|
|
Post by easye on Jan 10, 2024 12:39:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by easye on Jan 11, 2024 13:50:44 GMT -5
I found South Africa taking Israel to court to be really an interesting twist. www.npr.org/2024/01/11/1224126552/court-hearings-genocide-charges-israelSouth Africa tells the U.N. top court Israel is committing genocide in Gaza[/b] Probably the only country in the world that can call out another for having an Apartheid government structure and have some legitimacy in knowing what an Apartheid government looks like is South Africa. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jan 11, 2024 18:03:15 GMT -5
Pretty bizarre to see SA hold up a mirror to Western countries, as the complete opposite response in the Israel-Gaza/Palestine conflict and the Ukraine-Russia conflict.
You would think Israel would welcome the chance, as they claim to so obviously be innocent. Not that it's likely that they will be found guilty of the actual practice.
|
|
|
|
Post by easye on Jan 12, 2024 11:36:12 GMT -5
Related to the Israel/Gaza conflict is the question of if this will become a wider conflict in the region.
The activity in Yemen with the Houthi, Hezbollah activity in Lebanon, and the ISIS actions in Iran all point to a de-stabilization in the region and an expansion of hostilities with Iran as a nexus.
What I am not sure about, is how much my view is being clouded by my US-based Bias. Therefore, I am coming here to get some more wider ranging thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jan 12, 2024 12:32:43 GMT -5
Hezbollah is a difficult one, Lebanon has no appetite for another Israeli invasion and Hezbollah knows it, this is why their responses have been relatively meek, even though Israel appears to be trying to provoke a war with their reponse? This is my impression, Israel would absolutely know that what Hezbollah is doing is launching pinpricks to avoid losing face and try and avoid a war. Israel is taking this further than retaliatory pinpricks. It feels almost cynical to think like this, but...
Meanwhile, the Houthis have been bombed by a US supported coalition for the last decade. It's no surprise that they are lashing out in the wider area. What does it matter to them if the American made planes, dropping American made bombs, are actually flown by Americans? This has been their life for the last 10 years.
It's easy to blame Iran, but the wider escalation has enough blame to be shared with all the players.
Once again the US (and/or the West) is trying to solve problems the same way that has failed over the past few decades. The only way tensions in the wider region will ever get resolved is to start off on a different path, one that likely involves reining in Israel's increasingly extremist governments and actions in the West Bank (and Gaza, but you could argue this is a grey area, although explicitly the reason for the Houthis doing this). It's easy to always point the finger at Hamas and Iran, but what effort has Israel (and by extension the US) seriously undertaken in the last few decades towards some form of resolution?
|
|
|
|
Post by easye on Jan 12, 2024 13:38:52 GMT -5
Once again the US (and/or the West) is trying to solve problems the same way that has failed over the past few decades. The only way tensions in the wider region will ever get resolved is to start off on a different path, one that likely involves reining in Israel's increasingly extremist governments and actions in the West Bank (and Gaza, but you could argue this is a grey area, although explicitly the reason for the Houthis doing this). It's easy to always point the finger at Hamas and Iran, but what effort has Israel (and by extension the US) seriously undertaken in the last few decades towards some form of resolution? This is a particularly good point. If anything, they have been pushing the envelope with their settlement expansions and have spit-in-the-eye of the US "Two-State" solution. They Israeli's have made it clear that this is a non-starter by their actions. I mean it is easy to point the finger at Iran, and that is exactly what my US-Bias and Info sources makes it very easy to do. Ultimately, it is not a US problem. It is only a US Electoral problem. No politician seems to have a strong enough coalition or mandate to either push a solution or walk-a-way from the region completely. |
|
|
|
Post by A Town Called Malus on Jan 12, 2024 16:51:52 GMT -5
The US also demonstrated that its word is meaningless when it comes to compromises when it pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal without any evidence that Iran broke it.
|
|
|
|
Post by easye on Jan 17, 2024 13:52:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by easye on Jan 19, 2024 10:29:46 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Jan 19, 2024 12:02:46 GMT -5
This is not really surprising, Netanyahu has basically been in power for the last 15 years and has always opposed a Palestinian state. His career almost ended in the 90's because he was (in the opinions of many people rightfully, if it is even up for debate given his actions) seen as one of the politicians egging on the extremists that later resulted in the murder of Rabin, a major player in a two state solution. Netanyahu is a monster that has never gotten too much pushback from the US or Europe.
As for Iran, you have to wonder what crazy game they're playing. Fighting two nuclear powers through proxies is one thing, directly attacking another nuclear power directly is quite the escalation. I guess Iran is correctly guessing that Pakistan is not in a position to up the ante and wants to flex in the region to (perceived) threats.
|
|
|
|
Post by easye on Jan 19, 2024 14:48:42 GMT -5
Pakistan is a mess right now, but I do not know enough about it to comment beyond that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 2, 2024 7:20:25 GMT -5
I think Israel holds at least as much culpability for destabilising the region as Iran. They have been doing that kind of cross-border strike for years now, and the ongoing occupation of Palestine and now the Gaza campaign with plausible evidence of genocide remains a major inflammation of tensions in the region. When it comes down to it, who benefits from the Middle East devolving into a regional war? Iran doesn't. Most of the Arab nations definitely don't, they are too weak to meaningfully participate and will just be battlegrounds. Europe certainly won't as they will have the refugee influx. America is insulated from costs and can sell some more missiles, but US taxpayers will lose out as money is spent on propping up Israel. That pretty much leaves the current Israeli government, who benefit from reorienting US attention back to West Asia from East Asia, and have more cover to pursue their stated goals of a Greater Israel. Hamas probably also benefits to some extent, unless the Gaza population is entirely removed. I really don't understand why much of Europe is acting like the US's poodles on this. The US won't see consequences, Europe will. Honestly feels like the world is going mad... Pretty bizarre to see SA hold up a mirror to Western countries, as the complete opposite response in the Israel-Gaza/Palestine conflict and the Ukraine-Russia conflict. You would think Israel would welcome the chance, as they claim to so obviously be innocent. Not that it's likely that they will be found guilty of the actual practice. Well, the ICJ did state that genocide was plausible, which is as much as they can say at this stage. I think it is likely they will be found guilty, but the ICJ has no enforcement mechanism, it relies on the UN. The US has a veto, so it is unlikely the UN can do anything. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Feb 2, 2024 8:13:49 GMT -5
Well, the ICJ did state that genocide was plausible, which is as much as they can say at this stage. I think it is likely they will be found guilty, but the ICJ has no enforcement mechanism, it relies on the UN. The US has a veto, so it is unlikely the UN can do anything. They stated that it was plausible that Israel committed acts that violated the Convention, which is not the same as stating the argument of genocide was plausible. I feel like a guilty conviction on genocide will be an unlikely surprise, because the evidence requirements are so high. Remember that the ICJ did not find Serbia guilty on genocide (because holding an entire state responsible is incredibly difficult legally speaking, that's why individuals get convicted), only that it did not do enough to prevent it. I think most people will call events that happened in the Yugoslavian civil war genocidal, yet the ICJ did not rule/think so. The Israeli case is a lot less clear cut in the outcome, because the case against Serbia failed, even when Serbia was documented to support and fund the Serbians that were documented to have committed mass executions. |
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 2, 2024 9:46:32 GMT -5
Well, the ICJ did state that genocide was plausible, which is as much as they can say at this stage. I think it is likely they will be found guilty, but the ICJ has no enforcement mechanism, it relies on the UN. The US has a veto, so it is unlikely the UN can do anything. They stated that it was plausible that Israel committed acts that violated the Convention, which is not the same as stating the argument of genocide was plausible. I feel like a guilty conviction on genocide will be an unlikely surprise, because the evidence requirements are so high. Remember that the ICJ did not find Serbia guilty on genocide (because holding an entire state responsible is incredibly difficult legally speaking, that's why individuals get convicted), only that it did not do enough to prevent it. I think most people will call events that happened in the Yugoslavian civil war genocidal, yet the ICJ did not rule/think so. The Israeli case is a lot less clear cut in the outcome, because the case against Serbia failed, even when Serbia was documented to support and fund the Serbians that were documented to have committed mass executions. But a violation of the Convention of Genocide requires a genocide to be committed. I agree with your point that the state of Israel may be found not to have committed genocide if it is deemed to have been done below the state level. That is fair. However, I disagree with your interpretation of the Serbian case, which did rule that the Srebrenica massacre was a genocide, and that Serbia as a state was not complicit but did breach the convention by failing to prevent it. However, I think the Israel case is unusual in the number of senior politicians who have made statements that are consistent with genocidal intent, so they are in pretty hot water when it comes to state complicity. From the ICJ Serbia ruling: |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Feb 2, 2024 11:20:37 GMT -5
Yes, but my point was that being in breach of the convention is not the same as being declared guilty of genocide, which will be a crucial difference for Israel in this case.
Taking Sebrenica as the example here isn't what is important in that ruling, because the guilty party there was seen as the Serb Republic (in Bosnia), not the state of Serbia. You have too look at how the ICJ rules about Serbia directly, not the VRS.
Serbian politicians were convicted of war crimes due to their aid to the Serb Republic, but crucially not a legal guilty party in the genocide. Practically, how can you be a party to one, but not the other? Yet this is the legal result outcome.
It requires a standard of evidence that is unlikely to be met. What breaches there are can be dismissed with the argument of "bad apples/Hamas human shields", because being in breach does not rule on the intentional aspect behind what Israel is doing.
Edit: to make clear, I just expect any ruling to be dissapointing, despite the level of Israeli violence on display. It is hard to say civilian casualties are unintentional, yet that might just be what the court lands one (i.e. careless but not intentional).
|
|
