[ International ] [ Main Menu ]
54086
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: After Biden accepts ICC's use of territorial jurisdiction in Ukraine..
URL: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/29/netanyahu-icc-war-crimes
|
Kenneth Roth After Biden accepted the International Criminal Court's use of territorial jurisdiction in Ukraine to prosecute Putin, it would be the height of hypocrisy if Biden objected to the ICC's use of territorial jurisdiction in Palestine to prosecute Netanyahu. ‘Can war crime charges make any difference?’ Photograph: Ronen Zvulun/Reuters Opinion Benjamin Netanyahu What will happen if the ICC charges Netanyahu with war crimes? Kenneth Roth The Israeli prime minister has good reason to worry, and the defenses he has offered so far are unlikely to help him Mon 29 Apr 2024 The Israeli government believes that the international criminal court (ICC) in The Hague is about to file war crimes charges against Benjamin Netanyahu and other senior Israeli officials. We can’t know for sure – the ICC has kept its plans close to the vest – but the Israeli prime minister has good reason to worry, and the defenses he has offered so far are unlikely to help him. The ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan’s most likely target is Netanyahu’s starvation strategy for Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Because the Israeli government has refused to let ICC staff enter Gaza, it will take time for Khan to complete the detailed investigation required to demonstrate other possible Israeli war crimes, such as indiscriminately bombing civilian areas and firing on military targets with foreseeably disproportionate civilian consequences. But the facts surrounding Israel’s obstruction of humanitarian aid are readily available. During his two recent visits to the region, Khan stressed that, as international humanitarian law requires, Palestinian civilians in Gaza “must have access to basic food, water and desperately needed medical supplies, without further delay, and at pace and at scale”. He warned the Israeli government: “If you do not do so, do not complain when my Office is required to act.” The standard he cited is endorsed by virtually every government in the world including Israel, Britain, the United States, and, as a United Nations observer state, Palestine. For much of the war Israel has allowed just enough food into Gaza to avoid widespread death, but not enough to prevent pervasive hunger and, in some parts of Gaza according to the USAid administrator, Samantha Power, “famine”. Oxfam calculated that hundreds of thousands of people in northern Gaza were receiving on average only 245 calories a day, about one-tenth of normal requirements. At least 28 children younger than 12 were reported to have died of malnutrition as of 17 April. Israeli authorities have been blaming anyone but themselves for this deprivation, but the evidence points primarily to Netanyahu’s government. Israel understandably wants to stop the smuggling of arms to Hamas, but its understaffed, convoluted procedures for inspecting aid trucks can take three weeks, with trucks often rejected for carrying a single innocuous item that Israel deemed of military value, forcing them to start the process all over again. Items rejected include anesthetics, cardiac catheters, chemical water quality testing kits, crutches, maternity kits, oxygen cylinders, surgical tools, ultrasound equipment, wheelchairs and X-ray machines. When the UN secretary general, António Guterres, visited the Egyptian side of the Gaza border in March, he saw “long lines of blocked relief trucks waiting to be let into Gaza”. Israel has allowed much-publicized airdrops and sea delivery of food, but they provide only a tiny fraction of what land transport could deliver. It is thus not surprising that Khan reportedly will initially charge Netanyahu, as well as the defense minister, Yoav Gallant, and Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, Lt Gen Herzi Halevi, for having “deliberately starved Palestinians in Gaza”. Just as Khan initially charged Vladmir Putin and his children’s rights commissioner with abducting Ukrainian children, and only later began to address Russia’s factually more complicated bombing campaign starting with attacks on electrical infrastructure, so is Khan likely to start with the straightforward charges in Gaza before moving on to more complex ones. Khan will undoubtedly also charge senior Hamas officials in the military chain of command, as he should. The killing and abduction of Israeli civilians on 7 October are clear war crimes. But a basic premise of international humanitarian law is that war crimes by one side never justify war crimes by the other. The duty to comply is absolute, not reciprocal. An Israeli bomb destroyed 4,000 embryos at a Gaza IVF centre. Where is the outrage? Netanyahu has already begun to offer his defense. In a post on Twitter/X, he said: “Israel will never accept any attempt by the ICC to undermine its inherent right of self-defense.” But that is nonsense. ICC charges will have nothing to do with Israel’s right to self-defense. Rather, they will focus on the way the Netanyahu government has chosen to carry out that defense – by not only targeting Hamas but also committing war crimes against civilians. Assuming that starvation is the ICC’s focus, Netanyahu may note that in recent weeks, the Israeli government has allowed more food into Gaza. Indeed, after the 1 April killing of seven World Central Kitchen staff members, when Joe Biden on 4 April implicitly threatened to condition future US military aid and arms sales on an easing of Israel’s obstruction of humanitarian aid, Netanyahu promised to open an additional border crossing and allow somewhat more aid into Gaza. Since then, humanitarian deliveries have increased, but are reportedly still insufficient. But this calibration according to US pressure only underscores the deliberateness of the starvation strategy. And easing that strategy now is no defense to having pursued it for many months. The Israeli government may argue that Israel has a well-developed legal system and can prosecute its own war criminals. Under what is known as the principle of complementarity, the international criminal court is supposed to defer to conscientious national justice efforts. But Israel has no history of prosecuting senior officials for war crimes, and no case has been brought for Netanyahu’s starvation strategy in Gaza. The Israeli government undoubtedly will argue that because it never joined the ICC, Israeli officials shouldn’t be prosecuted by it. But the Rome Statute creating the ICC gives it jurisdiction not only over the nationals of governments that have joined the court, but also over crimes committed on the territories of its members. That makes sense because addressing crimes on a country’s territory is a key attribute of sovereignty. Palestine has joined the court and granted it jurisdiction over crimes in its occupied territory – the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza. During the negotiations to establish the ICC, the US government opposed territorial jurisdiction, but the other governments present overruled it. US opposition to territorial jurisdiction was behind the sanctions outrageously imposed by Donald Trump on the prior ICC prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, when she opened investigations in Afghanistan that could have implicated George W Bush-era torturers and in Palestine that could reach Israeli officials. Civilian deaths in Gaza rival those of Darfur – which the US called a ‘genocide’ Read more But Biden lifted Trump’s sanctions. When the ICC charged Putin based on territorial jurisdiction, Biden said the charges were justified. It would be profoundly unprincipled for Washington to accept territorial jurisdiction for Russian war crimes in Ukraine but not for Israeli war crimes in Gaza. Moreover, any effort to interfere with the prosecution, such as by invoking the much-maligned American Servicemembers Protection Act that authorizes even military action to protect US allies from ICC prosecution – and hence has been dubbed the Hague Invasion Act – would probably yield enormous protests in the United States and endanger Biden’s re-election prospects. Can war crime charges make any difference? The Israeli government is not about to surrender Netanyahu or his deputies for trial. But their travel would suddenly be limited. Although the US never joined the court, European governments have, meaning that suddenly Europe and much of the rest of the world would be out of bounds for those charged without risking arrest. It would also make it more difficult for Washington and London to pretend that their ongoing arming of the Israeli military is not contributing to war crimes. In addition, an initial round of charges would be an implicit threat of more. As Netanyahu contemplates a potential invasion of Gaza’s southernmost city of Rafah despite 1.4 million Palestinians sheltering there, he must worry about whether more civilian deaths would spur Khan to intensify investigation of Israel’s apparently indiscriminate and disproportionate attacks on civilians. The ICC thus may live up to its potential not only to provide retrospective justice, but also to deter future war crimes. Kenneth Roth, former executive director of Human Rights Watch, is a visiting professor at Princeton’s School of Public and International Affairs |
Responses:
[54090] [54097] [54088] [54100] [54089] [54093] [54117]
54090
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: but the Hague Invasion Act..
URL: https://twitter.com/jeremyscahill/status/1784884060440997890
|
Insanity. jeremy scahill@jeremyscahill Regarding rumors about Israeli officials facing indictment by the ICC, some relevant context: In 2002, Pres. Bush signed into law a bipartisan bill that authorizes the U.S. to use force to liberate any U.S. or allied personnel charged with war crimes. Known in the human rights community as "The Hague Invasion Act," it also lists as “persons authorized to be freed” from the ICC through U.S. actions “military personnel, elected or appointed officials, and other persons employed by or working on behalf of the government of a NATO member country, a major non-NATO ally (including Australia, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Jordan, Argentina, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand), or Taiwan.” It is important to note that these rumors that the ICC may hand down indictments against Israeli officials started via Israeli media outlets, likely from Israeli sources (though the reports say sources in the Hague). It is quite possible that Netanyahu or his minions are behind these leaks for their own political reasons (that are not entirely clear at present). The WSJ, which has consistently laundered Israeli propaganda, published an Editorial on Friday calling on the US and UK governments to "warn" the chief ICC prosecutor "what will happen if he proceeds." The WSJ fears an indictment will put US & British forces "next under the gun." |
Responses:
[54097]
54097
From: pamela, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: but the Hague Invasion Act..
|
👍Thanks for posting this info- amazing how even Dems these days support Bush and his atrocities. But the Dems have been out of it for quite some time-- neither the Dems or Pubs are making any progress in real leadership, progressive acts or caring for the US and or world peoples or any respect for what is right and wrong. |
Responses:
None
54088
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: wow - WH says ICC has 'no jurisdiction' in Israel-Hamas war
|
U.S. 'Does Not Support or Believe' ICC Has Jurisdiction to Issue Arrest Warrants Against Israeli Officials But jurisdiction for Russian-Ukraine war? Of course! |
54100
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Standing alongside Blinken, Israeli President Herzog says any ICC ..
URL: https://twitter.com/jeremyscahill/status/1785585037900943480
|
jeremy scahill Standing alongside Antony Blinken, Israeli President Herzog says any ICC attempt to indict Israeli leaders for war crimes is a “clear and present danger to all democracies and to free and peace-loving nations.” Also war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength. |
Responses:
None
54089
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Psycho Joe Biden hails ICC arrest warrant against Vladimir
URL: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/18/biden-hails-decision-icc-arrest-warrant-against-putin
|
Joe Biden hails decision to issue ICC arrest warrant against Vladimir Putin This article is more than 1 year old US president joined by German chancellor in support of action taken after Russia’s abduction of Ukrainian children The US president, Joe Biden, has backed the International Criminal Court’s decision to issue an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin over his role in the abduction of Ukrainian children, saying it was “justified”. Germany’s chancellor, Olaf Scholz, was among other international leaders who welcomed the decision, saying on Saturdayyesterday that it showed “nobody is above the law”. Thousands of Ukrainian children have been forcibly deported to Russia, where many have been adopted by Russian families. It is just one of many crimes – including torture and the deliberate targeting of civilians – for which Ukraine wants to see Russian soldiers and politicians held to account. Volodymr Zelenskiy, Ukraine’s president, hailed it as a historic decision “from which historic responsibility will begin”. The warrant is unlikely to lead to a trial. Putin cannot be tried in absentia, and can only be arrested if he travels to one of the 123 countries that are members of the ICC. Russia, Putin’s key ally China, and the US have all declined to become members. ICC arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin is justified, says Joe Biden – video 0:33 ICC arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin is justified, says Joe Biden – video Biden acknowledged this, even as he said the warrant made “a very strong point”. This marks the first time the court has issued an arrest warrant against the leader of one of the five permanent members of the UN security council. Putin will now be labelled an alleged war criminal for the rest of his life by the court responsible for investigating some of the most serious violations of recent decades. It puts him in the same company as infamous figures such as Slobodan Milošević, the former president of Yugoslavia, and the former Sudanese dictator Omar al-Bashir. At a time when Moscow is seeking to win support for its war – or neutralise backing for Ukraine – among countries in the global south, it will potentially limit his travel. However, ICC member countries do not have to enforce arrest warrants, and have declined to do so in the past. Joe Biden photographed walking out of a door to the White House in a suit and tie View image in fullscreen Joe Biden said the warrant made ‘a very strong point’. Photograph: Rex/Shutterstock The warrant, along with one for Russia’s commissioner for children’s rights, Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova, also sends a strong message to other senior Russian military and civilian officials who are playing a role in the war. It is now clear they can be held accountable for what they are doing, by lawyers who are closely monitoring events in Ukraine. Even if Putin’s government protects them at home, at the very least their travel could be severely restricted if they appear on future warrants. In the UK, the Labour party leader, Keir Starmer, said the decision sent an important message: “There will be no hiding place for Putin and his cronies, and the world is determined to make them pay for what they have done.” He also suggested more warrants were likely to follow: “These cases are just the tip of the iceberg.” Russia has denied committing atrocities, and in Moscow the arrest warrant was met with predictable outrage. Pro-Putin figures presented it as evidence that Washington was pushing for regime change in the country, even though the US is not a member of the ICC. “Yankees, hands off Putin!” the parliamentary speaker, Vyacheslav Volodin – a close ally of the president – wrote on Telegram. “We regard any attacks on the president of the Russian Federation as aggression against our country.” The warrant is likely to bolster the standing of pro-war Russian hardliners who have sought to present the invasion of Ukraine as an existential battle for national survival. “All pro-western liberal forces who looked for compromise with the west will be fired,” wrote Sergei Markov, a pro-Putin political analyst and former Kremlin adviser. “The Kremlin’s only path can be that of a military victory.” The Russian opposition, which has largely fled abroad since the start of the war, hailed Friday’s announcement. “Yes, it’s a symbolic step. But what an important one,” said Leonid Volkov, a close ally of jailed opposition leader Alexei Navalny. And while Putin’s opponents acknowledged that the warrant would make little difference to the Russian leader’s status, they welcomed the decision as an appropriate response to his likely role in the abduction of children. “Now Putin is truly an international pariah,” Ivan Pavlov, a prominent Russian human rights lawyer, told the Observer. “I exclude the possibility that the deportation of Ukrainian children was carried out without his knowledge, without his consent and without his order.” |
54093
From: mitra, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Piece of Shit Akira loves to denigrate
|
It's the favorite propaganda ploy. She needs to work the whole list, this one is getting tiresome, so much so I'm having trouble putting a positive view to it. And there's got to be one. Or three. |
Responses:
[54117]
54117
From: akira, [DNS_Address]
Subject: people who participate in genocide deserve denigration & WORSE...(NT)
| (NT) |
Responses:
None
[ International ] [ Main Menu ]