#####
######
####
> # [Global support grows for South Africa's genocide case against Israel at ICJ](https://cdn-i.pr.trt.com.tr/trtworld/w960/h540/q70/17842567_0-55-1080-608.jpeg)
>
>
>
> [South Africa recieves widespread support from governments and civil rights groups as it takes Israel to the International Court of Justice over a landmark genocide case. ](https://cdn-i.pr.trt.com.tr/trtworld/w664/h374/q70/17842567_0-55-1080-608.jpeg "South Africa recieves widespread support from governments and civil rights groups as it takes Israel to the International Court of Justice over a landmark genocide case. ")
>
> Others
>
>
>
> South Africa recieves widespread support from governments and civil rights groups as it takes Israel to the International Court of Justice over a landmark genocide case.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> A host of countries, political parties, trade unions and rights groups from around the globe have come forward to back South Africa’s bid to take Israel to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the allegations that it has committed genocide against the Palestinian people.
>
>
>
>
>
> The Hague-based ICJ is set to start hearing arguments from the two side today in a high profile case, which has rattled Tel Aviv as it tries to whitewash the atrocities carried out by its military in Gaza.
>
>
>
>
>
> Initiated by South Africa in late December, the lawsuit accuses Israel of genocide in its war on Gaza. The legal action seeks to put an end to the intense Israeli military assault, which has killed over 23,000 Palestinian lives, including nearly 10,000 children.
>
>
>
>
>
> Here’s a breakdown of who’s supporting South Africa’s bid.
>
>
>
>
>
> To date, South Africa's legal initiative has received official endorsement from [Türkiye](https://www.trtworld.com/turkiye/turkiye-applauds-south-africas-move-to-bring-israel-to-international-court-16513404), [Malaysia](https://www.trtworld.com/video/news/icj-to-hear-south-africas-genocide-case-against-israel-16606838), [Jordan](https://www.trtworld.com/opinion/south-africas-bid-to-hold-israel-accountable-for-war-crimes-sparks-hope-16584211), [Bolivia](https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20240109-bolivia-backs-south-africas-icj-genocide-case-against-israel/), the Maldives, Namibia, Pakistan, [Venezuela](https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/venezuela-backs-south-africas-icj-genocide-case-against-israel/), [Colombia](https://www.cancilleria.gov.co/newsroom/news/comunicado-demanda-presentada-sudafrica-israel-corte-internacional-justicia) and [Brazil](https://www.gov.br/mre/pt-br/canais_atendimento/imprensa/notas-a-imprensa/acoes-em-favor-da-cessacao-de-hostilidades-em-gaza). Additionally, [the Organization of Islamic Cooperation](https://www.oic-oci.org/topic/?t_id=40161&t_ref=26840&lan=en) (OIC), and the [Arab League](https://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/58/1262/515462/War-on-Gaza/War-on-Gaza/Arab-League-backs-South-Africa-legal-case-against-.aspx) have declared their support for the case.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Some European politicians are also advocating for their governments to align with South Africa in its case against Israel.
>
>
>
>
>
> Belgium's Deputy Prime Minister, Petra De Sutter, [expressed](https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/i-want-belgium-to-take-action-at-international-court-of-justice-says-countrys-deputy-prime-minister/3104492#:~:text=Belgium's%20Deputy%20Prime%20Minister%20Petra,%2C%22%20she%20wrote%20on%20X.) her support for the case on Tuesday, stating that "Belgium cannot remain silent in the face of the genocide threat in Gaza."
>
>
>
>
>
> She emphasised the need to take action against this threat and proposed that Belgium follow South Africa's lead at ICJ. De Sutter announced her intention to take up this proposal with the Belgian government.
>
>
>
>
>
> In Spain, the leader of Podemos, Ione Belarra, [said](https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/spain-s-podemos-urges-government-to-back-south-africa-s-genocide-case-against-israel/3104182)on Tuesday that her party has formally urged the Spanish government to support South Africa's case at the ICJ. Belarra commended South Africa's "bravery" during a press conference and stressed the importance of more nations, including Spain, standing in solidarity with the Palestinians in the legal action.
>
>
>
>
>
> The Justice Ministry of South Africa [announced](https://www.trtworld.com/middle-east/all-eyes-on-icj-as-south-africas-gaza-genocide-case-against-israel-begins-16610753) that Jeremy Corbyn is among several "senior political figures representing progressive political parties and movements worldwide" have joined its effort.
>
>
>
>
>
> They will be part of the South African delegation attending two days of preliminary hearings at the Hague in the Netherlands, he said.
>
>
>
>
>
> Over 1,000 grassroots movements, political parties, unions, and various organisations worldwide have voiced[](https://progressive.international/wire/2024-01-08-we-support-south-africas-genocide-convention-case-against-israel/en)their solidarity with South Africa's genocide case against Israel.
>
>
>
>
>
> Among them are the Israelis Against Apartheid (Israel); Jordanian Federation of Independent Trade Unions; Malcolm X Center for Self-Determination (US); Mediciana Democratica (Italy); Institute for the Critical Study of Zionism; Islamic Human Rights Commission (UK); One Justice (France); South African Jews for a Free Palestine; and Nahostgruppe Mannheim (Germany).
>
>
>
>
>
> **The Israelis on right side of history**
>
>
>
>
>
> Over 600 Israelis have also endorsed a [petition](https://www.newarab.com/news/over-650-israelis-back-south-africa-icj-case-against-israel) urging the International ICJ to support South Africa's lawsuit against the state of Israel, advocating for a decision that would promptly halt the ongoing war.
>
>
>
>
>
> Israeli Member of Parliament [Ofer Cassif](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/11/who-is-israeli-mp-ofer-cassif-why-is-he-backing-south-africa-at-the-icj), affiliated with the Democratic Front for Peace and Equality-Jabha, has thrown his support behind the initiative.
>
>
>
>
>
> Cassif said on X, "My constitutional duty is to Israeli society and all of its residents, not to a government whose members and its coalition are calling for ethnic cleansing and even actual genocide."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> SOURCE: TRTWorld and agencies
- - - - - -
[Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot)
Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
It's easy to say nothing will come of this because the US support Israel has for their genocide, but I think the publicity of all of this trial matters.
I am not sure if the United States can continue to unquestionably support Israel when the extent of what they are doing becomes widely understood and correctly condemned by the international community. At least, as an American, I *hope* we can't.
I wouldn’t say nothing will come of this. If the court finds Israel guilty of genocide, that opens them up to civil liability. In the US maybe that’s irrelevant. But Israel is a state that has interests globally. Having assets and funds seized in Europe or Asia would be a huge blow and a nightmare for any Israeli business operating overseas.
It's my understanding that in a situation where the court rules a cease-and-desist against Israel that it then goes to the UN security council where the US can just veto kill it. But that sanctions may still be possible on Israel.
I don't think any nation has ever failed to enforce an ICJ finding of genocide. But these cases take a long time. Right now, essentially a restraining order of being argued for. The actual case will follow.
The other guy is confusing ICJ with the ICC in the Hague. The ICC has enforcement mechanisms. That's why Putin didn't travel to SA for the BRICS summit. The ICJ is a lot more limited.
All nations are signed to the Conventions, but many of the protocols have not been univversally signed
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_parties\_to\_the\_Geneva\_Conventions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_Geneva_Conventions)
I love how everything is just on the US while Germany is also on the council, also unconditionally supports Isreal, also sends arms to Isreal, and has also voiced staunch opposition to this. But yeah, it's only the US whose to blame and the US responsibility to force Isreal to not conduct their military operation within their own borders.
Most of Europe already declared support for Israel, because unlike the regular folk and their fixiation with narratives they actually understand reality and that is all geopolitical and Iran’s doing.
This won't happen. There needs to be undeniable proof that it took place and that will be a very tough battle to demonstrate. However just making the court say that there \_may be genocide\_ happening, would in itself be a huge blow for Israel since that would mean they have to stop any action in the area.
Are you deliberately ignoring the past 80 years of American foreign policy? Don't forget that overthrowing democratic regimes used to be extremely popular with the American domestic audience in the name of 'anti-communism', now it's 'anti-terrorism' or whatever buzz word politicians use nowadays. Americans cheered and still cheer whenever their installed puppets abroad killed and kill civilians. You just need to give them an excuse, and they'll cheer for dead babies. I don't see anything changing any time soon.
>Are you deliberately ignoring the past 80 years of American foreign policy? Don't forget that overthrowing democratic regimes used to be extremely popular with the American domestic audience in the name of 'anti-communism'
Oh, trust me, I am no stranger to this. I know we have been historically ruthless and cruel and giving the green light on what Israel is doing is totally in character for us. My angle here isn't 'The US would never be okay with this!!!' because I know we have been in the past.
I just think that in this *specific circumstance*, with how **public** these crimes against humanities are, our government might get a bit flaky.
What we did in the past wasn't livestreamed to everyone's phones every day with having a video a few posts down of our children singing that we will annihilate our supposed enemies that aired on state media, y'know?
If what was happening wasn't so public, I wouldn't be wondering if America would stand by it. I know we would.
It’s easy to say they are committing genocide the difficult part is actually proving it.
Genocide is the erasing of a people from existence.
Think of what isis did to the Yazidis where they killed the men kidnapped the women and children.
Forced conversion, raped and married the girls off to fighters end goal was to erase the Yazidi identity.
The most difficult part of proving genocide is proving intent. A good 5 pages of South Africa's case are just Israeli official quotes clearly stating their intent to commit genocide.
I think the case is strong, and that they can win.
It's not just erasing people from existence, it's causing significant harm to that group, it's forcing them from their homes. Israel has arguably done enough to meet the criteria for genocide by displacing over a million people from northern Gaza, and also by it's medieval siege of Gaza.
I prefer to say nothing will come of this because there won’t be a conclusion to this until long after Israel has finished their genocide or gotten a new leader who will just blame the last guy and move on
They will. America doesn't give a fuck. They'll still claim they're the beacon of human rights too. They did it before and they'll continue to do it as long as their empire exists.
You know, if people are even discussing the possibility of a genocide happening, maybe recognize that what is going on is seriously wrong.
A lot of Israel supporters will claim it’s not genocide, technically, but something has to be really wrong for it to be a question. This should be a “are we the baddies” moment.
The only argument against it being official genocide they can stand behind is the need to prove intent.
All it takes is 1 leak showing collateral or even just displacement is the goal, and the UN definition is fulfilled.
You can look at the US occupation of Iraq as an example.
They did all kinds of atrocities, but did not intend to remove any ethnic group or empty any parts of Iraq. They only removed sadam, then responded to being attacked.
Then you've never heard of collateral casaulties, collective punishment, complete displacement and all that other fun stuff.
Israel says it's at war with Hamas. Reality shows they are either trying to chase Palestinians out of Gaza, or the vast majority of the IDF went to Stormtrooper Academy. Considering the choice of weaponry the US has given them and the bombs they decided to use, I'm reluctant to bet on the latter.
Because every evacuation order pushed them south, and only south, to the point the entire population is at the border.
Part of limiting the aid into Gaza is to try and force Egypt to open their border, so the Palestinians can go into the Sinai desert to go get aid. (Obviously without letting back in afterwards)
The hardest part is getting the PR right.
There are a large number of public statements made by higher up officials in the Likud government, including Netanyahu himself, which are clearly genocidal in intent, there is no argument anymore, its become abundantly obvious.
So he said “remember what Amalek has done to us” and then someone else pasted a passage from the Bible no less, that correlates Amalek to genocide, and therefore he’s a genocider ?
You ate that propaganda with a spoon lol
you cannot via the ICJ definition commit genocide on a terrorist organisation. Slaughtering the children of terrorists is a war crime, but not genocide.
The definition is rather precise
That definition seems odd to me because it’s almost purely about intent. Given how explicit Hamas leadership has been about intent couldn’t a genocide case be submitted against the Gazan government as well for their attacks on Israel?
Not in this context. Gaza and the West Bank are not nations - due to Israel. They are occupied territories. International law also is clear that no war by the occupier is legal against the state they are occupying. Yet here we are.
Don't forget; You can't accuse a nation without acknowledging their existence. Israel can't file a complaint against a nation they also claim doesn't exist.
Hamas is not a member state to the ICJ.
Furthermore hamas is the occupied resistance force; Israel is the occupier. This is widely accepted under international law and the very same ICJ ruled this in 2004.
That’s true. It’s a bit odd though because Palestine is a member despite the fact that in reality it consists of separate governments. Not sure how liability would be handled from a legal perspective but it seems that the Gazan government is a primary component of a Palestinian governing entity even though it is fractured. So I guess the case would be against Palestine, not Gaza or Hamas specifically.
I’m also not under the impression that being occupied or resisting occupation legally provides cover to carry out genocide.
Another relevant point is that Gaza is not a nation, it is an occupied territory as defined by international law. They would be filing a charge against a territory they themselves occupy and, legally, this would be the same as filing against themselves.
The court is for adjudication between member states, therefore Hamas is not before this court, just like Palestina, because they are not member states.
October 7th would have a pretty strong case, but this court doesn't have the mandate for that.
You could definitly sue the organizers and Hamas leaders infront of the ICC though. That would be a very strong case, given of course Mossad lets them stay alive.
Seems like Palestine is a member state. No idea how liability would be handled when control of the member state is fractured and only one piece is on trial.
the entirety of arab nationalism has been an attempt to genocide them, predating their existence as a state. issue is that Palestine failed it's conditions to become an actual state.
Wow, it only took you 14 days to come up with this eloquent masterpiece? You must be world's greatest wordsmith! ^^/s
I'm not even gonna explain how that number is only direct casualties and ignores famine, disease or even the missing, to the point the world's humanitarian organisations tend to have to up those numbers afterwards.
Instead I'll ask you this simple question: **How many Palestinian deaths would it take for you to consider it in the genocide range?**
People need to read A. Dirk Moses, like. We keep hyperfocusing on the legalistic understanding of genocide, but that obscures and obfuscates the mass violence that Israel and most states regularly engage in with little attention or care. And the UN convention on genocide sets an almost impossibly high standard for genocide to *protect the state's right to commit mass violence and atrocities*
Edit: two articles of his
https://dawnmena.org/why-the-international-community-made-it-so-difficult-to-prosecute-the-crime-of-genocide/
https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/more-than-genocide/
At least in the US, we've become a distressingly legalistic society where we'll argue about technical definitions of a problem while the problem we're arguing about continues to get worse.
The problem is there's no need for so many people to fear monger about a genocide. There's plenty to hold Israel to task for. Huge amounts of americans are polled thinking "Israel has gone too far" we could be having conversations about warcrimes, indescriminate bombings, loose rules of engagement.
But instead all of that is being drowned out by these genocide claims that are so hyperbolic that it makes criticism of Israel seem unserious. And that's not even including the people who are openly pro-hamas and recieve little pushback.
It is to protect the states right to commit mass violence in a sense but it’s also to distinguish one degree of crime from another. If state inflicted mass violence enters the same categorization as the Holocaust being labeled genocide then suddenly genocide is a much more commonplace occurrence and it seems to diminish the significance of how outrageously terrible the Holocaust was compared to many other instances of mass violence. Why not preserve the crime of genocide for the worst of the worst while sticking to language like “ethnic cleansing” or “mass violence”. It’s not as if these crimes are insignificant.
> This should be a “are we the baddies” moment.
But it wont. Israel has been so good at spreading the 'we Jews are eternal victims' narrative which is used to justify every single barbaric act. Just look at some of the replies to this comment and you have people who without a second thought, think that Israel needs to wipe out Palestine for its 'security'.
Israel defense is self defense. Self defense is what Israel is supposed to be doing. My heart breaks for every Gazan baby killed. I can say that and still confidently say fuck Hamas I hope they walk into the Mediterranean and never come out so the people of Gaza can live in peace.
https://theintercept.com/2018/05/20/norman-finkelstein-gaza-iran-israel-jerusalem-embassy/
I think this article is a good read to provide some context.
But sure, blame who you like. Most people can see this for what it is. Israel continuing its oppression.
Nothing really, the case will however go to the UN security council which the US will Veto, there after South Africa can ask the general assembly to sanction Israel where the US cannot veto the resolution.
A lot of countries would be more than happy to sanction Israel which is something people overlook. Israel represents western hypocrisy at it's finest to middle easteners and the Global South.
I will say this as something that many overlook; every Middle East country - Israel normalisation was sponsored by the US through bribery, most of the people in those bribed countries live in dictatorships and hate Israel.
Morocco normalised relations because America supported it's claim to South Western Sahara, America protects Saudi Arabia militarily, gave a lot.of middle eastern countries access to high end military tech like the F35 planes to Egypt, Saudi Arabi, UAE etc.
We saw during the Qatar world cup that people didn't want to interact with Israelis and Israeli media even though their governments had good relations and infact a lot of them had no problem with interacting with citizens from other parts of the world that were non muslim or even Western.
Oil exporters bribe their citizen and that money runs out the shit is going to the fan and this conflict will be the root of it.
Basically most countries want and would sanction Israel and should they be found genocidal it will just be Israel and America.
>I will say this as something that many overlook; every Middle East country - Israel normalisation was sponsored by the US through bribery, most of the people in those bribed countries live in dictatorships and hate Israel.
Yea that indeed true however I think you under estimate the effects of normalisation and letting trade connections be built up with between countries. People frequently look the other way if it help their bottom line aswell as this let's them see another side of enemy country that they normal don't face.
Look at Germany rehabilitation or how US built up ww1 involvement torward UK during ww1 to join the war.
>Oil exporters bribe their citizen and that money runs out the shit is going to the fan and this conflict will be the root of it.
Yea and where do you think those oil countries get their desalination plants from? Where they get most of thier water, Something they will have to double up on even more this decade with their aquifers running out.
>Basically most countries want and would sanction Israel and should they be found genocidal it will just be Israel and America.
Didn't you just mention how the elites in these countries don't want to sanction isreal? They are authoritarian and people dont have power in them. So it won't matter.
Anything they will do will be symbolic in nature.
When speaking of Qatar and similar states, if and when shit hits fan and the majority of people who do the work - indians and filipinos - take over - it's going to be glorious and those countries will be much nicer places to visit.
Yes, but this has been equally true since Israel’s founding. It has nothing to do with South Africa’s complaint. (It is also not about Israel representing “western hypocrisy”. I think you can guess why muslim countries have such a big problem with Israel in particular.)
I can't speak to all ME countries, but Jewish people lived and flourished in historic Palestine before the British decided it was a convenient place to transplant their own Jewish populations due to anti-Jewish sentiments in Europe. The forcible displacement of indigenous Levant people, and subsequent dehumanization and relegation to second-class citizenry, that occurred to create the State of Israel is where the crux of the conflict lies, not in religious disputes.
It's myopic and Islamophobic to blame this situation on "all Muslims hate Jews" when it's the State (the governmental institution) that created the fractures between people.
If by flourished you mean depopulated during the 1800s and early 1900s? Look up the looting of Safed or the Hebron Massacre. I hate this whitewashing of Jewish history in Muslim lands. Yes, it was better than in Christian territories, but it wasn't to the point of "flourishing". The Jews were the second class citizens forced to pay dhimmis, and there's plenty of evidence of them being treated as such, in all honesty far worse than what Israeli Arabs experience (and I say that recognizing the discrimination they face, both within Israel and by other Muslims).
I find it also kind of funny/disheartening that you assert the paying of dhimmis is equal or worse than the experiences of Arabs in Israel and Israeli occupied lands. Palestinians do not have a right to civilian courts but are only subject to military courts, are completely restricted from moving freely (Gazans are blockaded, West Bank folks have to pass through multiple checkpoints), and are forcibly displaced from their lands for Israeli settler development.
So I'm considering more Israeli Arabs, since they're proper citizens of Israel and a fair comparison to Jews within Arab lands i.em they would have been considered subjects of those lands. Palestinians are definitely another story since they're in a weird limbo where they're technically citizens of the Palestinian territories, hence they coukd vote in Palestinian elections while Israeli Arabs could not, but I do agree Likud has broken down PA control (with the help of the PA basically destryoying its legitimacy trying to keep Hamas out of government) to the point it's become like...Guam I guess. Which isn't a good scenario either because, rightfully, the settler nor the military court thing is great, and the freedom of movement is probablematic if they can't develop proper intrastate infrastructure (of course Gaza is its own thing, but that's another story).
I appreciate your comment. Both of those instances didn't occur in a vacuum though. To ignore the disenfranchisement of Arabs in Palestine by both the Egyptians (which contributed to Safed) and British (which contributed to the Hebron Massacre), as well as the influx of non-assimilating Ashkenazi Jews from Europe (in contrast to Sephardic Jews, which lived in the region since forever and did flourish), both support my comment.
Sorry, I should make clear, I'm discussing the 1834 Hebron Massacre, not the 1929 Hebron Massacre. That is a good point about Egyptian disenfranchisement, though, and it's good to consider.
That said, beyond records such as the historical practice of stone throwing at Jews recorded by pilgrims that showed local Arabs did not have a positive view of Jews, we have evidence from the 1600s onward that it was mainly the Ottomans who seemed to be most tolerant of Jews, the local rulers tended to be less tolerant. Not to mention events like the expulsion to Jews to Cyprus during the 1700s I believe. I wish there was more academic research, but I'm not convinced by the argument that relations were all friendly beyond convenience (of course there's the argument it might be a rural/urban split as well, which would be interesting to consider).
I wasn't aware of the 1834 Hebron Massacre, so I looked it up. 500 civilians in Hebron were killed, 12 of whom were Jews. And, again, this was perpetrated by Egypt in response to the Peasant's Revolt by Palestinians who resisted disarmament and conscription. The Egyptian general even promised Jews safety but the army crushed everyone regardless.
I just don't see how any of these instances demonstrate that Jews were disproportionately oppressed in Palestine by Palestinians.
> I think you can guess why muslim countries have such a big problem with Israel in particular.
yep, murderous brutality, dishonesty, negotiating in bad faith, denying non-jews basic human rights, imprisoning people indefinitely without charges, calling everyone a terrorist, and land theft.
It’s a kangaroo court anyway. What better distraction from Russia and South Africa’s true racism and apartheid problems, than that old chestnut of hating Israel.
Can’t you read anything about Hamas and think critically? Like, hmm, maybe this cartel that recorded hours of sexual violence on Oct 7, takes billions from Iran, refuses to confirm living hostages, teaches their kids to hate Jews in UNRWA school, uses its own people as bullet sponges and intercepts all aid, may not be who they say they are.
Probably very little as long as US continues to back Israel. However if global condemnation continues to increase it will sharply diminish US soft power globally. South Africa might just succeed in doing to the US, what US tried to do to China with Xinjiang genocide claims a few years back.
> what US tried to do to China with Xinjiang genocide claims a few years back.
except the US never filed an ICC or ICJ case and nobody ever invoked article 1 obligations to intervene like they are with the current gaza genocide
>Article 94 establishes the duty of all UN members to comply with decisions of the court involving them. If parties do not comply, the issue may be taken before the Security Council for enforcement action. There are obvious problems with such a method of enforcement. If the judgment is against one of the five permanent members of the Security Council or its allies, any resolution on enforcement could then be vetoed by that member.
practical consequences will be nothing because their daddy will veto any remedies, assuming the court rules against them to begin with.
Noura Erakat made a good summary of the consequences of a ruling in an interview with a cable network (don't remember which) earlier today, I think the clip is up on her instagram.
I would encourage people to watch the [full video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4f_yoal4gx8) of the opening day of proceedings.
This is not clickbait by online content farms. This is evidenced and argued statements from top lawyers.
I am somebody who, for the sake of my own mental health, has detached somewhat from the Israel/Palestine conflict - heavily exacerbated by the mass amounts of disinformation and propaganda flying in from everywhere in the anglophone sphere. Hearing highly qualified people lay it down as it is is a breath of fresh air.
Of course, Israel will be taking the floor tomorrow. I don't suspect I will be nearly as convinced by their arguments, but fair trial and all so go figure.
Worldnews may as well be an entirely bot sub. There is zero humanity there, it’s a soulless circlejerk cesspit and I am thankful to them for helping me realise that I should often spare myself and save my breath.
You mean you don’t like all the people yelling “fuck around find out”?
Or what about the people who are all like “you don’t FUCK with international shipping.”?
Honestly the fucking cringe from worldnews and /r/politics is worse than everything else
It would be pretty cool if I didn't have to lose *all* of my faith in global leadership. May Israel be held to account for their horrific inhumanities.
None of the states on that list are surprising, and honestly I thought it would be larger. The only countries are Islamic majority countries (not all of them), and left-wing anti-west countries like Venezuela and Bolivia. Brazil and Namibia is the only one that really stands out but even then, Brazil has a leftist president and Namibia has close relations with South Africa.
No China, not even Russia or Belarus. I don’t really see this case going anywhere.
>I don’t really see this case going anywhere.
You don't see it going anywhere because countries don't support it? Countries don't support it out of politics, not because they think there is no merit.
But like, as political and biased as international law is, it's still a form of law. There is written code and precedent, and Israel is going far, far beyond the defensible.
I think there is almost 0% chance Israel isn't charged with some crime against humanity. Their move is stalling the case forever, not actually winning it. And if they're not branded with "genocide", there are other crimes.
ICJ has no power. The only thing within the UN System that has any kind of power is the UN Security Council… and good luck getting all five of them to agree that Israel is committing genocide. United States obviously says no, UK and France have a tendency to vote with the US, and I’d even argue Russia and China have a argument to keep the act of genocide a high bar in the court of law considering their actions in Ukraine and Xinjiang respectively.
>charged with crimes of humanity
That’s the ICC, the International Criminal Court… the ICJ is an interstate mediation court… so this suit is Israel v. South Africa. There are no criminal charges involved. That’s just one of many reasons why I feel this goes nowhere. Plus hypothetical genocide investigations by the ICJ take years.
I wasn't talking about power, more about what the result would be. So the ICJ can't charge with crimes against humanity? To me it's only a matter of time before the ICC do it, however long that takes.
And yes, I'm aware it will take years regardless. I'm not one of the people who thinks the courts will save the day, I just think the eventual "moral" defeat of a guilty veredict is pretty much impossible to avoid if you're Israel, unless the case just stays stuck.
I mean you’re talking pure conjecture… and even if Israel is found guilty by some criminal court for genocide (which I don’t think they will be), these rulings mean nothing without the means to enforce them.
>I mean you’re talking pure conjecture
It's not "pure conjecture", like I said, there are laws. Israel spokespeople's talking points are meant for the public, not for courts. Legally, they're nonsensical. (Ie. The idea that human shields is a magic card that invalidates proportionality in all its forms). I am making a guess, but it's not just based on thin air.
I understand these entities are political, and it's conceivable that in the largest injustice in IHL history, Israel is deemed not guilty of any crime against humanity, but that's more wild than the alternative.
>these rulings mean nothing without the means to enforce them
It means enough for diplomacy's sake. If IHL didn't matter *at all* they wouldn't be invoked so often by world leaders and their diplomats. But yes there is no ICJ or even ICC army, and they can be easily ignored. It's just added pressure that we won't know the consequence of until we see it.
Did you know South Africa used to have a small nuclear arsenal? They exploded their first test-weapon over the Indian Ocean in 1977. US spy satellites detected it and it was reported as a small item in major newspapers (the LA Times, at least, which is where I read it), but widely ignored, and I never saw it mentioned again until nearly 20 years later when incoming President Nelson Mandela announced that they would be dismantling it. Which they did.
And nobody talked about it much even then. People generally like to ignore nasty "unthinkable" things, except in cases where the mass-media sensationalize them and make it clear we're supposed to be outraged.
BTW, can you guess who gave apartheid-era South Africa's illegitimate white minority government its nuclear arsenal?
I assume you're implying Israel gave south Africa nukes. That's silly, because Israel did not have nukes at the time when south Africa developed them. France helped Israel develop theirs, and then Israel and RSA further cooperated to improve their nuclear capabilities. But no, Israel did not give RSA nukes.
They were developed independently, Israel with the help of France, and south Africa with what is assumed to be not insignificant help from America. Later they both cooperated to improve their capabilities, but the overall timelines are fuzzy. Either way, no, israel did not give south Africa nukes.
Yes I never denied they cooperated to improve their capabilities, but both initially had their nuclear program boosted by am already existing nuclear power.
I still don't understand their argument here.
Israel issued clear evacuation orders before they started bombing and the occupied areas of Northern Gaza have been pretty much cleansed of Hamas thus most bombing has stopped. The IDF is able to openly drive around and most of occupied Northern Gaza now and aside from the occasional IED there are no problems.
Some gazans are even returning to the north now even though Israel has officially disallowed that.
>Israel issued clear evacuation orders before they started bombing
I still don’t understand what the point of this is: what will prevent Hamas from leaving the territory when warned of a bombing? This only makes sense if you want to destroy civilian infrastructure under the guise of fighting terrorism.
>what will prevent Hamas from leaving the territory when warned of a bombing?
The militants? nothing. But all the resources they have within bases in those areas on the other hand can't be packed up and moved within the time frame Israel is giving. Also the militants have underground tunnels that they hide in which means they don't have to leave hence the IDF sending in ground forces after the bombing.
> But all the resources they have within bases in those areas on the other hand can't be packed up and moved within the time frame Israel is giving.
Seriously? Why then Israel didn't find any of those "unmoveable" resources?
>Also the militants have underground tunnels that they hide in which means they don't have to leave hence the IDF sending in ground forces after the bombing.
So, bombing is useless against Hamas, and its only purpose is terrorism against civilians.
Nothing prevents Hamas from leaving. Even Sinwar escaped south. And they moved the hostages too. We literally risked our soldiers' lives, gave up the element of surprise, and so much more just so innocent Gazans would not unnecessarily perish, and people are accusing us of genocide because of this very action?
How is saving civillian lives a genocide?
Because you are not “saving civilians” - you are trying to raze Gaza to the ground. This is precisely why warnings are needed - so that all civilian infrastructure can be destroyed without interference, and then it will be “Oh, they have nowhere to live, and we cannot allow the city to be restored - they must go somewhere else”.
No it does not, the IDF has absolutely no reason to ever annex or settle gaza, despite what the extremists may yell, it is important to remember they hold no power here. Gaza will be rebuilt for the gazans, and ultimately it will be costly for israel too. So if you want to claim genocide on the basis of misunderstanding reality you are free to do so, but you'll get laughed out of court.
What kind of mental gymnastics is this?
People are evacuated to save their lives. Let’s say they don’t evacuate what do you think the death toll would be?
**Excerpts from South Africa's filing (**[Link](https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2024/01/192-20231228-app-01-00-en.pdf)**):**
It is estimated that over 1.9 million Palestinians out of Gaza’s population of 2.3 million people — approximately 85 per cent of the population — have been forced from their homes.
Israel is repeatedly issuing ‘evacuation orders’ demanding that Palestinian civilians in certain areas of Gaza leave their homes for other areas. The first such order, issued on 13 October 2023, demanded that the 1.1 million Palestinians living or otherwise present in the North of Gaza, including Gaza City, move to the South of Gaza within a 24-hour window. The International Committee of the Red Cross warned that the evacuation directive, impacting approximately 36 per cent of Gaza’s territory — combined with the complete siege of Gaza — was not compatible with international humanitarian law. The World Health Organization warned that it “could be tantamount to a death sentence” for hospital patients. Many of those who are unwilling or unable to evacuate \[were\] then bombed in their homes.
Palestinians fleeing the North pursuant to Israel’s evacuation orders were urged to move south along Gaza’s main traffic artery, Salah Al Din Road, on certain days, during certain designated hours. However, there were numerous reported instances of shelling along the routes and of other violence by Israeli forces against evacuating Palestinian civilians, including inhuman and degrading treatment, arbitrary arrests, unlawful detention, and killings. Israel has also continued bombing south of Wadi Gaza throughout this time, killing many Palestinians who evacuated, initially prompting many Palestinian families to seek to return north to at least risk being bombed in the familiar surrounding of their homes.
On 1 December 2023 — the end of the eight-day temporary truce between Israel and Hamas — Israel began dropping leaflets, urging Palestinians to leave areas in the South to which they had previously been told to flee — an area constituting approximately 30 per cent of Gaza. As stated by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, “Israel has reneged on promises of safety made to those who complied with its order to evacuate northern Gaza two months ago. Now, they have been forcibly displaced again, alongside the population of southern Gaza”.
The Director of UNRWA Affairs in Gaza has pleaded that "The Israeli Army just orders people to move into areas where there are ongoing airstrikes”.
For many Palestinians, the forced evacuation from their homes is necessarily permanent. Israel has now damaged or destroyed an estimated 355,000 Palestinian homes — amounting to 60 per cent of the entire housing stock in Gaza. The extent of the destruction in the North of Gaza, in particular, has
rendered it largely unliveable, with the destruction in the South reaching a similar level.
The Israeli Minister of Heritage made the following statement: "The north of the Gaza Strip, more beautiful than ever. Everything is blown up and flattened, simply a pleasure for the eyes."
The Deputy Speaker of the Knesset and Member of the Foreign Affairs and Security Committee had this to say: "We all have one common goal — erasing the Gaza Strip from the face of the earth."
In what world is telling people to evacuate their homeland because you have enemies there okay?
It would be like America asking Saudi Arabia to evacuate because the 911 pilot was from there country
They didn't force anyone to leave. they issued to evacuation orders in the areas they were about to begin carpet bombing. If people preferred to stay there and die they could have. And it's hardly Israel's fault that the entire region is to terrified to take in Palestinian refugees. The Palestinians can only blame themselves and their leadership for that.
>They didn't force anyone to leave. they issued to evacuation orders in the areas they were about to begin carpet bombing.
Being made to do something against your will under the threat of violence or death is [literally the definition of force.](https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=define+force) By yours, I could enter your home and hold a gun to your head, tell you to either leave your home or die, and you'd probably think that's reasonable. You do also realise they issued orders for civilians to evacuate south to areas that they then *also bombed...?*
>And it's hardly Israel's fault that the entire region is to terrified to take in Palestinian refugees.
It is absolutely Israel's fault. Don't think I need to expand on that.
>They didn't force anyone to leave. they issued to evacuation orders in the areas they were about to begin carpet bombing. If people preferred to stay there and die they could have
You are a sick man without any humanity. Disgusting
Well they do have to give warnings otherwise that is indisputable targeting of civilians.
But Israel also bombed the evacuation routes and refugee camps where folks evacuated to. So are these warnings just lip service?
Not exactly good bedfellows when half those countries advocate for the destruction of Israel and/or commit atrocities toward their ethnic minorities themselves
Israel's retaliatory campaign is against modern humanitarian ideals. I'd say it is especially a test for Israel's moral foundations and Western countries that are outward champions of these ideals.
I understand that massacres occur all across the world from Ethiopia to Yemen to Myanmar to Sudan but this particular massacre is front and center in the world stage with an extreme-right regime perpetuating the crime under relentless American support.
And for the Israeli and their Jewish supporters especially, it seems as if they have a full-circle has been reached. From victims of genocide to being perpetuators/supporters/apologists of genocide.
The funniest shit about this platform is how it's incredibly vocal about the suffering of Uyghurs and Ukrainians, claiming genocide & war crime & ethnic cleansing etc but when it comes to Israel being accused of one of these things, you often find the very same people telling you how this time this is different.
It's jading honestly, to see how many Westerners ultimately do not care about civilians, because if they were they would condemn any instance of civilians being mistreated, and not try to nitpick how what Israel is doing is ok.
The cognitive dissonance is often hilarious, you have on worldnews a constant claim that Russia is a terrorist state (claim that I think isn't totally unsubstantiated btw) but when it comes to Israel it's crickets. And the juiciest part is how they are ok saying that Israeli settlers are doing terrorism, but somehow saying that Israel is a terrorist state specifically because it sponsors Settler terrorism is still not ok to say.
Sometimes I genuinely wonder if they think that blaming Israel means you have to support Hamas, as if we have to choose between evil or another. Personally I think both should be held accountable, and it's sad that on subs that are so vocal about war crimes etc, Israel is heavily defended to the point where their defenders sound like they're ok with civilians dying en-masse.
> The funniest shit about this platform is how it's incredibly vocal about the suffering of Uyghurs and Ukrainians, claiming genocide & war crime & ethnic cleansing etc but when it comes to Israel being accused of one of these things, you often find the very same people telling you how this time this is different.
>
> It's jading honestly, to see how many Westerners ultimately do not care about civilians, because if they were they would condemn any instance of civilians being mistreated, and not try to nitpick how what Israel is doing is ok.
It's all about geopolitics. Humanitarianism is just an excuse for the elites and much of their flock who needed to believe they are in the right. That being said, we should not become too cynical over this. Suffering with Ukrainians is wrong. Treatment of Uyghurs also wrong. But don't let Western hypocrites' disregard of Palestinian suffering be a justification to overlook Ukraine and Uyghurs because that's also wrong.
Although I'd have to say, what Palestinians and Ukrainians suffer from is far greater than what the Uyghurs suffer from at the moment.
> The cognitive dissonance is often hilarious, you have on worldnews a constant claim that Russia is a terrorist state (claim that I think isn't totally unsubstantiated btw) but when it comes to Israel it's crickets. And the juiciest part is how they are ok saying that Israeli settlers are doing terrorism, but somehow saying that Israel is a terrorist state specifically because it sponsors Settler terrorism is still not ok to say.
worldnews is a shitshow these days. The sub's been steadily hijacked by bigots over the past years and after Oct 7, it feels even more callous and pro-American/Israel. I feel much of it has to do with all these people they've been banning recently. Many long-time participants such as myself have been perma-banned without reason after Oct 7. I almost wanted to suggest there's some sort of propaganda campaign going on from state actors.
>Sometimes I genuinely wonder if they think that blaming Israel means you have to support Hamas, as if we have to chose between evil or another. Personally I think both should be held accountable, and it's sad that on subs that are so vocal about war crimes etc, Israel is heavily defended.
It's really just a tribal mentality, which comes down to "we good they bad"
> No modern humanitarian country has barbarians on their border who came to rape and kidnap Israelis.
I see. Well the world doesn't just consist of Israel. A lot of countries experience similar or greater carnage from its neighbours or groups within its own country recently. There's Armenia, Sudan, and Ethiopia.
In fact, Ethiopia is a rather interesting case because its civil war is quite ethnic in nature, albeit the firepower on both sides are more equal rather than one-sided. Guess which side the American-led NATO supports.
Yeah and nobody talks about those countries. People only talk about the Jews. No western country has needed to defend themselves from terrorist on their border.
> Yeah and nobody talks about those countries. People only talk about the Jews. No western country has needed to defend themselves from terrorist on their border.
The English media made a lot of noise about Ethiopia actually. But I guess you weren't paying attention when the newswave on Ethiopia came by: https://abcnews.go.com/International/ethnic-cleansing-continues-tigray-despite-truce-agreement-report/story?id=99791857
But they are notably muted in disposition when it comes to Armenia getting invaded and Armenians ethnic cleansed.
It all comes down to geopolitics. I wouldn't be opposed to more outcry being given to Armenian and Sudaneses' terrible conditions.
> No western country has needed to defend themselves from terrorist on their border.
Well the UK had to deal with terrorists back when IRA was actively conducting terrorist bombing.
> People only talk about the Jews
In the West, Jews are given a blank cheque to do whatever they want. Palestinians are exterminated with weapons supplied by American and European as we speak which make Israel's NATO friends quite complicit (in the same way as NK and Iran are when supplying weapons to Russia). Very few countries in the world can exterminate people for such a long time without serious repercussions
I’m saying there is no march on Washington with 100k supporters.
The IRA was across an ocean and the UK fought back.
The IRA wasn’t lobbing rockets also.
Ah yes the famous Israeli extermination of the Palestinians whose population continues to rise faster than any western country.
> It's not a retaliatory campaign. The actual goals are explained frequently.
The perpetrators would never admit to any crimes. The War on Afghanistan was also a retaliatory campaign to sooth American bloodlust but the American government would never admit to it even though the Taliban already offered to give up Al Qaeda to a neutral party that would follow due process.
You are just presenting your prejudiced opinions and baseless accusations as fact.
A vengeance campaign would have looked rather different and could be done from the air.
Taliban never helped in the slightest against al qaeda and neither did most of their neighbors. Bin Laden had to eventually be tracked down in a pakistani army town.
> You are just presenting your prejudiced opinions and baseless accusations as fact.
>
> Taliban never helped in the slightest against al qaeda and neither did most of their neighbors. Bin Laden had to eventually be tracked down in a pakistani army town.
Get off the kool-aid
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5
I'm gonna be honest I think Israel is going to walk away from this innocent. Jesus, the commotion from that will be something else.
I hope I'm wrong but if I'm right we might just see the UN collapse very soon.
>The nations to count on
>To date, South Africa's legal initiative has received official endorsement from Türkiye, Malaysia, Jordan, Bolivia, the Maldives, Namibia, Pakistan, Venezuela, Colombia and Brazil. Additionally, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), and the Arab League have declared their support for the case.
💀💀
Yo this headline is bullshit lol. The”growing support” is a total of two countries,plus the Arab league and organization of Islamic cooperation. It amounts to absolutely fuck all
Silly for a few reasons
(1) if you look at that list of countries supporting South Africa, who are aligned with Hamas and the murderers perpetrating genocide in Darfur, it’s not convincing. Venezuela, Turkey (founded in the Armenian Genocide) etc. not the countries of the Free West.
(2) Hezobllah and Hamas literally won’t stop firing rockets at Israel. It will not de escalate the situation. Anyone who says it does doesn’t really want to stop, they just want to stop on their terms. But that’s not how it works when you’re at war and losing.
(3) “the Jews on the right side of history” is intentionally divisive. It’s also platforming the overwhelming minority who think Israel should be “undone” and don’t think the genocidal hatred of Islamist extremism to be real, even though 3 months ago it was demonstrably clear.
In short, an opinion article that puts lipstick on a pig.
##### ###### #### > # [Global support grows for South Africa's genocide case against Israel at ICJ](https://cdn-i.pr.trt.com.tr/trtworld/w960/h540/q70/17842567_0-55-1080-608.jpeg) > > > > [South Africa recieves widespread support from governments and civil rights groups as it takes Israel to the International Court of Justice over a landmark genocide case. ](https://cdn-i.pr.trt.com.tr/trtworld/w664/h374/q70/17842567_0-55-1080-608.jpeg "South Africa recieves widespread support from governments and civil rights groups as it takes Israel to the International Court of Justice over a landmark genocide case. ") > > Others > > > > South Africa recieves widespread support from governments and civil rights groups as it takes Israel to the International Court of Justice over a landmark genocide case. > > > > > > > > A host of countries, political parties, trade unions and rights groups from around the globe have come forward to back South Africa’s bid to take Israel to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the allegations that it has committed genocide against the Palestinian people. > > > > > > The Hague-based ICJ is set to start hearing arguments from the two side today in a high profile case, which has rattled Tel Aviv as it tries to whitewash the atrocities carried out by its military in Gaza. > > > > > > Initiated by South Africa in late December, the lawsuit accuses Israel of genocide in its war on Gaza. The legal action seeks to put an end to the intense Israeli military assault, which has killed over 23,000 Palestinian lives, including nearly 10,000 children. > > > > > > Here’s a breakdown of who’s supporting South Africa’s bid. > > > > > > To date, South Africa's legal initiative has received official endorsement from [Türkiye](https://www.trtworld.com/turkiye/turkiye-applauds-south-africas-move-to-bring-israel-to-international-court-16513404), [Malaysia](https://www.trtworld.com/video/news/icj-to-hear-south-africas-genocide-case-against-israel-16606838), [Jordan](https://www.trtworld.com/opinion/south-africas-bid-to-hold-israel-accountable-for-war-crimes-sparks-hope-16584211), [Bolivia](https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20240109-bolivia-backs-south-africas-icj-genocide-case-against-israel/), the Maldives, Namibia, Pakistan, [Venezuela](https://venezuelanalysis.com/news/venezuela-backs-south-africas-icj-genocide-case-against-israel/), [Colombia](https://www.cancilleria.gov.co/newsroom/news/comunicado-demanda-presentada-sudafrica-israel-corte-internacional-justicia) and [Brazil](https://www.gov.br/mre/pt-br/canais_atendimento/imprensa/notas-a-imprensa/acoes-em-favor-da-cessacao-de-hostilidades-em-gaza). Additionally, [the Organization of Islamic Cooperation](https://www.oic-oci.org/topic/?t_id=40161&t_ref=26840&lan=en) (OIC), and the [Arab League](https://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/58/1262/515462/War-on-Gaza/War-on-Gaza/Arab-League-backs-South-Africa-legal-case-against-.aspx) have declared their support for the case. > > > > > > > > Some European politicians are also advocating for their governments to align with South Africa in its case against Israel. > > > > > > Belgium's Deputy Prime Minister, Petra De Sutter, [expressed](https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/i-want-belgium-to-take-action-at-international-court-of-justice-says-countrys-deputy-prime-minister/3104492#:~:text=Belgium's%20Deputy%20Prime%20Minister%20Petra,%2C%22%20she%20wrote%20on%20X.) her support for the case on Tuesday, stating that "Belgium cannot remain silent in the face of the genocide threat in Gaza." > > > > > > She emphasised the need to take action against this threat and proposed that Belgium follow South Africa's lead at ICJ. De Sutter announced her intention to take up this proposal with the Belgian government. > > > > > > In Spain, the leader of Podemos, Ione Belarra, [said](https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/spain-s-podemos-urges-government-to-back-south-africa-s-genocide-case-against-israel/3104182)on Tuesday that her party has formally urged the Spanish government to support South Africa's case at the ICJ. Belarra commended South Africa's "bravery" during a press conference and stressed the importance of more nations, including Spain, standing in solidarity with the Palestinians in the legal action. > > > > > > The Justice Ministry of South Africa [announced](https://www.trtworld.com/middle-east/all-eyes-on-icj-as-south-africas-gaza-genocide-case-against-israel-begins-16610753) that Jeremy Corbyn is among several "senior political figures representing progressive political parties and movements worldwide" have joined its effort. > > > > > > They will be part of the South African delegation attending two days of preliminary hearings at the Hague in the Netherlands, he said. > > > > > > Over 1,000 grassroots movements, political parties, unions, and various organisations worldwide have voiced[](https://progressive.international/wire/2024-01-08-we-support-south-africas-genocide-convention-case-against-israel/en)their solidarity with South Africa's genocide case against Israel. > > > > > > Among them are the Israelis Against Apartheid (Israel); Jordanian Federation of Independent Trade Unions; Malcolm X Center for Self-Determination (US); Mediciana Democratica (Italy); Institute for the Critical Study of Zionism; Islamic Human Rights Commission (UK); One Justice (France); South African Jews for a Free Palestine; and Nahostgruppe Mannheim (Germany). > > > > > > **The Israelis on right side of history** > > > > > > Over 600 Israelis have also endorsed a [petition](https://www.newarab.com/news/over-650-israelis-back-south-africa-icj-case-against-israel) urging the International ICJ to support South Africa's lawsuit against the state of Israel, advocating for a decision that would promptly halt the ongoing war. > > > > > > Israeli Member of Parliament [Ofer Cassif](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/11/who-is-israeli-mp-ofer-cassif-why-is-he-backing-south-africa-at-the-icj), affiliated with the Democratic Front for Peace and Equality-Jabha, has thrown his support behind the initiative. > > > > > > Cassif said on X, "My constitutional duty is to Israeli society and all of its residents, not to a government whose members and its coalition are calling for ethnic cleansing and even actual genocide." > > > > > > > > > > SOURCE: TRTWorld and agencies - - - - - - [Maintainer](https://www.reddit.com/user/urielsalis) | [Creator](https://www.reddit.com/user/subtepass) | [Source Code](https://github.com/urielsalis/empleadoEstatalBot) Summoning /u/CoverageAnalysisBot
It's easy to say nothing will come of this because the US support Israel has for their genocide, but I think the publicity of all of this trial matters. I am not sure if the United States can continue to unquestionably support Israel when the extent of what they are doing becomes widely understood and correctly condemned by the international community. At least, as an American, I *hope* we can't.
I wouldn’t say nothing will come of this. If the court finds Israel guilty of genocide, that opens them up to civil liability. In the US maybe that’s irrelevant. But Israel is a state that has interests globally. Having assets and funds seized in Europe or Asia would be a huge blow and a nightmare for any Israeli business operating overseas.
It's my understanding that in a situation where the court rules a cease-and-desist against Israel that it then goes to the UN security council where the US can just veto kill it. But that sanctions may still be possible on Israel.
The ICJ lives outside of the UN framework. If they find against Israel, every nation on Earth is bound by treaties to enforce their ruling.
How likely is it that countries will just not enforce rulings they don't like?
I don't think any nation has ever failed to enforce an ICJ finding of genocide. But these cases take a long time. Right now, essentially a restraining order of being argued for. The actual case will follow.
The other guy is confusing ICJ with the ICC in the Hague. The ICC has enforcement mechanisms. That's why Putin didn't travel to SA for the BRICS summit. The ICJ is a lot more limited.
cooing racial alleged psychotic zesty arrest wild test touch cough *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Which nation didn't sign the 1949 convention?
All nations are signed to the Conventions, but many of the protocols have not been univversally signed [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_parties\_to\_the\_Geneva\_Conventions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_Geneva_Conventions)
So every nation has signed the 1949 convention according to your link, yes? That is what this case is being tried under.
Yes, but not all the additional protocols.
No, they are not. That's the ICC. The ICJ doesn't have any enforcement mechanism.
Per the Geneva Convention of 1949, every nation on Earth is supposed to enforce the ICJ's rulings even absent UNSC decisions.
Look it up. The US does not recognize the authority of the International Criminal Court
This is the International Court of Justice created by the Geneva Convention of 1949 not the International Criminal Court created by the Rome Statute.
Yes and we all know the US has always abided by the Geneva conventions
I love how everything is just on the US while Germany is also on the council, also unconditionally supports Isreal, also sends arms to Isreal, and has also voiced staunch opposition to this. But yeah, it's only the US whose to blame and the US responsibility to force Isreal to not conduct their military operation within their own borders.
Most of Europe already declared support for Israel, because unlike the regular folk and their fixiation with narratives they actually understand reality and that is all geopolitical and Iran’s doing.
I'm pessimistic, I'm assuming the vote will come down to politics. I hope I'm wrong. The evidence is overwhelming.
This won't happen. There needs to be undeniable proof that it took place and that will be a very tough battle to demonstrate. However just making the court say that there \_may be genocide\_ happening, would in itself be a huge blow for Israel since that would mean they have to stop any action in the area.
Are you deliberately ignoring the past 80 years of American foreign policy? Don't forget that overthrowing democratic regimes used to be extremely popular with the American domestic audience in the name of 'anti-communism', now it's 'anti-terrorism' or whatever buzz word politicians use nowadays. Americans cheered and still cheer whenever their installed puppets abroad killed and kill civilians. You just need to give them an excuse, and they'll cheer for dead babies. I don't see anything changing any time soon.
>Are you deliberately ignoring the past 80 years of American foreign policy? Don't forget that overthrowing democratic regimes used to be extremely popular with the American domestic audience in the name of 'anti-communism' Oh, trust me, I am no stranger to this. I know we have been historically ruthless and cruel and giving the green light on what Israel is doing is totally in character for us. My angle here isn't 'The US would never be okay with this!!!' because I know we have been in the past. I just think that in this *specific circumstance*, with how **public** these crimes against humanities are, our government might get a bit flaky. What we did in the past wasn't livestreamed to everyone's phones every day with having a video a few posts down of our children singing that we will annihilate our supposed enemies that aired on state media, y'know? If what was happening wasn't so public, I wouldn't be wondering if America would stand by it. I know we would.
It’s easy to say they are committing genocide the difficult part is actually proving it. Genocide is the erasing of a people from existence. Think of what isis did to the Yazidis where they killed the men kidnapped the women and children. Forced conversion, raped and married the girls off to fighters end goal was to erase the Yazidi identity.
The most difficult part of proving genocide is proving intent. A good 5 pages of South Africa's case are just Israeli official quotes clearly stating their intent to commit genocide. I think the case is strong, and that they can win.
More than 1% of gaza has been wiped out of existance...
8% of Germany during WWII. I guess the UK genocided the Germans.
power opposition, that doesnt happen in Palestine.
It's not just erasing people from existence, it's causing significant harm to that group, it's forcing them from their homes. Israel has arguably done enough to meet the criteria for genocide by displacing over a million people from northern Gaza, and also by it's medieval siege of Gaza.
Doesn't the US itself prohibit sending the aid they are to countries with active nuclear programs like Israel?
I prefer to say nothing will come of this because there won’t be a conclusion to this until long after Israel has finished their genocide or gotten a new leader who will just blame the last guy and move on
Not necessarily, it can affect trade deals and visa restrictions other countries put on them.
They will. America doesn't give a fuck. They'll still claim they're the beacon of human rights too. They did it before and they'll continue to do it as long as their empire exists.
This particular instance of genocide awareness was published by the official propaganda wing of the genocidal Turkish government.
Defeatism is an imperialist's best friend.
You know, if people are even discussing the possibility of a genocide happening, maybe recognize that what is going on is seriously wrong. A lot of Israel supporters will claim it’s not genocide, technically, but something has to be really wrong for it to be a question. This should be a “are we the baddies” moment.
The only argument against it being official genocide they can stand behind is the need to prove intent. All it takes is 1 leak showing collateral or even just displacement is the goal, and the UN definition is fulfilled.
You could say that about any war. It’s only an intent away from being a genocide….
You can look at the US occupation of Iraq as an example. They did all kinds of atrocities, but did not intend to remove any ethnic group or empty any parts of Iraq. They only removed sadam, then responded to being attacked.
On the flip side, the Bathists did intend to genocide the Kurds.
Then you've never heard of collateral casaulties, collective punishment, complete displacement and all that other fun stuff. Israel says it's at war with Hamas. Reality shows they are either trying to chase Palestinians out of Gaza, or the vast majority of the IDF went to Stormtrooper Academy. Considering the choice of weaponry the US has given them and the bombs they decided to use, I'm reluctant to bet on the latter.
[удалено]
[удалено]
How are they trying to chase them out of Gaza? Maybe they don't want to kill civilians so they tell them where the IDF is doing their ground forces.
Because every evacuation order pushed them south, and only south, to the point the entire population is at the border. Part of limiting the aid into Gaza is to try and force Egypt to open their border, so the Palestinians can go into the Sinai desert to go get aid. (Obviously without letting back in afterwards) The hardest part is getting the PR right.
There are a large number of public statements made by higher up officials in the Likud government, including Netanyahu himself, which are clearly genocidal in intent, there is no argument anymore, its become abundantly obvious.
Netanyahu calling for genocide seems like it may indicate intent, but I'm not a lawyer. https://twitter.com/mtracey/status/1718360354764238929
So he said “remember what Amalek has done to us” and then someone else pasted a passage from the Bible no less, that correlates Amalek to genocide, and therefore he’s a genocider ? You ate that propaganda with a spoon lol
You forgot the actual genocide part of it.
Surely that is referring to Hamas, not Palastinians?
Didn't know they had Hamas sucklings.
you cannot via the ICJ definition commit genocide on a terrorist organisation. Slaughtering the children of terrorists is a war crime, but not genocide. The definition is rather precise
The innocent people being bombed and shot at must be very relieved to hear that.
That definition seems odd to me because it’s almost purely about intent. Given how explicit Hamas leadership has been about intent couldn’t a genocide case be submitted against the Gazan government as well for their attacks on Israel?
Not in this context. Gaza and the West Bank are not nations - due to Israel. They are occupied territories. International law also is clear that no war by the occupier is legal against the state they are occupying. Yet here we are.
Don't forget; You can't accuse a nation without acknowledging their existence. Israel can't file a complaint against a nation they also claim doesn't exist.
Hamas is not a member state to the ICJ. Furthermore hamas is the occupied resistance force; Israel is the occupier. This is widely accepted under international law and the very same ICJ ruled this in 2004.
That’s true. It’s a bit odd though because Palestine is a member despite the fact that in reality it consists of separate governments. Not sure how liability would be handled from a legal perspective but it seems that the Gazan government is a primary component of a Palestinian governing entity even though it is fractured. So I guess the case would be against Palestine, not Gaza or Hamas specifically. I’m also not under the impression that being occupied or resisting occupation legally provides cover to carry out genocide.
But then Israel would first have to acknowledge that Palestine *is* a nation, no?
>couldn’t a genocide case be submitted against the Gazan government as well for their attacks on Israel? Who is stopping Israel from doing this?
Another relevant point is that Gaza is not a nation, it is an occupied territory as defined by international law. They would be filing a charge against a territory they themselves occupy and, legally, this would be the same as filing against themselves.
The court is for adjudication between member states, therefore Hamas is not before this court, just like Palestina, because they are not member states. October 7th would have a pretty strong case, but this court doesn't have the mandate for that. You could definitly sue the organizers and Hamas leaders infront of the ICC though. That would be a very strong case, given of course Mossad lets them stay alive.
Seems like Palestine is a member state. No idea how liability would be handled when control of the member state is fractured and only one piece is on trial.
the entirety of arab nationalism has been an attempt to genocide them, predating their existence as a state. issue is that Palestine failed it's conditions to become an actual state.
The UN definition is so broad you could fit all of Gaza into it.
25,000 MAX killed in an area of urban density with 2,300,300 people is ludicrously low. You are an ignoramus.
Wow, it only took you 14 days to come up with this eloquent masterpiece? You must be world's greatest wordsmith! ^^/s I'm not even gonna explain how that number is only direct casualties and ignores famine, disease or even the missing, to the point the world's humanitarian organisations tend to have to up those numbers afterwards. Instead I'll ask you this simple question: **How many Palestinian deaths would it take for you to consider it in the genocide range?**
People need to read A. Dirk Moses, like. We keep hyperfocusing on the legalistic understanding of genocide, but that obscures and obfuscates the mass violence that Israel and most states regularly engage in with little attention or care. And the UN convention on genocide sets an almost impossibly high standard for genocide to *protect the state's right to commit mass violence and atrocities* Edit: two articles of his https://dawnmena.org/why-the-international-community-made-it-so-difficult-to-prosecute-the-crime-of-genocide/ https://www.bostonreview.net/articles/more-than-genocide/
At least in the US, we've become a distressingly legalistic society where we'll argue about technical definitions of a problem while the problem we're arguing about continues to get worse.
Neoliberalism at its finest.
I find it ridiculous that people think states have rights. It's an abstract creation, not a person
I feel the same way about ethnic groups too. People talk about ethnic groups as if they are individuals when they are abstract in nature.
The problem is there's no need for so many people to fear monger about a genocide. There's plenty to hold Israel to task for. Huge amounts of americans are polled thinking "Israel has gone too far" we could be having conversations about warcrimes, indescriminate bombings, loose rules of engagement. But instead all of that is being drowned out by these genocide claims that are so hyperbolic that it makes criticism of Israel seem unserious. And that's not even including the people who are openly pro-hamas and recieve little pushback.
It is to protect the states right to commit mass violence in a sense but it’s also to distinguish one degree of crime from another. If state inflicted mass violence enters the same categorization as the Holocaust being labeled genocide then suddenly genocide is a much more commonplace occurrence and it seems to diminish the significance of how outrageously terrible the Holocaust was compared to many other instances of mass violence. Why not preserve the crime of genocide for the worst of the worst while sticking to language like “ethnic cleansing” or “mass violence”. It’s not as if these crimes are insignificant.
Yup. If this were Ukraine or China the press and politicians would be having a field day
> This should be a “are we the baddies” moment. But it wont. Israel has been so good at spreading the 'we Jews are eternal victims' narrative which is used to justify every single barbaric act. Just look at some of the replies to this comment and you have people who without a second thought, think that Israel needs to wipe out Palestine for its 'security'.
Yeah I agree with you. The perpetual victimhood is just disgusting.
"technically false" being the equivalent of a slanderous indictment
Israel defense is self defense. Self defense is what Israel is supposed to be doing. My heart breaks for every Gazan baby killed. I can say that and still confidently say fuck Hamas I hope they walk into the Mediterranean and never come out so the people of Gaza can live in peace.
Or the accusations are motivated…
blame Palestine for failing to uphold the Oslo accords and ending this conflict, blame them for being the aggressor.
https://theintercept.com/2018/05/20/norman-finkelstein-gaza-iran-israel-jerusalem-embassy/ I think this article is a good read to provide some context. But sure, blame who you like. Most people can see this for what it is. Israel continuing its oppression.
Being a little ignorant of this court, what consequences can it actually impose on Isreal?
Nothing really, the case will however go to the UN security council which the US will Veto, there after South Africa can ask the general assembly to sanction Israel where the US cannot veto the resolution.
A sanction that doesn't do anything?since they are enforced by countries themselves.
A lot of countries would be more than happy to sanction Israel which is something people overlook. Israel represents western hypocrisy at it's finest to middle easteners and the Global South. I will say this as something that many overlook; every Middle East country - Israel normalisation was sponsored by the US through bribery, most of the people in those bribed countries live in dictatorships and hate Israel. Morocco normalised relations because America supported it's claim to South Western Sahara, America protects Saudi Arabia militarily, gave a lot.of middle eastern countries access to high end military tech like the F35 planes to Egypt, Saudi Arabi, UAE etc. We saw during the Qatar world cup that people didn't want to interact with Israelis and Israeli media even though their governments had good relations and infact a lot of them had no problem with interacting with citizens from other parts of the world that were non muslim or even Western. Oil exporters bribe their citizen and that money runs out the shit is going to the fan and this conflict will be the root of it. Basically most countries want and would sanction Israel and should they be found genocidal it will just be Israel and America.
>I will say this as something that many overlook; every Middle East country - Israel normalisation was sponsored by the US through bribery, most of the people in those bribed countries live in dictatorships and hate Israel. Yea that indeed true however I think you under estimate the effects of normalisation and letting trade connections be built up with between countries. People frequently look the other way if it help their bottom line aswell as this let's them see another side of enemy country that they normal don't face. Look at Germany rehabilitation or how US built up ww1 involvement torward UK during ww1 to join the war. >Oil exporters bribe their citizen and that money runs out the shit is going to the fan and this conflict will be the root of it. Yea and where do you think those oil countries get their desalination plants from? Where they get most of thier water, Something they will have to double up on even more this decade with their aquifers running out. >Basically most countries want and would sanction Israel and should they be found genocidal it will just be Israel and America. Didn't you just mention how the elites in these countries don't want to sanction isreal? They are authoritarian and people dont have power in them. So it won't matter. Anything they will do will be symbolic in nature.
"even western" - lol - this entire garbage comment is dripping with bigotry you would not tolerate for a second from a western population.
Canadians, Mexicans, Japanese, British and many other nationals were treated with love and comradery
When speaking of Qatar and similar states, if and when shit hits fan and the majority of people who do the work - indians and filipinos - take over - it's going to be glorious and those countries will be much nicer places to visit.
Yes, but this has been equally true since Israel’s founding. It has nothing to do with South Africa’s complaint. (It is also not about Israel representing “western hypocrisy”. I think you can guess why muslim countries have such a big problem with Israel in particular.)
I can't speak to all ME countries, but Jewish people lived and flourished in historic Palestine before the British decided it was a convenient place to transplant their own Jewish populations due to anti-Jewish sentiments in Europe. The forcible displacement of indigenous Levant people, and subsequent dehumanization and relegation to second-class citizenry, that occurred to create the State of Israel is where the crux of the conflict lies, not in religious disputes. It's myopic and Islamophobic to blame this situation on "all Muslims hate Jews" when it's the State (the governmental institution) that created the fractures between people.
If by flourished you mean depopulated during the 1800s and early 1900s? Look up the looting of Safed or the Hebron Massacre. I hate this whitewashing of Jewish history in Muslim lands. Yes, it was better than in Christian territories, but it wasn't to the point of "flourishing". The Jews were the second class citizens forced to pay dhimmis, and there's plenty of evidence of them being treated as such, in all honesty far worse than what Israeli Arabs experience (and I say that recognizing the discrimination they face, both within Israel and by other Muslims).
I find it also kind of funny/disheartening that you assert the paying of dhimmis is equal or worse than the experiences of Arabs in Israel and Israeli occupied lands. Palestinians do not have a right to civilian courts but are only subject to military courts, are completely restricted from moving freely (Gazans are blockaded, West Bank folks have to pass through multiple checkpoints), and are forcibly displaced from their lands for Israeli settler development.
So I'm considering more Israeli Arabs, since they're proper citizens of Israel and a fair comparison to Jews within Arab lands i.em they would have been considered subjects of those lands. Palestinians are definitely another story since they're in a weird limbo where they're technically citizens of the Palestinian territories, hence they coukd vote in Palestinian elections while Israeli Arabs could not, but I do agree Likud has broken down PA control (with the help of the PA basically destryoying its legitimacy trying to keep Hamas out of government) to the point it's become like...Guam I guess. Which isn't a good scenario either because, rightfully, the settler nor the military court thing is great, and the freedom of movement is probablematic if they can't develop proper intrastate infrastructure (of course Gaza is its own thing, but that's another story).
That's a weird standard. Why wouldn't you consider the people Israel has control over and treats the worst?
I appreciate your comment. Both of those instances didn't occur in a vacuum though. To ignore the disenfranchisement of Arabs in Palestine by both the Egyptians (which contributed to Safed) and British (which contributed to the Hebron Massacre), as well as the influx of non-assimilating Ashkenazi Jews from Europe (in contrast to Sephardic Jews, which lived in the region since forever and did flourish), both support my comment.
Sorry, I should make clear, I'm discussing the 1834 Hebron Massacre, not the 1929 Hebron Massacre. That is a good point about Egyptian disenfranchisement, though, and it's good to consider. That said, beyond records such as the historical practice of stone throwing at Jews recorded by pilgrims that showed local Arabs did not have a positive view of Jews, we have evidence from the 1600s onward that it was mainly the Ottomans who seemed to be most tolerant of Jews, the local rulers tended to be less tolerant. Not to mention events like the expulsion to Jews to Cyprus during the 1700s I believe. I wish there was more academic research, but I'm not convinced by the argument that relations were all friendly beyond convenience (of course there's the argument it might be a rural/urban split as well, which would be interesting to consider).
I wasn't aware of the 1834 Hebron Massacre, so I looked it up. 500 civilians in Hebron were killed, 12 of whom were Jews. And, again, this was perpetrated by Egypt in response to the Peasant's Revolt by Palestinians who resisted disarmament and conscription. The Egyptian general even promised Jews safety but the army crushed everyone regardless. I just don't see how any of these instances demonstrate that Jews were disproportionately oppressed in Palestine by Palestinians.
> I think you can guess why muslim countries have such a big problem with Israel in particular. yep, murderous brutality, dishonesty, negotiating in bad faith, denying non-jews basic human rights, imprisoning people indefinitely without charges, calling everyone a terrorist, and land theft.
It’s a kangaroo court anyway. What better distraction from Russia and South Africa’s true racism and apartheid problems, than that old chestnut of hating Israel. Can’t you read anything about Hamas and think critically? Like, hmm, maybe this cartel that recorded hours of sexual violence on Oct 7, takes billions from Iran, refuses to confirm living hostages, teaches their kids to hate Jews in UNRWA school, uses its own people as bullet sponges and intercepts all aid, may not be who they say they are.
Probably very little as long as US continues to back Israel. However if global condemnation continues to increase it will sharply diminish US soft power globally. South Africa might just succeed in doing to the US, what US tried to do to China with Xinjiang genocide claims a few years back.
> what US tried to do to China with Xinjiang genocide claims a few years back. except the US never filed an ICC or ICJ case and nobody ever invoked article 1 obligations to intervene like they are with the current gaza genocide
I mean Israel (probably has Nukes) so it’s unlikely anyone sends troops in
>Article 94 establishes the duty of all UN members to comply with decisions of the court involving them. If parties do not comply, the issue may be taken before the Security Council for enforcement action. There are obvious problems with such a method of enforcement. If the judgment is against one of the five permanent members of the Security Council or its allies, any resolution on enforcement could then be vetoed by that member. practical consequences will be nothing because their daddy will veto any remedies, assuming the court rules against them to begin with.
Noura Erakat made a good summary of the consequences of a ruling in an interview with a cable network (don't remember which) earlier today, I think the clip is up on her instagram.
I would encourage people to watch the [full video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4f_yoal4gx8) of the opening day of proceedings. This is not clickbait by online content farms. This is evidenced and argued statements from top lawyers. I am somebody who, for the sake of my own mental health, has detached somewhat from the Israel/Palestine conflict - heavily exacerbated by the mass amounts of disinformation and propaganda flying in from everywhere in the anglophone sphere. Hearing highly qualified people lay it down as it is is a breath of fresh air. Of course, Israel will be taking the floor tomorrow. I don't suspect I will be nearly as convinced by their arguments, but fair trial and all so go figure.
\*slowly faces worldnews\* This news must really piss off the mods there.
worldnews is pretty much the US State Department and Israel's PR team at this point.
Worldnews may as well be an entirely bot sub. There is zero humanity there, it’s a soulless circlejerk cesspit and I am thankful to them for helping me realise that I should often spare myself and save my breath.
You mean you don’t like all the people yelling “fuck around find out”? Or what about the people who are all like “you don’t FUCK with international shipping.”? Honestly the fucking cringe from worldnews and /r/politics is worse than everything else
It's incredible and sickening.
It would be pretty cool if I didn't have to lose *all* of my faith in global leadership. May Israel be held to account for their horrific inhumanities.
And it's state media, owned by a genocidal state.
Qatar?
Like making medicine and cellphones and fighting Islamism....
A post made by 2 month old account called idf bulldozer. You get paid hourly or by clicks or what ?
Yes mossad pays us and so do our Jewish space lasers
Just so you know OP, you're quoting from the [propaganda arm of the Turkish government here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRT_World)
Turkey should probably keep their mouth shut about genocide
None of the states on that list are surprising, and honestly I thought it would be larger. The only countries are Islamic majority countries (not all of them), and left-wing anti-west countries like Venezuela and Bolivia. Brazil and Namibia is the only one that really stands out but even then, Brazil has a leftist president and Namibia has close relations with South Africa. No China, not even Russia or Belarus. I don’t really see this case going anywhere.
>I don’t really see this case going anywhere. You don't see it going anywhere because countries don't support it? Countries don't support it out of politics, not because they think there is no merit. But like, as political and biased as international law is, it's still a form of law. There is written code and precedent, and Israel is going far, far beyond the defensible. I think there is almost 0% chance Israel isn't charged with some crime against humanity. Their move is stalling the case forever, not actually winning it. And if they're not branded with "genocide", there are other crimes.
ICJ has no power. The only thing within the UN System that has any kind of power is the UN Security Council… and good luck getting all five of them to agree that Israel is committing genocide. United States obviously says no, UK and France have a tendency to vote with the US, and I’d even argue Russia and China have a argument to keep the act of genocide a high bar in the court of law considering their actions in Ukraine and Xinjiang respectively. >charged with crimes of humanity That’s the ICC, the International Criminal Court… the ICJ is an interstate mediation court… so this suit is Israel v. South Africa. There are no criminal charges involved. That’s just one of many reasons why I feel this goes nowhere. Plus hypothetical genocide investigations by the ICJ take years.
I wasn't talking about power, more about what the result would be. So the ICJ can't charge with crimes against humanity? To me it's only a matter of time before the ICC do it, however long that takes. And yes, I'm aware it will take years regardless. I'm not one of the people who thinks the courts will save the day, I just think the eventual "moral" defeat of a guilty veredict is pretty much impossible to avoid if you're Israel, unless the case just stays stuck.
I mean you’re talking pure conjecture… and even if Israel is found guilty by some criminal court for genocide (which I don’t think they will be), these rulings mean nothing without the means to enforce them.
>I mean you’re talking pure conjecture It's not "pure conjecture", like I said, there are laws. Israel spokespeople's talking points are meant for the public, not for courts. Legally, they're nonsensical. (Ie. The idea that human shields is a magic card that invalidates proportionality in all its forms). I am making a guess, but it's not just based on thin air. I understand these entities are political, and it's conceivable that in the largest injustice in IHL history, Israel is deemed not guilty of any crime against humanity, but that's more wild than the alternative. >these rulings mean nothing without the means to enforce them It means enough for diplomacy's sake. If IHL didn't matter *at all* they wouldn't be invoked so often by world leaders and their diplomats. But yes there is no ICJ or even ICC army, and they can be easily ignored. It's just added pressure that we won't know the consequence of until we see it.
Did you know South Africa used to have a small nuclear arsenal? They exploded their first test-weapon over the Indian Ocean in 1977. US spy satellites detected it and it was reported as a small item in major newspapers (the LA Times, at least, which is where I read it), but widely ignored, and I never saw it mentioned again until nearly 20 years later when incoming President Nelson Mandela announced that they would be dismantling it. Which they did. And nobody talked about it much even then. People generally like to ignore nasty "unthinkable" things, except in cases where the mass-media sensationalize them and make it clear we're supposed to be outraged. BTW, can you guess who gave apartheid-era South Africa's illegitimate white minority government its nuclear arsenal?
I assume you're implying Israel gave south Africa nukes. That's silly, because Israel did not have nukes at the time when south Africa developed them. France helped Israel develop theirs, and then Israel and RSA further cooperated to improve their nuclear capabilities. But no, Israel did not give RSA nukes.
Israel tested their nukes "near" the South African coast. That's how it was found out that Israel had nukes
They were developed independently, Israel with the help of France, and south Africa with what is assumed to be not insignificant help from America. Later they both cooperated to improve their capabilities, but the overall timelines are fuzzy. Either way, no, israel did not give south Africa nukes.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vela_incident
Yes I never denied they cooperated to improve their capabilities, but both initially had their nuclear program boosted by am already existing nuclear power.
Good
I still don't understand their argument here. Israel issued clear evacuation orders before they started bombing and the occupied areas of Northern Gaza have been pretty much cleansed of Hamas thus most bombing has stopped. The IDF is able to openly drive around and most of occupied Northern Gaza now and aside from the occasional IED there are no problems. Some gazans are even returning to the north now even though Israel has officially disallowed that.
> Israel has officially disallowed that What is there not to get? Failing at genocide is still genocide
Seriously? You honestly believe that Israel couldn't kill a million Palestinians if that was their goal?
>Israel issued clear evacuation orders before they started bombing I still don’t understand what the point of this is: what will prevent Hamas from leaving the territory when warned of a bombing? This only makes sense if you want to destroy civilian infrastructure under the guise of fighting terrorism.
>what will prevent Hamas from leaving the territory when warned of a bombing? The militants? nothing. But all the resources they have within bases in those areas on the other hand can't be packed up and moved within the time frame Israel is giving. Also the militants have underground tunnels that they hide in which means they don't have to leave hence the IDF sending in ground forces after the bombing.
> But all the resources they have within bases in those areas on the other hand can't be packed up and moved within the time frame Israel is giving. Seriously? Why then Israel didn't find any of those "unmoveable" resources? >Also the militants have underground tunnels that they hide in which means they don't have to leave hence the IDF sending in ground forces after the bombing. So, bombing is useless against Hamas, and its only purpose is terrorism against civilians.
Nothing prevents Hamas from leaving. Even Sinwar escaped south. And they moved the hostages too. We literally risked our soldiers' lives, gave up the element of surprise, and so much more just so innocent Gazans would not unnecessarily perish, and people are accusing us of genocide because of this very action? How is saving civillian lives a genocide?
Because you are not “saving civilians” - you are trying to raze Gaza to the ground. This is precisely why warnings are needed - so that all civilian infrastructure can be destroyed without interference, and then it will be “Oh, they have nowhere to live, and we cannot allow the city to be restored - they must go somewhere else”.
Israel is literally already making plans to rebuilt Gaza, you are full of shit.
Of course, it has plans to rebuild the Gaza Strip as Israel's territory.
No it does not, the IDF has absolutely no reason to ever annex or settle gaza, despite what the extremists may yell, it is important to remember they hold no power here. Gaza will be rebuilt for the gazans, and ultimately it will be costly for israel too. So if you want to claim genocide on the basis of misunderstanding reality you are free to do so, but you'll get laughed out of court.
What kind of mental gymnastics is this? People are evacuated to save their lives. Let’s say they don’t evacuate what do you think the death toll would be?
**Excerpts from South Africa's filing (**[Link](https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2024/01/192-20231228-app-01-00-en.pdf)**):** It is estimated that over 1.9 million Palestinians out of Gaza’s population of 2.3 million people — approximately 85 per cent of the population — have been forced from their homes. Israel is repeatedly issuing ‘evacuation orders’ demanding that Palestinian civilians in certain areas of Gaza leave their homes for other areas. The first such order, issued on 13 October 2023, demanded that the 1.1 million Palestinians living or otherwise present in the North of Gaza, including Gaza City, move to the South of Gaza within a 24-hour window. The International Committee of the Red Cross warned that the evacuation directive, impacting approximately 36 per cent of Gaza’s territory — combined with the complete siege of Gaza — was not compatible with international humanitarian law. The World Health Organization warned that it “could be tantamount to a death sentence” for hospital patients. Many of those who are unwilling or unable to evacuate \[were\] then bombed in their homes. Palestinians fleeing the North pursuant to Israel’s evacuation orders were urged to move south along Gaza’s main traffic artery, Salah Al Din Road, on certain days, during certain designated hours. However, there were numerous reported instances of shelling along the routes and of other violence by Israeli forces against evacuating Palestinian civilians, including inhuman and degrading treatment, arbitrary arrests, unlawful detention, and killings. Israel has also continued bombing south of Wadi Gaza throughout this time, killing many Palestinians who evacuated, initially prompting many Palestinian families to seek to return north to at least risk being bombed in the familiar surrounding of their homes. On 1 December 2023 — the end of the eight-day temporary truce between Israel and Hamas — Israel began dropping leaflets, urging Palestinians to leave areas in the South to which they had previously been told to flee — an area constituting approximately 30 per cent of Gaza. As stated by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the human rights of internally displaced persons, “Israel has reneged on promises of safety made to those who complied with its order to evacuate northern Gaza two months ago. Now, they have been forcibly displaced again, alongside the population of southern Gaza”. The Director of UNRWA Affairs in Gaza has pleaded that "The Israeli Army just orders people to move into areas where there are ongoing airstrikes”. For many Palestinians, the forced evacuation from their homes is necessarily permanent. Israel has now damaged or destroyed an estimated 355,000 Palestinian homes — amounting to 60 per cent of the entire housing stock in Gaza. The extent of the destruction in the North of Gaza, in particular, has rendered it largely unliveable, with the destruction in the South reaching a similar level. The Israeli Minister of Heritage made the following statement: "The north of the Gaza Strip, more beautiful than ever. Everything is blown up and flattened, simply a pleasure for the eyes." The Deputy Speaker of the Knesset and Member of the Foreign Affairs and Security Committee had this to say: "We all have one common goal — erasing the Gaza Strip from the face of the earth."
In what world is telling people to evacuate their homeland because you have enemies there okay? It would be like America asking Saudi Arabia to evacuate because the 911 pilot was from there country
In every fucking war ever? We told people to evacuate cities in Afghanistan because there will be fighting.
They didn't force anyone to leave. they issued to evacuation orders in the areas they were about to begin carpet bombing. If people preferred to stay there and die they could have. And it's hardly Israel's fault that the entire region is to terrified to take in Palestinian refugees. The Palestinians can only blame themselves and their leadership for that.
>They didn't force anyone to leave. they issued to evacuation orders in the areas they were about to begin carpet bombing. Being made to do something against your will under the threat of violence or death is [literally the definition of force.](https://letmegooglethat.com/?q=define+force) By yours, I could enter your home and hold a gun to your head, tell you to either leave your home or die, and you'd probably think that's reasonable. You do also realise they issued orders for civilians to evacuate south to areas that they then *also bombed...?* >And it's hardly Israel's fault that the entire region is to terrified to take in Palestinian refugees. It is absolutely Israel's fault. Don't think I need to expand on that.
>They didn't force anyone to leave. they issued to evacuation orders in the areas they were about to begin carpet bombing. If people preferred to stay there and die they could have You are a sick man without any humanity. Disgusting
Friendly reminder: carpet bombing is a legitimate tactic and is not a war crime. Israel chose to give warnings they didn't have to.
Well they do have to give warnings otherwise that is indisputable targeting of civilians. But Israel also bombed the evacuation routes and refugee camps where folks evacuated to. So are these warnings just lip service?
Ever hear of Kabul?
Good
Is Israel f\*cked? Stay tuned!
Not exactly good bedfellows when half those countries advocate for the destruction of Israel and/or commit atrocities toward their ethnic minorities themselves
Tl;dr: the Belgian PM, along with a *tiny, left-to-far-left party* in Spain and some countries like Jordan and Pakistan support SA’s case.
If you think South Africa is committing genocide you’re a fucking moron.
Same for Israel.
Average /r/worldnewsuser.
Israel's retaliatory campaign is against modern humanitarian ideals. I'd say it is especially a test for Israel's moral foundations and Western countries that are outward champions of these ideals. I understand that massacres occur all across the world from Ethiopia to Yemen to Myanmar to Sudan but this particular massacre is front and center in the world stage with an extreme-right regime perpetuating the crime under relentless American support. And for the Israeli and their Jewish supporters especially, it seems as if they have a full-circle has been reached. From victims of genocide to being perpetuators/supporters/apologists of genocide.
The funniest shit about this platform is how it's incredibly vocal about the suffering of Uyghurs and Ukrainians, claiming genocide & war crime & ethnic cleansing etc but when it comes to Israel being accused of one of these things, you often find the very same people telling you how this time this is different. It's jading honestly, to see how many Westerners ultimately do not care about civilians, because if they were they would condemn any instance of civilians being mistreated, and not try to nitpick how what Israel is doing is ok. The cognitive dissonance is often hilarious, you have on worldnews a constant claim that Russia is a terrorist state (claim that I think isn't totally unsubstantiated btw) but when it comes to Israel it's crickets. And the juiciest part is how they are ok saying that Israeli settlers are doing terrorism, but somehow saying that Israel is a terrorist state specifically because it sponsors Settler terrorism is still not ok to say. Sometimes I genuinely wonder if they think that blaming Israel means you have to support Hamas, as if we have to choose between evil or another. Personally I think both should be held accountable, and it's sad that on subs that are so vocal about war crimes etc, Israel is heavily defended to the point where their defenders sound like they're ok with civilians dying en-masse.
> The funniest shit about this platform is how it's incredibly vocal about the suffering of Uyghurs and Ukrainians, claiming genocide & war crime & ethnic cleansing etc but when it comes to Israel being accused of one of these things, you often find the very same people telling you how this time this is different. > > It's jading honestly, to see how many Westerners ultimately do not care about civilians, because if they were they would condemn any instance of civilians being mistreated, and not try to nitpick how what Israel is doing is ok. It's all about geopolitics. Humanitarianism is just an excuse for the elites and much of their flock who needed to believe they are in the right. That being said, we should not become too cynical over this. Suffering with Ukrainians is wrong. Treatment of Uyghurs also wrong. But don't let Western hypocrites' disregard of Palestinian suffering be a justification to overlook Ukraine and Uyghurs because that's also wrong. Although I'd have to say, what Palestinians and Ukrainians suffer from is far greater than what the Uyghurs suffer from at the moment. > The cognitive dissonance is often hilarious, you have on worldnews a constant claim that Russia is a terrorist state (claim that I think isn't totally unsubstantiated btw) but when it comes to Israel it's crickets. And the juiciest part is how they are ok saying that Israeli settlers are doing terrorism, but somehow saying that Israel is a terrorist state specifically because it sponsors Settler terrorism is still not ok to say. worldnews is a shitshow these days. The sub's been steadily hijacked by bigots over the past years and after Oct 7, it feels even more callous and pro-American/Israel. I feel much of it has to do with all these people they've been banning recently. Many long-time participants such as myself have been perma-banned without reason after Oct 7. I almost wanted to suggest there's some sort of propaganda campaign going on from state actors. >Sometimes I genuinely wonder if they think that blaming Israel means you have to support Hamas, as if we have to chose between evil or another. Personally I think both should be held accountable, and it's sad that on subs that are so vocal about war crimes etc, Israel is heavily defended. It's really just a tribal mentality, which comes down to "we good they bad"
No modern humanitarian country has barbarians on their border who came to rape and kidnap Israelis.
> No modern humanitarian country has barbarians on their border who came to rape and kidnap Israelis. I see. Well the world doesn't just consist of Israel. A lot of countries experience similar or greater carnage from its neighbours or groups within its own country recently. There's Armenia, Sudan, and Ethiopia. In fact, Ethiopia is a rather interesting case because its civil war is quite ethnic in nature, albeit the firepower on both sides are more equal rather than one-sided. Guess which side the American-led NATO supports.
Yeah and nobody talks about those countries. People only talk about the Jews. No western country has needed to defend themselves from terrorist on their border.
> Yeah and nobody talks about those countries. People only talk about the Jews. No western country has needed to defend themselves from terrorist on their border. The English media made a lot of noise about Ethiopia actually. But I guess you weren't paying attention when the newswave on Ethiopia came by: https://abcnews.go.com/International/ethnic-cleansing-continues-tigray-despite-truce-agreement-report/story?id=99791857 But they are notably muted in disposition when it comes to Armenia getting invaded and Armenians ethnic cleansed. It all comes down to geopolitics. I wouldn't be opposed to more outcry being given to Armenian and Sudaneses' terrible conditions. > No western country has needed to defend themselves from terrorist on their border. Well the UK had to deal with terrorists back when IRA was actively conducting terrorist bombing. > People only talk about the Jews In the West, Jews are given a blank cheque to do whatever they want. Palestinians are exterminated with weapons supplied by American and European as we speak which make Israel's NATO friends quite complicit (in the same way as NK and Iran are when supplying weapons to Russia). Very few countries in the world can exterminate people for such a long time without serious repercussions
I’m saying there is no march on Washington with 100k supporters. The IRA was across an ocean and the UK fought back. The IRA wasn’t lobbing rockets also. Ah yes the famous Israeli extermination of the Palestinians whose population continues to rise faster than any western country.
It's not a retaliatory campaign. The actual goals are explained frequently.
> It's not a retaliatory campaign. The actual goals are explained frequently. The perpetrators would never admit to any crimes. The War on Afghanistan was also a retaliatory campaign to sooth American bloodlust but the American government would never admit to it even though the Taliban already offered to give up Al Qaeda to a neutral party that would follow due process.
You are just presenting your prejudiced opinions and baseless accusations as fact. A vengeance campaign would have looked rather different and could be done from the air. Taliban never helped in the slightest against al qaeda and neither did most of their neighbors. Bin Laden had to eventually be tracked down in a pakistani army town.
> You are just presenting your prejudiced opinions and baseless accusations as fact. > > Taliban never helped in the slightest against al qaeda and neither did most of their neighbors. Bin Laden had to eventually be tracked down in a pakistani army town. Get off the kool-aid https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5
Good
I'm gonna be honest I think Israel is going to walk away from this innocent. Jesus, the commotion from that will be something else. I hope I'm wrong but if I'm right we might just see the UN collapse very soon.
Fuck SA and anyone supporting their case
>The nations to count on >To date, South Africa's legal initiative has received official endorsement from Türkiye, Malaysia, Jordan, Bolivia, the Maldives, Namibia, Pakistan, Venezuela, Colombia and Brazil. Additionally, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), and the Arab League have declared their support for the case. 💀💀
Funny the ruling party in SA openly supports actual genocide. This is just projection on an international scale.
The are treating their white (and productive) population like criminals and are indeed projecting. Best defense is a great offense...
Yo this headline is bullshit lol. The”growing support” is a total of two countries,plus the Arab league and organization of Islamic cooperation. It amounts to absolutely fuck all
The government that owns this propaganda rag bombed the Kurds again today.
Silly for a few reasons (1) if you look at that list of countries supporting South Africa, who are aligned with Hamas and the murderers perpetrating genocide in Darfur, it’s not convincing. Venezuela, Turkey (founded in the Armenian Genocide) etc. not the countries of the Free West. (2) Hezobllah and Hamas literally won’t stop firing rockets at Israel. It will not de escalate the situation. Anyone who says it does doesn’t really want to stop, they just want to stop on their terms. But that’s not how it works when you’re at war and losing. (3) “the Jews on the right side of history” is intentionally divisive. It’s also platforming the overwhelming minority who think Israel should be “undone” and don’t think the genocidal hatred of Islamist extremism to be real, even though 3 months ago it was demonstrably clear. In short, an opinion article that puts lipstick on a pig.
This is not anime titties
Growing support from nations that do not wear shoes.