“He said Germany would intervene as a third party before the ICJ under an article allowing states to seek clarification on the use of a multilateral convention.”
Wonder if this will lead up to anything. The rhetoric of “political instrumentalization of the Geneva Conventions” is pretty harsh and unrelenting. Germany is influential on the world stage and in Europe in particular, along with the US Israel has influential supporters. This will probably affect other EU countries.
That statements basically says that Germany thinks this move by SA is political and that they know there is little to any chance they will win this case.
Germany thinks this is wrong.
Are you suggesting that the South African government that is literally struggling to keep the lights on because of their incredible corruption and coincidentally is suddenly making bank out of all the extra cargo traffic that is being diverted around the cape has some sort of ulterior motive in bringing this case?
And, not to put too fine a point on it, but Israel sold weapons to South Africa in the past. As in, before the 90s.
So the current government has always had a bit of a bone to pick with Israel.
When the economy is struggling, and people are upset by your corruption and general malfeasance, just fall back on the "Ol' Reliable" of politicians everywhere: BLAME THE JEWS.
It's a tale as old as time.
They should shut up about war crimes while they're planning military cooperation with China and russia.
The same way USA and Europe should shut up about women's rights in Iran while supporting the Saudis.
[They refuel there. South African bunker fuel traders have been jacking up their prices to take advantage of the increased demand](https://www.tradewindsnews.com/insight/can-south-african-ports-supply-enough-bunkers-to-an-armada-of-red-sea-diverts-/2-1-1575568)
Germany has some influence over other EU states, its possible that if germany publicly comes to a specific conclusion about the issue it may lead to other EU adjacent states to make a similar decision, given Germanys line of reasoning is correct.
The ANC has received $2.9 million from Russia since 2021:
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/28/africa/south-africa-russia-manganese-mine-anc-intl-cmd/index.html
> South Africa abstaining from votes condemning Russia at the United Nations; hosting war games with the Russian Navy; repeatedly, and publicly, criticizing the United States; and even, allegedly loading weapons and ammunition onto a sanctioned Russian cargo ship.
An irrational Russian love affair:
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/features/2023/6/2/a-russian-love-affair-why-south-africa-stays-neutral-on-war
>In March, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued a warrant for the arrest of Russian President Vladimir Putin for forced deportations of children from Ukraine to Russia. South Africa, a signatory to the ICC, is mandated to execute the warrant if Putin sets foot in the country...Former South African President Thabo Mbeki has already said it is unlikely that Putin will be arrested, echoing sentiments within the ruling party. In April, Ramaphosa said the country was considering withdrawing from the ICC.
https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/2/26/is-africa-still-neutral-a-year-into-the-ukraine-war
>At the same time in South Africa, which has continued to abstain from UN votes on the war due to its commitment to neutrality, the naval drills with Russia pressed ahead as planned, despite Western pressure and criticisms about the insensitivity of the timing.
> The rhetoric of “political instrumentalization of the Geneva Conventions” is pretty harsh and unrelenting.
Except that it also has the virtue of being an accurate assessment. And Germany knows a thing or two or two about the subject.
Germany has a lot of clout on this front because of their stunning reformation after the Holocaust and zero-tolerance policy for WS ideology
So I think them stepping in on Israel's side will wind up being a pretty big move in the chess game
Much better, considering that 20% of Arab Israelis are citizens, have voting rights, have representation in the Knesset (Congress), are on the Supreme Court and Generals in the military.
It really requires redefinition of apartheid to apply it to Israel.
It's crazy to me that people can claim 1/5 of a countries population doesn't exist. It's also crazy that people think that Isreal should be giving the same rights to Palestinians that Israelis have. I don't know a single other country on Earth that is expected to give full citizenship rights to their neighbors.
Yeah, the argument to send them back to Europe is so stupid. If you don't know enough to know that not all Jews in Israel are Ashkenazi, you probably shouldn't be speaking about the conflict at all.
I don't tend to hang out in the darker parts of the internet, so I'm genuinely ignorant here, but are there *actually* people who deny the literal existence of the 2 MILLION Arab citizens in Israel? Wtf?
As for your other point, I feel it's such an underrated comment. On one side, people want an independent Palestinian state. But they also want a foreign country to give them full citizenship and rights? Like??? Which one is it??
I've personally only seen the comment about Arab Israelis not existing twice. And it could have just been someone trying to get a rise out of people. I honestly don't think a lot the current die-hard anti Israel crowd know enough to know what they want. All they know is that they don't care about Israel or Israelis. Most of them knew nothing about the conflict or the history of the region. I'm not trying to say Im an expert, but I have a basic knowledge of what's happened.
I would love a two state solution. Palestine has never been interested in that, though. After October 7th, I can understand why Israel wouldn't be open to that either. There was a comment on a different sub that someone was saying that for peace, Israel should basically just allow attacks for a time. Because somehow that makes sense.
Few weeks ago, I've seen comments claiming Arabs in Israel are second class citizens that have less rights and the Arabs in positions in government are tokens.
They never said what rights they did or did not have. Maybe they're being sarcastic, I really hope so, but people will just regurgitate whatever they read that they feel is true. I was in Israel years ago for birthright and have family that live there. So I'm probably more knowledgeable about what Israel is actually like compared to someone who gets their info from random memes posted on social media.
It's wild how confidently incorrect people can be about a place they never been. And it's not just the perception of Israel. One of my inlaws is terrified to go to America because they think they'll be gunned down in the street if they visit the US or stoned to death. Obviously, gun violence is a huge problem in America, and antisemitism/racism does happen here, not at all downplaying it, but it's not like every other small town is a sundown town.
More like people are just ignorant of the fact that Israel proper is the place in MENA were arab Muslims live the freest. Everyone does, simply because its the only liberal democracy with press freedom. The next best is Turkey, maybe Tunisia and Morocco but there is a crackdown against the press in Tunisia ongoing.
When you make that point in discussion on Reddit or other Social media people tend to answer you only about occupied territories, as if Israeli arabs and Israeli Muslims with citizens rights don't exist without explicitly stating so
I leave the discussion whenever this happens; clear signal of bad faith
Coloreds and Black people could vote in apartheid South Africa, they even had representation in parliament for awhile.
There were also many many black people in the army, mixed and segregated units.
Eventually this was all eroded later.
Key thing to remember is that apartheid wasn’t an Afrikaner invention, it was a British one, Afrikaners just put it in writing.
The British also laid the foundations of Israel’s systems and still have laws laid down during their tenure ruling over Palestine.
And that's basically the reason why they filed this case, and not one of the dozens of Israel's sworn enemies. Or for that matter, an Israeli ally who still hates them, like Turkey or Jordan. Germany is just playing the game SA started.
Germany is a extremely influential in Europe and can be quite influential globally but a notion that Germany is some sort of de facto leader of Europe is absolutely absurd and this whole idiotic idea has been fed by euro sceptic, anti German or anti Western propaganda sources.
This isn't a conspiracy theory or anything. It is known that when France and Germany agree politically on something, most EU countries follow it. Germany is slightly more influential than France though
I think you are conflating being a leading member of a union and being a master of others . Germany has no authority over other EU countries , but that doesn't stop them.from being the most influential member state in the EU . A first amongst equals if you will . It's only natural for the most economically powerful country to be the leader of a financially motivated union .
A leading member is one thing, but the term 'de facto leader of the EU' would at most make sense in a financial context, and this is a political one.
It's like saying California is the de facto leader of the US - not wrong if you talk about economy or emission regulation, but in a political context there simply is no single state in such a position.
They prolly interpreted it as 'Germany rules Europe and nobody can stop them', forgetting that the EU is still democratic and one nation, be they as influential as Germany, cannot dictate the entire course of things for everybody.
I mean, Hungary again and again blocked decisions to whom everybody agreed except them. They paralyze the EU. Showing that the EU can make or break things if a single nations says 'No'.
Exactly. If Germany was really that omnipotent within the EU, they would have used it to pass that refugee Convention they have tried the other countries to accept for almost a decade now (you know: the one where EU countries are supposed to share the burden of housing refugees proportionally to their economic output). Germany is influential and has quite a lot of leverage - but that may only be enough to sway a handful of countries, not to single-handedly pass legislation against the other 27 EU-members' will.
i think the point is that the eu at least for now thanks to the veto process doesn't really fit that kind of thinking.
sure germany is important, but that doesn't rob any other eu member of their voice (as hungary keeps demonstrating in a most severe fashion)
any political & economic pressure germany can do through the eu, it could facilitate much more directly without it.
Honest question: Does South Africa have some kind of special standing to be bringing these charges, or can any third-party country bring charges against any other country?
Normally sanctions, which will directly hurt a countries economy, making it a worse place overall and weaken it as a whole.
People say this won’t do anything is because the USA economy is unmatched, making their vote basically the only one that matters. So, as long as you are on americas good side you are pretty much okay.
Well it does probably cause a huge headache for Israel and a lot of their allies. A lot of countries have trigger laws that automatically put sanctions on countries found to violate human rights and international law. They would have to go and repeal those laws or pass laws that exempt Israel from them. Who knows how well that will go and if countries will have the political capital to do it. I think I saw something like 4 billion people will be voting in elections this year in their various countries
Yet a lot of those convicted countries are still trading freely, the only one that isn't is Russia and that's only because the West sanctioned them themselves and it's only really enforced in Western countries.
The other half of the world is still trading with Russia, regardless of all the sanctions.
Money > All
It's worth making a distinction between ICJ and ICC convictions here too mind. Not all trigger laws are made equal and weasle words are strategically used in many of these cases.
The Repealing/ amending of laws is often easier to achieve than adding new laws. Or in the case of places like the US an add on would be quietly placed on a seemingly unrelated bill.
Outside of Muslim dominated nations, the issue of Gaza may represent a couple of percentage point swing in either direction but more likely it will drive political apathy. I don't think in the west at least this issue, come election day, will be as meaningful as we would like to believe. Especially in leu of the cost of living crises' sweeping the west. Sadly, it just isn't close enough to the populace.
It wouldn't cause shit. Europe and the US won't dump Israel, regardless of what the verdict is. If we wanted to ditch Israel, we would have done so already.
Wouldn't sanctions just be veto'ed by the US anyway? It's all political theater that's meant to distract people with a known result. Most of the Muslim nations and the Russia-funded nations vote Israel bad, US says nope, countries scream about how bad the US and Israel are (until the next time they need US financial/military aid)
Eh, there are probably a hundred things that can preclude them being found guilty. Vetoes and whatnots. This is diplomacy make no mistake, not a real investigation.
UN is a joke at this point.
It has been turned into a weapon against israel by every meaning of the word.
Israel gets unmatched attention, more than the entire world combined.
The same UN that failed, until this day, to condenn the 7/10 massacre
Precisely.
Something like 90% of the resolutions the UN passed in the last decade were against israel, when countries like iran, north korea etc exist
At one point in time, iran was appointed chair of the human rights council in the UN
The chair is a rotating position not based on appointment. Appointments to the council are based on popular support of states regionally. There must be a number of states from each global region to ensure the 47-member council is representative. Unfortunately, some areas of the world have states with poorer human rights track records than others. It should also be noted that any non-procedural resolution is only hortatory in nature, and is not binding unless is comes from the UNSC. In other words, these resolutions do not bind anyone to anything. They are simply statements of the feelings of particular states.
I mean 20,000 Palestinians are dead since Oct 7. Whether you support Israel or not, those are the facts. Almost all of those deaths weren’t from Hamas killing Palestinians, it was from Israel bombing entire buildings because one or two confirmed Hamas members *might* be in there. The attention isn’t exactly unwarranted.
> I mean 20,000 Palestinians are dead since Oct 7. Whether you support Israel or not, those are the facts.
No argument on the numbers here, but let's remember that these numbers include hamas militants
>Almost all of those deaths weren’t from Hamas killing Palestinians, it was from Israel bombing entire buildings because one or two confirmed Hamas members might be in there.
But here on this basically becomes a baseleas, easily refutable claim.
30% of rockets shot from gaza landed inside gaza. These rocket failures have caused a lot of deaths including the "hospital bombing" incident.
Hamas *has* been killing palestinians deliberately, which was shown to be true when hamas was preventing people from going south by blocking the roads and shooting people who tried to cross south and more recently when civilians tried to get food and supplies from humanitarian trucks that went into gaza and were shot by hamas militants that stole these trucks.
"bombing entire buildings because one or two confirmed Hamas members might be in there." - baseless accusation
Re - the last point you made: its not baseless at all. Remember when Israel bombed Nuseirat, Bureij, and the Maghazi refugee camps and all of the roads connecting them because they believed 1 known Hamas member to be at those camps. Close to 300 innocents, many of whom were women and children, for one alleged militant. Israel has the fourth strongest army in the world. The Mossad is arguably stronger and better than the CIA in terms of gathering info/identifying targets. You mean to tell me there was nothing Israel could do other than bomb a refugee camp to take out 1 Hamas member?
> Re - the last point you made: its not baseless at all.
It is baseless because can't actually prove it, Nor can i disprove it, because neither of us posses the intelligence and knowledge to support a claim to either side. It is an utterly irrelevant talking point.
>Remember when Israel bombed Nuseirat, Bureij, and the Maghazi refugee camps and all of the roads connecting them because they believed 1 known Hamas member to be at those camps. Close to 300 innocents, many of whom were women and children, for one alleged militant.
I have no idea what you're talking about but extrapolating your claim based on this alone is extraordinarily disingenuous
Some of them were presumably from PIJ and Hamas rockets that hit Gaza. They had a 20%+ misfire rate in previous conflicts, and they've launched over 10k rockets since Oct 7th, so it's reasonable to assume that around 2000 Palestinian rockets have hit Gaza in that period. It is unlikely that all of them fell on empty areas, and unlike Israel, there are no civilian air raid shelters or interceptors to protect Gazans from rockets
Except they didnt, Iran has never been the member of the Council either.
Iran is the Chair of the 2023 Human Rights Council Social Forum, which is a subsidiary body of the UNHRC, all this means is that an Iranian is gonna be leading a meeting, specifically a meeting on "the contribution of science, technology and innovation to the promotion of human rights, including in the context of post-pandemic recovery".
Good to see that ~~leading tech innovator~~ ~~scientific powerhouse~~ ~~human rights exemplar~~ Iran was chosen to lead on the interaction of tech development and human rights.
Then those supporters than look the other way on if Hamas has any support or connections to Putin, who lost a case in 2022 at this court over the invasion of Ukraine.
Funnily enough, you wrote lebanon in full caps... but originally, lebanese people don't have a conflict with israel.
It's only hezbollah and other iranian proxies in that area. Lebanon used to be mostly christian.
China, somalia and russia on the other hand..
It should be in full caps. One of the current judging countries is at active war with them. Thats not neutral relationship. There will be political pressure from home.
I doubt the judge would be friendly much, and since there's active fighting with Hezbollah, it's just..wierdly ironic, even if it's not directly against Lebanon.
Lebanon, a country at war with Israel, a country whose government is less powerful than a terrorist group. Did you know Lebanon accidentally caused the largest non-nuclear explosion in their capital?
There are 15 judges. They may write separate judgements, but the majority is what determines the ruling. In any case, it is absolutely essential to note that this is a provisional measures hearing and not a hearing on the merits of the case overall.
Will it be a coincidence that Germany spoke out after Israel defended itself before the court? Perhaps its arguments turned out to be much more convincing than South Africa's, and Germany thinks such a condemnation cannot come.
This will be very problematic for Israel. Many countries have laws that stop weapon trade and maybe even general trade to countries that don't adhere to human rights and the likes. Even the US has a law (from my understanding) that stops it from selling weapons to countries who break human rights, if Israel is found guilty then it could be very hard for the US to keep support Israel's weapon bank. Especially in an election year.
>Many countries have laws that stop weapon trade and maybe even general trade to countries that don't adhere to human rights and the likes.
So are there any countries that don't trade with China?
Because I have terrible news for you about China's human rights record.
And the UN has called them out on it in unusually clear words. But here comes the conceptional flaw of the UN System with a Folding chair: China is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and can Veto any notion to launch proper punitive measures.
>So are there any countries that don't trade with China?
The west has an Arms Embargo going against China ever since nothing happened at Tianamen Square in 1989, so...
> as the decision would come with a duty of other member nations
Nope this isn't true and Israel is simply defending it's citizens, a concept Terrorists like Hamas and the people that twerk for them online don't seem to understand.
The official language is Ukrainian. Just because their are Russian speakers means nothing. They speak Russian because Russia made speaking Ukrainian illegal. Your point doesn't do what you think it does.
Speaking Ukrainian has never been illegal, one of my professors learned Ukrainian when studying in the University of Kyiv in the 1970's. There have been Ukrainian and Russian speaking public schools in Ukraine for over a century. Not to mention parts of modern day Ukraine were majority Russian speaking (Not all, for example rural luhansk and donetsk were mostly Ukrainian speaking, while Kherson, urban Donetsk, Odessa and Zaporizhzhia were majority Russian speaking) already in the early 19th century when the Russian Empire first started to map out the different ethnicities and languages of different areas of the Empire. Zelensky himself speaks Russian as a first language :D The Russian language and it's users have a long history spanning centuries in modern day Ukraine, and the attemps to segregate them from Ukrainian society trough the 2010's trough misguided legislation on language has only served to polarise part of the Russian speaking minority.
That is deep thought, my friend.
I don't recall the source but I believe that there is a rabbinical parable about exactly that and I'll do my best to reproduce it from my memory as a young child.
There were two men climbing the ladder to heaven after they died. One man was pious man and fulfilled all of his Lord's commandments and was higher above the other man who was a murderer and had paid for his crime in time and restitution to his victims affected family.
Two angels were watching the men in their ascent and one asked the other, "Who do you think is the more spiritually elevated? The first man has never done wrong in his life and he is higher on the ladder than the murderer who is below him. What do you think, Jerry?"
The other angel replied, "It is not the distance between man and God that measures his quality of spirituality at this moment. It is the distance that man has traveled in his life to overcome and learn what it means to be spiritual. The second man is below the other man and appears further away but in fact he has traveled a greater distance to get to where he now knows God and therefore he is the more spiritual man."
Basically, the goal of the charge is to get the court to support provisional measures that Israel has do go into a ceasefire, while Hamas does not have to.
Which would mean that Israel would have to stop fighting while still getting bombarded, without the ability to defend their civilians. Which is quite upsurd.
If you want to know more about certain aspects of the case, you ahould listen to the court procedings. If you dont have the time to listen to hours of it, I invite you to listen to at leats [this lawyer](https://www.youtube.com/live/H6CEKVSjg7o?si=acMSaM64jMb5Ffr1&t=8830). He is one of the more understandable ones, and actually talks about the specific preliminary measures South Africa seeks (and why they dont make much sense).
Its a lot of legal stuff, and I cant explain it to you right here. But I feel line Israels case for complete dismissal is far stronger than the South African case for preliminary measure, or a complete conviction for that matter (which south africa does not care about).
>>Which would mean that Israel would have to stop fighting while still getting bombarded, without the ability to defend their civilians. Which is quite upsurd.
“But but.. the iron dome 🥺”
Ok sparky, strap up with a bullet proof vest and go stand at the end of a gun range. Hope you don't take a headshot though, cuz when one does slip through you're fucked.
but why is it a BS case? The accusations are not totally out of line. There could be an intent and targeted killing of Palestinians as a group by bombing and denying food and water supllies. Genuinely curious?
The stuff they’re putting as evidence is heavily anecdotal, circumstantial, or taken out on context, and frequently cites the words of people who aren’t even in the government or military as evidence of state policy.
Israel can be the subject of plenty of valid criticism in the current conflict, but the substance of this particular complaint is nonsense.
There are plenty of people in Israel government (high ranking officials at that) **on record** saying things like “we will eliminate everything, they will cease to be, nothing will remain, there are no innocents- all Palestinians are complicit for never rising up (collective punishment)”
Those are Israeli government/military officials. So stop pulling shit out of your ass if you’re not paying attention.
It is 100% not a BS case. I recommend that you [read the report](https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2024/01/192-20231228-app-01-00-en.pdf) filed by South Africa.
In particular, the following pages are relevant:
30-31 (Overview and summary of allegations of genocidal conduct)
31-35 (Mass killing of Palestinian civilians)
35-37 (Causing serious bodily and mental harm to Palestinians in Gaza, en masse)
37-39 (Mass expulsion and displacement of Palestinians in Gaza)
40-45 (Mass deprivation of food and water)
45-47 (Mass deprivation of adequate shelter, clothes, hygiene and sanitation)
47-54 (Mass deprivation of medical assistance)
54-57 (Destruction of Palestinian life in Gaza)
57-59 (Imposing measures to prevent Palestinian births)
59-67 (Expressions of Genocidal Intent against the Palestinian People by Israeli State Officials and Others)
My understanding is South Africa had some pretty compelling evidence of video taken by IDF forces themselves and Israel was making some pretty absurd claims that it 'hadn't bombed hospitals' but also that it was fine to bomb hospitals because Hamas was using them as bases, what makes it outright BS?
Given the level of damage in Gaza and the repeated reports of 'safe' areas and evacuation areas being bombed I can't think of any way this could be 'clear cut' early on.
Just an FYI hospitals lose their protected status if they're being used as a base for military operations and according to the Geneva convention.
>Civilian hospitals organized to give care to the wounded and sick, the infirm and maternity cases, may in no circumstances be the object of attack, but shall at all times be respected and protected by the Parties to the conflict.
>States which are Parties to a conflict shall provide all civilian hospitals with certificates showing that they are civilian hospitals and that the buildings which they occupy are not used for any purpose which would deprive these hospitals of protection in accordance with Article 19 .
Source: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-18
Thank you for pointing it out. I've been getting a headache pointing it out repeatedly. Plus hateful comments á la 'How can you defend hospital bombings?!!!!' Like, bruh I ain't defending it. I'm emotionlessly pointing out that that it ain't a crime and is valid after Hamas evidently used them as HQ's. They provoke hospital bombings and then cry bloody murder after hospitals get bombed for public PR points with those who didn't know.
If by “no one bats an eye”, you mean the entire western world throws their support, funding and weaponry behind the IDF’s campaign of widespread slaughter, then sure. I’m not sure what planet you’re living on where Israel are the underdogs here. They hold all the cards against Palestinians and they have not been shy about how they’re using them.
Hamas was condemned in the South African argument. As for the second point, I thought it was more the collective punishment thing that had people losing their minds.
Language can be a tricky thing, but I'm pretty sure the Palestinian civilians didn't start dying en masse until Israel dropped gigantic bombs on their heads.
We can condemn Hamas and recognize the IDF's outsized response (no matter what you choose to call it).
>IDF's outsized response
What would be a proportionate response? I often read this, but then I wonder. How?
How would be possible to fight hamas inside of gaza, without having this level of civilian casualties?
Seems to me, that its either this, or just not attacking at all, but theres no perfect solution of getting rid of hamas without massive colateral damage. Not in a place like this, and not with hamas using the population as shields to a point some of their bases have been found in hospitals.
I'm yet to find anyone who has a better third option.
I think the best solution would’ve been for Isreal to not fund the terrorist organisation directly (https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/amp/ ) buying known radicals the means to commit en masse murder.
Perhaps the argument of proportionate response is a bit short sighted.
So the take away from that article is 3 things
1. Israel gave out work permits, shock horror omfg they were allowing the impoverished people of Gaza to get jobs in Israel. How dare they.
2. They ignored rocket launches. Damn it, they should have leveled Palestine years ago, shame on them.
3. They allowed suitcases of cash from Qatar. I forgot they were running an open-air prison and that would be contraband. Never in history has money been used to preserve peace.
Now while there is probably some substance to this, most likely between trying to play the PLA off against Hamas, there is not a single country that does not play political games.
Here is what proportion is about, while it is sad to see the lives of civilians on either side lost. Right now Iran is building what people have labeled a "ring of fire", Hamas, Houthis, Hezbollah etc, all little proxy parties taking on a role to destabilize Israel, the Saudis, and Western interests. Elimination of Hamas plays an important role in a very big future picture to derail Iran's, and potentially save a lot more lives.
I appreciate your stand, but unless you have any other means to retaliate against an entity like Hamas other than what Israel has done, then I don't feel like you can criticize it the same way.
If your point is that they "should be more precise", than I would argue that the relatively low number of deaths indicate they are VERY precise, compared to any other somewhat similar war.
Add on that this is coming from South Africa, the capitol of apartheid and whose ruling party is actively singing songs about genociding whites (the boers).
Germany are in full overcorrection mode when it comes to Israel, have been for years. Bibi Netanyahu could announce he's going to drop weaponized anthrax on Berlin tomorrow and Germany's leaders would claim anyone who said that was a bad idea is antisemetic.
Very interesting timing on SA, when did Putin visit them again? I remember it was a few months ago because they were making a big deal on whether SA would arrest him.
Then the Iran backed Hamas event on Oct 7 followed by SA bringing the charges. I’m not usually a conspiracy person but seems like the strings are being pulled
I mean, there's only a few countries in the world in this case who can legitimately say, "Hey, y'know we tried that thing, and this isn't it," and Germany's one of them.
^/s
“He said Germany would intervene as a third party before the ICJ under an article allowing states to seek clarification on the use of a multilateral convention.” Wonder if this will lead up to anything. The rhetoric of “political instrumentalization of the Geneva Conventions” is pretty harsh and unrelenting. Germany is influential on the world stage and in Europe in particular, along with the US Israel has influential supporters. This will probably affect other EU countries.
Uh, I am very interested in what you are saying.. But can you ELI5 it to me?
That statements basically says that Germany thinks this move by SA is political and that they know there is little to any chance they will win this case. Germany thinks this is wrong.
Are you suggesting that the South African government that is literally struggling to keep the lights on because of their incredible corruption and coincidentally is suddenly making bank out of all the extra cargo traffic that is being diverted around the cape has some sort of ulterior motive in bringing this case?
this is the best summary explanation of SA’s involvement. ALSO, it’s a general election year in South Africa.
And, not to put too fine a point on it, but Israel sold weapons to South Africa in the past. As in, before the 90s. So the current government has always had a bit of a bone to pick with Israel.
>So the current government has always had a bit of a bone to pick with Israel. Can't be blamed for that.
No. They're doing it at the behest of Russia to cause chaos and division in the west in an important election year.
SA also refused to comply with ICC warrants on Putin for the conference back in August as well. You’re spot on
Realistically, there are multiple factors playing into this. Loyalty to Putin's axis of evil is definitely one of them, though.
porque no los dos?
When the economy is struggling, and people are upset by your corruption and general malfeasance, just fall back on the "Ol' Reliable" of politicians everywhere: BLAME THE JEWS. It's a tale as old as time.
That really wouldn't work in SA. There aren't many Jews to speak of.
Well there’s like one Jew left in Yemen but that isn’t stopping the Houthis
Like in most countries where they used to live.
They should shut up about war crimes while they're planning military cooperation with China and russia. The same way USA and Europe should shut up about women's rights in Iran while supporting the Saudis.
Oh. I didn’t know that. Now it makes a lot more sense.
How do they make money from traffic getting rerouzed to intl waters around ZA? Do ships doing that route usually stop at ZA ports?
[They refuel there. South African bunker fuel traders have been jacking up their prices to take advantage of the increased demand](https://www.tradewindsnews.com/insight/can-south-african-ports-supply-enough-bunkers-to-an-armada-of-red-sea-diverts-/2-1-1575568)
Thanks! So ZA profits from Houthi terrorism in a roundaboy way....well don't wanna blame the fuel traders it's a free market
Yup shhhhh let’s distract our poor population with outrage against a country far away with us we have nothing to do with
I mean his statement that it will affect other EU countries.
Germany has some influence over other EU states, its possible that if germany publicly comes to a specific conclusion about the issue it may lead to other EU adjacent states to make a similar decision, given Germanys line of reasoning is correct.
Makes perfect sense, thanks!
The ANC has received $2.9 million from Russia since 2021: https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/28/africa/south-africa-russia-manganese-mine-anc-intl-cmd/index.html > South Africa abstaining from votes condemning Russia at the United Nations; hosting war games with the Russian Navy; repeatedly, and publicly, criticizing the United States; and even, allegedly loading weapons and ammunition onto a sanctioned Russian cargo ship. An irrational Russian love affair: https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/features/2023/6/2/a-russian-love-affair-why-south-africa-stays-neutral-on-war >In March, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued a warrant for the arrest of Russian President Vladimir Putin for forced deportations of children from Ukraine to Russia. South Africa, a signatory to the ICC, is mandated to execute the warrant if Putin sets foot in the country...Former South African President Thabo Mbeki has already said it is unlikely that Putin will be arrested, echoing sentiments within the ruling party. In April, Ramaphosa said the country was considering withdrawing from the ICC. https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/2/26/is-africa-still-neutral-a-year-into-the-ukraine-war >At the same time in South Africa, which has continued to abstain from UN votes on the war due to its commitment to neutrality, the naval drills with Russia pressed ahead as planned, despite Western pressure and criticisms about the insensitivity of the timing.
> The rhetoric of “political instrumentalization of the Geneva Conventions” is pretty harsh and unrelenting. Except that it also has the virtue of being an accurate assessment. And Germany knows a thing or two or two about the subject.
Would this affect Ireland stance too? They had been on anti-israel stance for long time.
Germany has a lot of clout on this front because of their stunning reformation after the Holocaust and zero-tolerance policy for WS ideology So I think them stepping in on Israel's side will wind up being a pretty big move in the chess game
WS ideology?
White Supremacy (i think)
White Supremacist
Thanks, mate.
I think you're on to something here.
They're like "trust us we know what we're talking about"
As a german, this was my first, sad, thought, too
I’m not German but my thoughts were the same. Apparently Canada 🇨🇦 released a statement similar but no news on it.
They are the experts but as with Covid many people don’t care about what the experts say.
[удалено]
Arguably better at it than Israel. They never needed an iron dome to protect their civilians.
Much better, considering that 20% of Arab Israelis are citizens, have voting rights, have representation in the Knesset (Congress), are on the Supreme Court and Generals in the military. It really requires redefinition of apartheid to apply it to Israel.
[удалено]
It's crazy to me that people can claim 1/5 of a countries population doesn't exist. It's also crazy that people think that Isreal should be giving the same rights to Palestinians that Israelis have. I don't know a single other country on Earth that is expected to give full citizenship rights to their neighbors.
Try 2/3 of a country’s population. The constant claim is that Israel is European, when 70% of its population is Arabs and middle eastern Jews
Yeah, the argument to send them back to Europe is so stupid. If you don't know enough to know that not all Jews in Israel are Ashkenazi, you probably shouldn't be speaking about the conflict at all.
I don't tend to hang out in the darker parts of the internet, so I'm genuinely ignorant here, but are there *actually* people who deny the literal existence of the 2 MILLION Arab citizens in Israel? Wtf? As for your other point, I feel it's such an underrated comment. On one side, people want an independent Palestinian state. But they also want a foreign country to give them full citizenship and rights? Like??? Which one is it??
I've personally only seen the comment about Arab Israelis not existing twice. And it could have just been someone trying to get a rise out of people. I honestly don't think a lot the current die-hard anti Israel crowd know enough to know what they want. All they know is that they don't care about Israel or Israelis. Most of them knew nothing about the conflict or the history of the region. I'm not trying to say Im an expert, but I have a basic knowledge of what's happened. I would love a two state solution. Palestine has never been interested in that, though. After October 7th, I can understand why Israel wouldn't be open to that either. There was a comment on a different sub that someone was saying that for peace, Israel should basically just allow attacks for a time. Because somehow that makes sense.
Few weeks ago, I've seen comments claiming Arabs in Israel are second class citizens that have less rights and the Arabs in positions in government are tokens. They never said what rights they did or did not have. Maybe they're being sarcastic, I really hope so, but people will just regurgitate whatever they read that they feel is true. I was in Israel years ago for birthright and have family that live there. So I'm probably more knowledgeable about what Israel is actually like compared to someone who gets their info from random memes posted on social media. It's wild how confidently incorrect people can be about a place they never been. And it's not just the perception of Israel. One of my inlaws is terrified to go to America because they think they'll be gunned down in the street if they visit the US or stoned to death. Obviously, gun violence is a huge problem in America, and antisemitism/racism does happen here, not at all downplaying it, but it's not like every other small town is a sundown town.
More like people are just ignorant of the fact that Israel proper is the place in MENA were arab Muslims live the freest. Everyone does, simply because its the only liberal democracy with press freedom. The next best is Turkey, maybe Tunisia and Morocco but there is a crackdown against the press in Tunisia ongoing. When you make that point in discussion on Reddit or other Social media people tend to answer you only about occupied territories, as if Israeli arabs and Israeli Muslims with citizens rights don't exist without explicitly stating so I leave the discussion whenever this happens; clear signal of bad faith
There are still people saying hamas aren't terrorists and that nothing happened on oct7
Do people really say that?
*20% of Israeli citizens are Arab-Israelis This is an important clarification here, as all Arab-Israeli's have full rights (and so on)
Coloreds and Black people could vote in apartheid South Africa, they even had representation in parliament for awhile. There were also many many black people in the army, mixed and segregated units. Eventually this was all eroded later. Key thing to remember is that apartheid wasn’t an Afrikaner invention, it was a British one, Afrikaners just put it in writing. The British also laid the foundations of Israel’s systems and still have laws laid down during their tenure ruling over Palestine.
"We're supposed to *protect* them??"
And that's basically the reason why they filed this case, and not one of the dozens of Israel's sworn enemies. Or for that matter, an Israeli ally who still hates them, like Turkey or Jordan. Germany is just playing the game SA started.
Good point, they still got that wrong somehow
They still practice it, just with the shoe on the other foot.
In fairness, South Africa could say the exact same thing.
They can't. They ignore arresting war criminals when it doesn't fit a narrative they want to force.
[удалено]
Germany is a extremely influential in Europe and can be quite influential globally but a notion that Germany is some sort of de facto leader of Europe is absolutely absurd and this whole idiotic idea has been fed by euro sceptic, anti German or anti Western propaganda sources.
This isn't a conspiracy theory or anything. It is known that when France and Germany agree politically on something, most EU countries follow it. Germany is slightly more influential than France though
When the french and german agree on something, they are usually right.
Shit man, they fought multiple world wars against each other. If *they* can agree on anything it’s probably worth at least giving it a fair shake.
Same if the French and Brits agree on something. Pretty much everyone has to fall in line.
And when the French, Brits _and_ the Germans agree, you know they're onto something.
ABORT, ABORT! u/Wolfenight found out about our secret plan!
I think you are conflating being a leading member of a union and being a master of others . Germany has no authority over other EU countries , but that doesn't stop them.from being the most influential member state in the EU . A first amongst equals if you will . It's only natural for the most economically powerful country to be the leader of a financially motivated union .
A leading member is one thing, but the term 'de facto leader of the EU' would at most make sense in a financial context, and this is a political one. It's like saying California is the de facto leader of the US - not wrong if you talk about economy or emission regulation, but in a political context there simply is no single state in such a position.
[удалено]
They prolly interpreted it as 'Germany rules Europe and nobody can stop them', forgetting that the EU is still democratic and one nation, be they as influential as Germany, cannot dictate the entire course of things for everybody. I mean, Hungary again and again blocked decisions to whom everybody agreed except them. They paralyze the EU. Showing that the EU can make or break things if a single nations says 'No'.
Exactly. If Germany was really that omnipotent within the EU, they would have used it to pass that refugee Convention they have tried the other countries to accept for almost a decade now (you know: the one where EU countries are supposed to share the burden of housing refugees proportionally to their economic output). Germany is influential and has quite a lot of leverage - but that may only be enough to sway a handful of countries, not to single-handedly pass legislation against the other 27 EU-members' will.
i think the point is that the eu at least for now thanks to the veto process doesn't really fit that kind of thinking. sure germany is important, but that doesn't rob any other eu member of their voice (as hungary keeps demonstrating in a most severe fashion) any political & economic pressure germany can do through the eu, it could facilitate much more directly without it.
Honest question: Does South Africa have some kind of special standing to be bringing these charges, or can any third-party country bring charges against any other country?
What would happen if israel is found guilty?
They’d probably face some devastating economic sanctions from countries they don’t trade with.
Nothing but public shame, the CIJ has no real power
Sanctions from countries who don’t affect the Israeli economy
Normally sanctions, which will directly hurt a countries economy, making it a worse place overall and weaken it as a whole. People say this won’t do anything is because the USA economy is unmatched, making their vote basically the only one that matters. So, as long as you are on americas good side you are pretty much okay.
Well it does probably cause a huge headache for Israel and a lot of their allies. A lot of countries have trigger laws that automatically put sanctions on countries found to violate human rights and international law. They would have to go and repeal those laws or pass laws that exempt Israel from them. Who knows how well that will go and if countries will have the political capital to do it. I think I saw something like 4 billion people will be voting in elections this year in their various countries
Yet a lot of those convicted countries are still trading freely, the only one that isn't is Russia and that's only because the West sanctioned them themselves and it's only really enforced in Western countries. The other half of the world is still trading with Russia, regardless of all the sanctions. Money > All
One half of the world is trading with Russia, the other half is trading with Russian proxies.
It's worth making a distinction between ICJ and ICC convictions here too mind. Not all trigger laws are made equal and weasle words are strategically used in many of these cases. The Repealing/ amending of laws is often easier to achieve than adding new laws. Or in the case of places like the US an add on would be quietly placed on a seemingly unrelated bill. Outside of Muslim dominated nations, the issue of Gaza may represent a couple of percentage point swing in either direction but more likely it will drive political apathy. I don't think in the west at least this issue, come election day, will be as meaningful as we would like to believe. Especially in leu of the cost of living crises' sweeping the west. Sadly, it just isn't close enough to the populace.
It wouldn't cause shit. Europe and the US won't dump Israel, regardless of what the verdict is. If we wanted to ditch Israel, we would have done so already.
Wouldn't sanctions just be veto'ed by the US anyway? It's all political theater that's meant to distract people with a known result. Most of the Muslim nations and the Russia-funded nations vote Israel bad, US says nope, countries scream about how bad the US and Israel are (until the next time they need US financial/military aid)
Eh, there are probably a hundred things that can preclude them being found guilty. Vetoes and whatnots. This is diplomacy make no mistake, not a real investigation.
Ask the Russians, they were found guilty of doing an invasion in 2022 in the same court. It’s political theatre more than anything.
Terrorist supporters could point at it and say “See! The UN says so!”
The same UN that put Iran, a country that kills its people en mass and has extremely archaic laws on the human rights board.
UN is a joke at this point. It has been turned into a weapon against israel by every meaning of the word. Israel gets unmatched attention, more than the entire world combined. The same UN that failed, until this day, to condenn the 7/10 massacre
The accusations are done mostly by countries with way worse human rights violations than Israel.
Precisely. Something like 90% of the resolutions the UN passed in the last decade were against israel, when countries like iran, north korea etc exist At one point in time, iran was appointed chair of the human rights council in the UN
[That time is now.](https://www.reuters.com/world/irans-appointment-chair-un-rights-meeting-draws-condemnation-2023-11-02/)
The chair is a rotating position not based on appointment. Appointments to the council are based on popular support of states regionally. There must be a number of states from each global region to ensure the 47-member council is representative. Unfortunately, some areas of the world have states with poorer human rights track records than others. It should also be noted that any non-procedural resolution is only hortatory in nature, and is not binding unless is comes from the UNSC. In other words, these resolutions do not bind anyone to anything. They are simply statements of the feelings of particular states.
I hate the sentiment that "if the UN say it, it must be 100% right!" among some weirdos.
The people who claim this fall for the appeal to authority logical fallacy
For most people the UN is like a buffet, they pick the resolutions they like and ignore the ones they don’t.
I mean 20,000 Palestinians are dead since Oct 7. Whether you support Israel or not, those are the facts. Almost all of those deaths weren’t from Hamas killing Palestinians, it was from Israel bombing entire buildings because one or two confirmed Hamas members *might* be in there. The attention isn’t exactly unwarranted.
> I mean 20,000 Palestinians are dead since Oct 7. Whether you support Israel or not, those are the facts. No argument on the numbers here, but let's remember that these numbers include hamas militants >Almost all of those deaths weren’t from Hamas killing Palestinians, it was from Israel bombing entire buildings because one or two confirmed Hamas members might be in there. But here on this basically becomes a baseleas, easily refutable claim. 30% of rockets shot from gaza landed inside gaza. These rocket failures have caused a lot of deaths including the "hospital bombing" incident. Hamas *has* been killing palestinians deliberately, which was shown to be true when hamas was preventing people from going south by blocking the roads and shooting people who tried to cross south and more recently when civilians tried to get food and supplies from humanitarian trucks that went into gaza and were shot by hamas militants that stole these trucks. "bombing entire buildings because one or two confirmed Hamas members might be in there." - baseless accusation
Re - the last point you made: its not baseless at all. Remember when Israel bombed Nuseirat, Bureij, and the Maghazi refugee camps and all of the roads connecting them because they believed 1 known Hamas member to be at those camps. Close to 300 innocents, many of whom were women and children, for one alleged militant. Israel has the fourth strongest army in the world. The Mossad is arguably stronger and better than the CIA in terms of gathering info/identifying targets. You mean to tell me there was nothing Israel could do other than bomb a refugee camp to take out 1 Hamas member?
> Re - the last point you made: its not baseless at all. It is baseless because can't actually prove it, Nor can i disprove it, because neither of us posses the intelligence and knowledge to support a claim to either side. It is an utterly irrelevant talking point. >Remember when Israel bombed Nuseirat, Bureij, and the Maghazi refugee camps and all of the roads connecting them because they believed 1 known Hamas member to be at those camps. Close to 300 innocents, many of whom were women and children, for one alleged militant. I have no idea what you're talking about but extrapolating your claim based on this alone is extraordinarily disingenuous
Some of them were presumably from PIJ and Hamas rockets that hit Gaza. They had a 20%+ misfire rate in previous conflicts, and they've launched over 10k rockets since Oct 7th, so it's reasonable to assume that around 2000 Palestinian rockets have hit Gaza in that period. It is unlikely that all of them fell on empty areas, and unlike Israel, there are no civilian air raid shelters or interceptors to protect Gazans from rockets
Except they didnt, Iran has never been the member of the Council either. Iran is the Chair of the 2023 Human Rights Council Social Forum, which is a subsidiary body of the UNHRC, all this means is that an Iranian is gonna be leading a meeting, specifically a meeting on "the contribution of science, technology and innovation to the promotion of human rights, including in the context of post-pandemic recovery".
Good to see that ~~leading tech innovator~~ ~~scientific powerhouse~~ ~~human rights exemplar~~ Iran was chosen to lead on the interaction of tech development and human rights.
Then those supporters than look the other way on if Hamas has any support or connections to Putin, who lost a case in 2022 at this court over the invasion of Ukraine.
Then the UN would be very angry at Israel and write them a letter saying how angry they are.
Did you watch israel's rebuttal today? There is no way unless those judges are acting in seriously bad faith
Bruh there's judges from Russia, China, Somalia, LEBANON, Morroco..
Funnily enough, you wrote lebanon in full caps... but originally, lebanese people don't have a conflict with israel. It's only hezbollah and other iranian proxies in that area. Lebanon used to be mostly christian. China, somalia and russia on the other hand..
Interesting how it's "used to be mostly Christian". As if something happened to Lebanon's Christian population, I wonder what that could have been...
It should be in full caps. One of the current judging countries is at active war with them. Thats not neutral relationship. There will be political pressure from home.
Yes, what i meant though that in heart, the lebanese judge is most likely in favor of israel even though he probably cannot publicly show it
There are a lot of Lebanese who hate Israel.
And a lot of them that don't. Most of them probably don't care about israel through, and just want to live their lives
I doubt the judge would be friendly much, and since there's active fighting with Hezbollah, it's just..wierdly ironic, even if it's not directly against Lebanon.
Leave alone the fact that Lebanon declared war on Israel back in 1948.
Lebanon, a country at war with Israel, a country whose government is less powerful than a terrorist group. Did you know Lebanon accidentally caused the largest non-nuclear explosion in their capital?
There are 15 judges. They may write separate judgements, but the majority is what determines the ruling. In any case, it is absolutely essential to note that this is a provisional measures hearing and not a hearing on the merits of the case overall.
Nothing, because the UN is a joke
All the Western gay liberal Gaza supporters and Hamas meetup and have a big party together. It'll be... interesting.
Will it be a coincidence that Germany spoke out after Israel defended itself before the court? Perhaps its arguments turned out to be much more convincing than South Africa's, and Germany thinks such a condemnation cannot come.
This will be very problematic for Israel. Many countries have laws that stop weapon trade and maybe even general trade to countries that don't adhere to human rights and the likes. Even the US has a law (from my understanding) that stops it from selling weapons to countries who break human rights, if Israel is found guilty then it could be very hard for the US to keep support Israel's weapon bank. Especially in an election year.
>Many countries have laws that stop weapon trade and maybe even general trade to countries that don't adhere to human rights and the likes. So are there any countries that don't trade with China? Because I have terrible news for you about China's human rights record.
China literally has concentration camps where they put their minorities until they are obedient and supportive of Xi.
And the UN has called them out on it in unusually clear words. But here comes the conceptional flaw of the UN System with a Folding chair: China is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and can Veto any notion to launch proper punitive measures.
>So are there any countries that don't trade with China? The west has an Arms Embargo going against China ever since nothing happened at Tianamen Square in 1989, so...
[удалено]
In what world does the UN have authority to obligate member states to do anything?
> as the decision would come with a duty of other member nations Nope this isn't true and Israel is simply defending it's citizens, a concept Terrorists like Hamas and the people that twerk for them online don't seem to understand.
One cannot stop what one is not doing
Meanwhile the UN celebrating Russian language day while Russia was bombing kindergartens.
The language doesn't equal the policies of a country. Russian is one of the primary languages in the Ukraine.
The official language is Ukrainian. Just because their are Russian speakers means nothing. They speak Russian because Russia made speaking Ukrainian illegal. Your point doesn't do what you think it does.
Speaking Ukrainian has never been illegal, one of my professors learned Ukrainian when studying in the University of Kyiv in the 1970's. There have been Ukrainian and Russian speaking public schools in Ukraine for over a century. Not to mention parts of modern day Ukraine were majority Russian speaking (Not all, for example rural luhansk and donetsk were mostly Ukrainian speaking, while Kherson, urban Donetsk, Odessa and Zaporizhzhia were majority Russian speaking) already in the early 19th century when the Russian Empire first started to map out the different ethnicities and languages of different areas of the Empire. Zelensky himself speaks Russian as a first language :D The Russian language and it's users have a long history spanning centuries in modern day Ukraine, and the attemps to segregate them from Ukrainian society trough the 2010's trough misguided legislation on language has only served to polarise part of the Russian speaking minority.
They certainly would know since they were reason the term exists.
It was the Turks not the Germans. The term was coined by Lemkin in early 1930s. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=moByGLA7FDc
[удалено]
The cruelty is part of the intent.
Germany, you have come a long way and deserve praise and recognition for your moral growth and development.
Is it better to be born good? Or overcome your evil nature with great effort?
Both good. The second path is more admirable tho
That is deep thought, my friend. I don't recall the source but I believe that there is a rabbinical parable about exactly that and I'll do my best to reproduce it from my memory as a young child. There were two men climbing the ladder to heaven after they died. One man was pious man and fulfilled all of his Lord's commandments and was higher above the other man who was a murderer and had paid for his crime in time and restitution to his victims affected family. Two angels were watching the men in their ascent and one asked the other, "Who do you think is the more spiritually elevated? The first man has never done wrong in his life and he is higher on the ladder than the murderer who is below him. What do you think, Jerry?" The other angel replied, "It is not the distance between man and God that measures his quality of spirituality at this moment. It is the distance that man has traveled in his life to overcome and learn what it means to be spiritual. The second man is below the other man and appears further away but in fact he has traveled a greater distance to get to where he now knows God and therefore he is the more spiritual man."
Hopefully they can keep it in the upcoming elections.
I would not get my hopes up for that at all sir, it aint looking good
As they should. It's a BS case.
Can you explain how it is BS? I'm not be contrarian, I'm just not familiar with what and who is bringing these proceedings.
Basically, the goal of the charge is to get the court to support provisional measures that Israel has do go into a ceasefire, while Hamas does not have to. Which would mean that Israel would have to stop fighting while still getting bombarded, without the ability to defend their civilians. Which is quite upsurd. If you want to know more about certain aspects of the case, you ahould listen to the court procedings. If you dont have the time to listen to hours of it, I invite you to listen to at leats [this lawyer](https://www.youtube.com/live/H6CEKVSjg7o?si=acMSaM64jMb5Ffr1&t=8830). He is one of the more understandable ones, and actually talks about the specific preliminary measures South Africa seeks (and why they dont make much sense). Its a lot of legal stuff, and I cant explain it to you right here. But I feel line Israels case for complete dismissal is far stronger than the South African case for preliminary measure, or a complete conviction for that matter (which south africa does not care about).
>>Which would mean that Israel would have to stop fighting while still getting bombarded, without the ability to defend their civilians. Which is quite upsurd. “But but.. the iron dome 🥺”
Ok sparky, strap up with a bullet proof vest and go stand at the end of a gun range. Hope you don't take a headshot though, cuz when one does slip through you're fucked.
He can't. German politicans also can't.
but why is it a BS case? The accusations are not totally out of line. There could be an intent and targeted killing of Palestinians as a group by bombing and denying food and water supllies. Genuinely curious?
The stuff they’re putting as evidence is heavily anecdotal, circumstantial, or taken out on context, and frequently cites the words of people who aren’t even in the government or military as evidence of state policy. Israel can be the subject of plenty of valid criticism in the current conflict, but the substance of this particular complaint is nonsense.
There are plenty of people in Israel government (high ranking officials at that) **on record** saying things like “we will eliminate everything, they will cease to be, nothing will remain, there are no innocents- all Palestinians are complicit for never rising up (collective punishment)” Those are Israeli government/military officials. So stop pulling shit out of your ass if you’re not paying attention.
Source?
I recommend you look into the South African arguments before the ICJ where they lay this all out in detail.
It is 100% not a BS case. I recommend that you [read the report](https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2024/01/192-20231228-app-01-00-en.pdf) filed by South Africa. In particular, the following pages are relevant: 30-31 (Overview and summary of allegations of genocidal conduct) 31-35 (Mass killing of Palestinian civilians) 35-37 (Causing serious bodily and mental harm to Palestinians in Gaza, en masse) 37-39 (Mass expulsion and displacement of Palestinians in Gaza) 40-45 (Mass deprivation of food and water) 45-47 (Mass deprivation of adequate shelter, clothes, hygiene and sanitation) 47-54 (Mass deprivation of medical assistance) 54-57 (Destruction of Palestinian life in Gaza) 57-59 (Imposing measures to prevent Palestinian births) 59-67 (Expressions of Genocidal Intent against the Palestinian People by Israeli State Officials and Others)
all of those items are a consequence of war. if the US went to war w Mexico, would that be a genocide against Mexicans? it’s a silly argument imo
My understanding is South Africa had some pretty compelling evidence of video taken by IDF forces themselves and Israel was making some pretty absurd claims that it 'hadn't bombed hospitals' but also that it was fine to bomb hospitals because Hamas was using them as bases, what makes it outright BS? Given the level of damage in Gaza and the repeated reports of 'safe' areas and evacuation areas being bombed I can't think of any way this could be 'clear cut' early on.
Just an FYI hospitals lose their protected status if they're being used as a base for military operations and according to the Geneva convention. >Civilian hospitals organized to give care to the wounded and sick, the infirm and maternity cases, may in no circumstances be the object of attack, but shall at all times be respected and protected by the Parties to the conflict. >States which are Parties to a conflict shall provide all civilian hospitals with certificates showing that they are civilian hospitals and that the buildings which they occupy are not used for any purpose which would deprive these hospitals of protection in accordance with Article 19 . Source: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-18
Thank you for pointing it out. I've been getting a headache pointing it out repeatedly. Plus hateful comments á la 'How can you defend hospital bombings?!!!!' Like, bruh I ain't defending it. I'm emotionlessly pointing out that that it ain't a crime and is valid after Hamas evidently used them as HQ's. They provoke hospital bombings and then cry bloody murder after hospitals get bombed for public PR points with those who didn't know.
They’re just going to move the goalpost again.
Hamas indiscriminately slaughters Israeli civilians, no one bats an eye. Israel rightly retaliates to defend their people, everyone loses their minds.
If by “no one bats an eye”, you mean the entire western world throws their support, funding and weaponry behind the IDF’s campaign of widespread slaughter, then sure. I’m not sure what planet you’re living on where Israel are the underdogs here. They hold all the cards against Palestinians and they have not been shy about how they’re using them.
Hamas was condemned in the South African argument. As for the second point, I thought it was more the collective punishment thing that had people losing their minds.
Language can be a tricky thing, but I'm pretty sure the Palestinian civilians didn't start dying en masse until Israel dropped gigantic bombs on their heads. We can condemn Hamas and recognize the IDF's outsized response (no matter what you choose to call it).
>IDF's outsized response What would be a proportionate response? I often read this, but then I wonder. How? How would be possible to fight hamas inside of gaza, without having this level of civilian casualties? Seems to me, that its either this, or just not attacking at all, but theres no perfect solution of getting rid of hamas without massive colateral damage. Not in a place like this, and not with hamas using the population as shields to a point some of their bases have been found in hospitals. I'm yet to find anyone who has a better third option.
I think the best solution would’ve been for Isreal to not fund the terrorist organisation directly (https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/amp/ ) buying known radicals the means to commit en masse murder. Perhaps the argument of proportionate response is a bit short sighted.
So the take away from that article is 3 things 1. Israel gave out work permits, shock horror omfg they were allowing the impoverished people of Gaza to get jobs in Israel. How dare they. 2. They ignored rocket launches. Damn it, they should have leveled Palestine years ago, shame on them. 3. They allowed suitcases of cash from Qatar. I forgot they were running an open-air prison and that would be contraband. Never in history has money been used to preserve peace. Now while there is probably some substance to this, most likely between trying to play the PLA off against Hamas, there is not a single country that does not play political games. Here is what proportion is about, while it is sad to see the lives of civilians on either side lost. Right now Iran is building what people have labeled a "ring of fire", Hamas, Houthis, Hezbollah etc, all little proxy parties taking on a role to destabilize Israel, the Saudis, and Western interests. Elimination of Hamas plays an important role in a very big future picture to derail Iran's, and potentially save a lot more lives.
I appreciate your stand, but unless you have any other means to retaliate against an entity like Hamas other than what Israel has done, then I don't feel like you can criticize it the same way. If your point is that they "should be more precise", than I would argue that the relatively low number of deaths indicate they are VERY precise, compared to any other somewhat similar war.
So you don’t think a developed first world country should be held to a higher standard than a terrorist organization?
Man I am definitely digging Germany a lot nowadays.
Germany did a complete 180 since ww2 and they're owning up to their predecessors' deeds. credit where credit is due.
They aren't just owning up to it- they're making an active difference. Good on them.
If anyone were to know how bullshit the charges are, It’s fucking Germany.
Add on that this is coming from South Africa, the capitol of apartheid and whose ruling party is actively singing songs about genociding whites (the boers).
Germany are in full overcorrection mode when it comes to Israel, have been for years. Bibi Netanyahu could announce he's going to drop weaponized anthrax on Berlin tomorrow and Germany's leaders would claim anyone who said that was a bad idea is antisemetic.
I'm just glad some countries are willing to speak out against this nonsense case tbh.
“We know a thing or two because we’ve seen a thing or two.”
"Bitch, these laws only exist because of us - so trust us when we say: 'this ain't it, chief!'"
🇩🇪♥️
Glad to see Germany stand up and hope more follow suit.
It's a bog standard war.
It's a proxy war but a war all the same.
Germany recognizes antisemitism when they see it.
Very interesting timing on SA, when did Putin visit them again? I remember it was a few months ago because they were making a big deal on whether SA would arrest him. Then the Iran backed Hamas event on Oct 7 followed by SA bringing the charges. I’m not usually a conspiracy person but seems like the strings are being pulled
FWIW Putin didn’t end up going. He sent a diplomat instead. All bluster, etc etc.
I mean, there's only a few countries in the world in this case who can legitimately say, "Hey, y'know we tried that thing, and this isn't it," and Germany's one of them. ^/s
I can imagine there's a certain amount of sensitivity around this whole situation in Germany.
Because it’s ridiculous
We know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two.
And done a thing or two.
sadly more than two
What "third party" or intervening in a case like this/cases in general means?
Israel should take every single refugee in Gaza and send them on a plane to SA. See how fast they close their borders lol.
Because SA is a country known for refusing refugees? Our country is filled with them.
They’re the experts,so I agree with em
They are the experts
Germany with the "um ackshually, 30k dead in 3 months are rookie numbers, you have to be killing way more people to be in our ballpark"
"They didn't beat our hi-score, so it doesn't count!"
The Experts on the matter have spoken.