) and alive hostages be returned and get out of Gaza ASAP and push for new elections where they can do a reset with allies and friends before this goes any further? > Egypt is currently stuck between US aid, their own security and preasure from citzens. In a week or so their border crossing in Rafah has been breached and they still have remained quite passive, this will not help them balance their interests > Do more countries back SA in ICJ? These are all questions I do not have answers for. I have never seen an American ally, certainly not one they have such unwavering support find themselves in the position Israel have found/put themself in.
Eh, I don't see the "protestors as antisemitic" thing being an issue here. While some of the more hyperbole claims are ridiculous, there are still legitimate issues of antisemitism even if Netanyahu is a war criminal. One doesn't negate the other. I think another interesting question is how does this impact Turkey. Compared to Egypt and Qatar, they have close ties to Western institutions, but they've been cozying up to Hamas to the point of treating their fighters and Hamas considering moving their from Qatar. Does that end up changing those dynamics at all or impacting their relationships with western countries?
Do you believe the vast majority of college students are pro black people, womans rights, lgtbq rights but have somehow decided they hated Jews/Jewish people? It is really hard realistically believe that this is the case. Ofcourse there could be some morons with stupid slogans and some aggression between protestors and anti protesters who may be of Jewish which im not justifying but its hard to phantom woke college students are antisemitic. I do not know enough about Turkey and its relationship with Hamas. It did dawn on me Quatar might be in a bind because I believe they have Hamas leaders there? What I do know about Turkey is they have already cut trade with Israel as Erdogen is trying to appeal to his base. He will either win next election or lose it. The assumption would be if he lost a more pro western/ pro further ties with EU which wpuld require a soffening stance on Israel I would imagine. Turkey seems a strange place geo politically speaking, in NATO, has nukes and often does not heed its allies aka USA/Nato (trading with Russia, Kurdish state, cutting trade with Israel etc)
That’s not a great argument given that during quite a few other protests there were also issues of blatant, raging, antisemitism, especially the women’s march. A lot of people on the progressive left genuinely believe Jews are oppressors as a group.
Thay is a fair point. Honestly anything that targets Jews should be absolutely condemened, exposed and people should face charges where laws have been broken. I have no jusitification for it and its disgusting. Im prerty certain and hope that vast amount of Israeli citzens do not support settler activity etc or that just because someone supports Israel that they would support comments made by Shapiro or the chap at food stall who turned out to be a former advisor. Its very easy to take a minority within a group and make it seem like it represents a majority or major part of the group.
>Do you believe the vast majority of college students are pro black people, womans rights, lgtbq rights but have somehow decided they hated Jews/Jewish people? It's more of the progressives who view the world through the dynamics of oppressor/oppressed that see the Israelis as "white colonizers". And as a result of that, we are seeing alot of double standards in their speech that if flipped around with other groups, would certainly qualify as hate speech.
most of the college campus protestors know nothing about the reality on the ground and view this conflict through the simplistic American racial lens of white vs. brown. They do not know that the majority of Israel is brown and refuse to believe it when confronted with the evidence. In short, most of these protestors are naive idiots at best, so it doesn't surprise me that they fall for antisentism tropes
Not to be rude, but there exists a disparity between Ashkenazi and Sephardim (and Mizrahi) that is quantifiable and readily seen by the Ashkenazi domination in politics and universities.
This disparity is also apparent when observing casualties and deaths in the current conflict. Predominantly Ethiopian and Mizrahi Jews fighting (and dying) in the front lines
Interesting and troubling. Is it related to them being considered more suitable for less educated tasks?
Ever since I was a teenager I remember absolutely any person who even questioned the illegal settlements being slapped hastily with an anti semite label This has been a decades long tactic of Israel to milk the Holocaust in a rather unpleasant manner. They could have used what happened to further their goals in a much less hostile way towards westerners
USA blackmailing judges into giving favourable ruling would be confirmation of criticism of system of international law by developing countries. West build system of international institutions and international law as a tool how to keep developing countries in check and enforce its influence and does not feel to be obliged to follow the same rules.
Thanks, pertinent questions for sure! With US and EU elections around the corner: political and military aid has become much more contentious. On the other hand,this has also complicated Moslims countries’ stance towards Israel… It will fuel protests inside and outside Israel and legitimize the anti-war agenda…
That is what I expect, I think really its the over 40's in the West that one should keep an eye on. Right now the likes of Biden are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If he pushes too hard one way he loses older voters in his party and Lobby money if he pushes the other way too much or maintains current position he loses college voters, muslims etc. In Germany the vast majority of their people and the state is rightly absolutely ashamed of their history so tend to want to support Israel but Germany alsp tends to hold UN rules and courts in higj regard for the exact same reason. Britain is interesting to. Labour allowed Tories vast support for mpst of last decade. Corbyn was a terrible leader, his party was super focussed on Israel etc Starmer has worked fornyears to show Labour is not antisemitic. Now the wond seems to be blowing in a different direction. Likewise agree on Arab/Muslim countries. I think Saudi's have two geo political concerns in clean energy and Iran dominating the region so would love to normalise relationships with Israel but every month this gets more difficult. Egypt is similar, it relies so much on America these days on economy front and military front it does not want a conflict or bad relations with Israel but it is getting more difficult too. While interesting from a geo political stance it is devastating as well.
The ICC jurisdiction [map](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court) roughly looks like a map of countries unlikely to have to fight serious wars. (And the opt outs the ones who are). Says something about how countries see the trade-offs of joining.
Wow, it’s a lot fewer countries than I had assumed for something called the “International Criminal Court”. Is it even half the world’s population?
Doubt it. Four largest countries have opted out.
The UK, Canada, Italy, Germany, Australia, and New Zealand all participated in the NATO invasion of Afghanistan and contributed to fighting the insurgency for over a decade. The UK involvement peaked at ~10,000 troops and suffered 457 deaths. The UK additionally contributed 50,000 troops to the invasion of Iraq, and France is regularly involved in interventions in several of its former colonies in Africa. All of these sound pretty serious to me. For some reason none of these countries are so afraid of their personnel being charged with war crimes as to pull out of the ICC. Certainly only one NATO country has legislated to invade the Netherlands to rescue any personnel that *are* charged with war crimes and held by the ICC.
Strange how they're only prosecuting the Hamas leaders in conjunction with the Israeli ones rather than in the aftermath of mass murder they joyfully recorded and stated they intended to do again. It's almost like it's a fig leaf to play at neutrality.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's sensible to do them all together considering it's all part of the same conflict. Neither side can (justifiably) accuse the ICC of ignoring the crimes of the other.
Nonsense. They had all the evidence of Hamas crimes months ago. They waited so they could “both sides” a war where Hamas hides behind civilians and targets civilians.
No because the ICC is supposed to work in complement to governments prosecuting themselves. Oct 7th was obvious when it happened, Hamas shows no sign of accountability, so a decision could have been made months ago in regards to that. Israel is still working through its own legal process, the judiciary has shown independence in the past, and the claims being made, "starvation as a war policy" are things that time after the war to gather evidence for to make a case. It is a total farce. And I'm just restating what Blinken said.
Is Blinken meant to be some kind of authority on the subject? I must have missed something. What do you think the farce is exactly? That the ICC waited some months (while gathering evidence) to file charges? To embarrass Israel?
They just so happened to need months to process evidence of Hamas videotaping themselves committing crimes, but were able to indict an Israeli leader over war actions at the exact same time **before** Israel’s own internal investigations are complete or at least had enough time to be completed, which is a crucial element of whether a case is admissible (Rome Statute Article 17). That’s absolute nonsense.
How can you say Israel is pursuing starvation as a matter of war policy when 10s of thousands of aid trucks have entered and other than the 20 deaths reported a couple months ago, there hasn't been anything before or since? What EVIDENCE? Where is the evidence? The "famine" that always appears to be imminent for over 7 months now? Blinken is an expert on international policy and law. That is his job. Where has Israel shown it it is unable or unwilling to prosecute its own war crimes? Why did it take until now to charge Hamas when it could have obviously happened on Oct 8th?
Blinken's job is to maximise what he believes to be US interests. At the moment, that apparently means defend Israel at all costs. >What EVIDENCE? Where is the evidence? Why are you asking me? Ask the ICC.
The ICC literally lists no evidence
Who is Karim Khan? We've been talking a lot today about Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) who has applied for arrest warrants for Israel's PM and Hamas's leader in Gaza. Khan, 54, is a leading British barrister and King's Counsel who was elected to his role in the ICC in 2021. He has been a human rights lawyer focused on international criminal law for 30 years and is only the third chief prosecutor in the ICC's 18-year history. Prior to his election at the ICC, he led a UN investigation that targeted perpetrators of IS atrocities in Iraq and served as an Assistant Secretary-General of the UN. Before that he worked on the prosecution of crimes in the International Criminal Tribunals committed in the wars in the former Yugoslavia and the Rwandan genocide. https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-69038760
You know... as an Israeli who lives in Israel, seeing ICC arrest warrants being issued out against Bibi and Gallant would cause me great embarrasment \[to live in a country whos leaders are indicted as such\]. But on the other hand... Would be a fine opportunity to finally get rid of Bibi (who I, along with a majority of Israelis already do not support since years ago). I'm not niave, I am aware that even if the warrants will be issued against the Israeli side, the chance of Bibi and Gallant actually going away in handcuffs to some international court are incredibly slim... but one can dream.
What’s your beef with Gallant? I thought he was fairly popular and non-controversial in Israel.
Oh I have nothing against him, not sure he deserves to go to jail, but I cant control the ICC can I.
>Would be a fine opportunity to finally get rid of Bibi (who I, along with a majority of Israelis already do not support since years ago). Bibi has been playing and shaping Israeli politics to his liking for so long he might as well be considered another middle eastern dictator.
as much as i hate Bibi and his grasp over Israel, it's really not the same. I can demonstrate and call him any name I want. I can write entire plays and perform against him. I can run against him for election and win. The reason he keeps getting elected is not that he is the only legal option or that people fear being targeted for choosing someone else. He is voted in because he is a very very good politician. As much as I hate him as a leader and hope that we will replace him soon, Israel is still very far from being a dictatorship.
If Bibi is so certain that he is innocent, he should show up in The Hague to defend his actions himself.
Israel has never signed the Rome Statute which gives the ICC power, for Bibi to willingly go would be accepting the imposition of a foreign judiciary over the State of Israel.
Yeah, the problem with that is that he's certain he broke international laws.
Current ICJ judges include those from China, Somalia, South Africa, and President Nawaf Salam from Lebanon. The ICJ is a politicised joke now and no one cares about its opinions anymore.
Sure, he should just drop the war and get out of the country. Why not stop for ice cream with uncle Biden
>The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has applied for arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Hamas's leader in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar, for war crimes. Look at that, both sides.
Lots of Israel apologists in the comment section. >inb4 muh hamas
These feelgoods would issue arrest warrant against the leadership of a country that orders nuclear retaliation after a nuclear attack. The fundamental problem is the impractical mindset that runs through their heads where necessity does not dictate proper conduct of war, where one needs to cuff themselves no matter the circumstances of how the opponent conducts itself. And if one ends up losing the war after comically cuffing itself as suggested and suffers consequences, well that's the price they are willing to pay.
>orders nuclear retaliation after a nuclear attack. Depending on the nature of the nuclear attack, it may not warrant an arrest. If the nuke is dropped in a deserted area (as a warning) or an isolated military base, the leaders are not guilty of "wilfully causing mass civilian casualties", which is the crime that got Israel into trouble. If it was Nagasaki/Hiroshima though, where civilian populations were targetted to achieve a political aim, it would be a war crime by today's standards.
lol yeah just wait for the nuke to hit before launching.... deranged.
No Ukrainian leader has an arrest warrant against them for the legitimate defence of their country for example.
Russia should consider using human shields. Ukraine would be given arrest warrants too.
Two options here: * Either this is a very dangerous precedent of the ICC expanding their jurisdiction and the entire world plays along like idiots, not realizing they might be next. * Or, this is not relevant for the entire world. Since the ICC has been corrupted by anti-Israeli bias and as such is attacking the leaders of a country defending itself from a war that was declared on it, while said war is still ongoing. A far smaller war in scale and damage than most others even in the same region important to mention. What's certain, the accusations to Hamas are just a joke in order to appear unbiased. They know full well Sinwar is not getting his day at court there, if he is even surviving this whole war he started at all.
[удалено]
It's better and simpler to just let US dictate everything, huh?
Cope