The International Court of Justice, the United Nations’ highest judicial body, will begin hearings this week in a case brought by South Africa that accuses Israel of committing genocide in Gaza.
The hearings, the first step in a lengthy process should the case go forward, will be the first time that Israel has chosen to defend itself, in person, in such a setting, attesting to the gravity of the indictment and the high stakes for its international reputation and standing.
Genocide, the term first employed by a Polish lawyer of Jewish descent in 1944 to describe the Nazis’ systematic murder of about six million Jews and others based on their ethnicity, is among the most serious crimes of which a country can be accused.
In its submission to the court, South Africa cited that lawyer, Raphael Lemkin, to expand the definition of genocide. South Africa, whose post-apartheid government has long supported the Palestinian cause, accused Israel of actions in Gaza against Hamas that are “genocidal in character.” It says Israel has killed Palestinian civilians, inflicted serious bodily and mental harm, and created for the residents of Gaza “conditions of life calculated to bring about their physical destruction.”
That’s a 200IQ move from RSA. This court is embedded in the United Nations so if Israel wanted to ignore it they would have to withdraw from the UN and this is probably too much even for them. So we’re up for a grim, but potentially entertaining festival of mental acrobatics, as the pawns sent by Netanyahu pretend that the anti-genocide convention is not actually an IDF checklist. Because it sure does read like one.
i want to hear the Egyptian opinions
Removed by mod
IDF and Hamas, sitting in a tree, killing all of each other for…god?
For land. The settlers want the land.
They’re fighting for the only part of the middle east that doesn’t have oil.
So do the millions who don’t meet the UNHRC definition of refugees. That’s why there’s a special definition of refugee that doesn’t apply to anyone else anywhere in the world.
The definition of a refugee under the UNRWA mandate is also unique. It covers all descendants, without limit, of those deemed refugees in 1948. This helps explain why its caseload has increased from 750,000 to more than 5 million (and still growing).
Unlike UNRWA, UNHCR has a specific mandate to assist refugees in eliminating their refugee status by local integration in the current country, resettlement in a third country or repatriation when possible.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Okay Hamas did a lot of bad stuff, but let’s not put them at the same level as the IDF here.
Removed by mod
The IDF are currently committing a genocide. Hamas hasn’t done anything comparable in their lifetime.
Removed by mod
Just because Israel is genociding doesn’t mean Hamas is any less of a terrorist organization.
Two things can be true at once. don’t hurt yourself absorbing that.
The term terrorist organization just means “The US doesn’t like this guy”. Most of their actions are retaliation against Israeli aggression. Not saying they didn’t do horrible stuff, but the term terrorist is meaningless now.
I’ll give it to you, the US indeed doesn’t like having passenger jets flown into buildings or ied trucks driven under buildings (nobody does you dingbat).
I guess that’s why the term terrorism exists. They weren’t there on 911 to rob the trade centers or bargain for prisoners or do anything other than to cause terror.
Words have meaning, even if you don’t know what it is. You can deny it but you don’t control the way people use words.
I’ll give it to you, the US indeed doesn’t like having passenger jets flown into buildings or ied trucks driven under buildings (nobody does you dingbat).
Uh… That’s one thing, but for example Nelson Mandela was designated as a terrorist until 2008. It’s a meaningless term (or I guess more accurately a meaningless designation) that happens to include some really bad people. I’m pretty sure I don’t need to say that someone’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter.
