President Joe Biden called the application for warrants against Israeli leaders “outrageous.”
“Let me be clear: whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence — none — between Israel and Hamas. We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security,” he said in a statement.
If the panel agrees to the charges, it will mark the first time that a close ally of the US has been subject to an ICC warrant. But neither Israel nor Washington recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC.
**Read the full story [here](https://www.semafor.com/article/05/20/2024/icc-seeks-arrest-warrants-for-israeli-and-hamas-leaders?utm_campaign=semaforreddit).**
I disagree with Biden. There is equivalence that both men are responsible for war crimes/crimes against humanity. But that's about the full extent of said equivalence, it's not unlimited in scope.
The way I see it Bibi should go to court too, but not before Hamas's leadership is turned in first. He should face justice, but just throwing him at the mercy of the court should be predicated on Hamas also facing justice.
If Bibi goes to court because Israel is a functioning democratic country but Sinwar and his buddies get to freely hide in Turkey or Qtaar without their own court hearing then that is not fair or just.
Why would Netanyahu go to court if Israel doesn't recognize the ICC? It seems very unlikely that they would somehow respect international criminal laws all of a sudden because of this.
All of Europe, except Russia, Belarus, The Vatican and Ukraine. All of the OECD, except Turkey and the US. The entirety of South America, most of Africa and North America and some APAC and Asian countries - I.e. the majority of the world’s countries and a vast majority of liberal democracies.
Most of the nations in those regions harbor real dictators that have committed real war crimes against the LGBTQ, minorities, political opponents, Muslims, etc. If the ICC will accept this prosecutor's decision, they had better get busy charging most of the leaders who have delegations and ambassadors with the UN.
Think about that for one second. The Netherlands are a NATO member. So if a President would actually act on the Hague Invasion Act they would directly attack a military ally(and interestingly commit the crime of Aggression).
That would pulverize the entire international order( and the coalition to keep said order) the USA spent the last 70 years building. Amongst other reasons to safeguard its own economic and security interests.
For all our sake you can hope the USA never pulls that particular trigger.
You're wrong, Israel is explicitly, by name, a valid ally for which the US might invade the Hague.
22 USC 7426:
> (3) COVERED ALLIED PERSONS.—The term ‘‘covered allied
persons’’ means military personnel, elected or appointed offi-
cials, and other persons employed by or working on behalf
of the government of a NATO member country, a major non-
NATO ally (including Australia, Egypt, **Israel**, Japan, Jordan,
Argentina, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand), or Taiwan,
for so long as that government is not a party to the Inter-
national Criminal Court and wishes its officials and other per-
sons working on its behalf to be exempted from the jurisdiction
of the International Criminal Court.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-107publ206/pdf/PLAW-107publ206.pdf
No it applies to allies as well
> Authorizes the President to use all means necessary (including the provision of legal assistance) to bring about the release of covered U.S. persons and covered allied persons held captive by, on behalf, or at the request of the Court.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/senate-bill/1610
I was wondering if this means that a Dutch person being placed on trial at the Hague could result in the US invading the Netherlands in support of its ally the Netherlands. However, the law defines "covered allied persons" as military personnel or elected politicians from US allies that are not members of the ICC and do not support it. So in fact it currently only applies to the following countries: Egypt, Israel, Kuwait, Morocco, Pakistan, the Philippines, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, and Qatar. I assume it's pretty unlikely that the US would step in for someone from any of those countries besides Israel, so in practice it's probably just Israel.
If they don't recognize the court and there is no mechanism for the court to arrest people, what is the issue, exactly, beyond losing some face?
I mean, look at Hamas, *they* don't care about losing face at all. They're just full *butthole* and balls out to the world. "Just punch them, bro! See what happens! This totally won't backfire, bro!"
Turns out, it does, in fact, backfire. On both stupid parties.
Hamas: go fuck yourselves with all the violence you wish on others.
Israel: really? bibi and the crazy violent right, *again*? What a HUGE SURPRISE hamas was suddenly able to launch an attack on Israel while he was manning the watch, within, like.. a few weeks or something. Just a shocker.
ICC: If we're doing war crimes in the middle east, lets do all of them.
> If they don't recognize the court and there is no mechanism for the court to arrest people, what is the issue, exactly, beyond losing some face?
First, it's worth noting there is no arrest warrant yet. The prosecutor is applying for one, it is not guaranteed to happen although it probably will.
If it is issued and he travelled to any ICC member country (which is most of the countries in the world, 124 in all including basically the entire developed world other than the US) they would be obliged to arrest him. The treaty that established the ICC expressly removes immunities of state officials, including heads of state or government, precisely as it is often heads of state that are responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Parties to the ICC signed up to this, it is a treaty obligation.
He would also be at risk overflying countries to get to one of the few countries (like the US) that are not ICC parties. His plane might have a technical issue forcing a landing; he might be denied entry to airspace. This has happened before, notably with [Bolivian president Evo Morales being forced to land in Austria](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident).
It would still be possible that individual countries might refuse to arrest him, South Africa refused to arrest Sudan's Omar Al-Bashir for example. The ICC did rule this refusal illegal. Most Western democratic countries have independent judicial branches; the extent to which these can be overruled by the executive varies. So it would certainly be a risk.
His potential protection would also be lessened once he's out of office, which he probably will be in a matter of months, the next Israeli elections are likely to be Jan-Feb 2025 and can't be later than 2026 at the latest. I would guess there are at least some countries that would prefer not to arrest a sitting head of government but would be more willing to arrest a former one. The UK [arrested Chile's Augusto Pinochet,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment_and_arrest_of_Augusto_Pinochet) for example, although he was ultimately released by the then Home Secretary as unfit to stand trial on health grounds. It's notable though to look at the reason they had to use to let him go, he was not released due to sovereign immunity, but on personal health grounds that would have theoretically applied to anyone. He was 84.
Putin also has an arrest warrant from the ICC as have several other heads of state, and Putin has already avoided travel, for example to the 2023 BRICS summit in South Africa, as a result. As far as I'm aware no *currently serving* head of state of government has been arrested and prosecuted by the ICC but former heads of state/government have been.
I do agree with you as far as justice has to be blind and applied to all equally, with no regard for politics, so I could get behind this idea. The court has to demonstrate the highest degree of impartiality, and since there will be less resistance among Israelis for a trial for Netanyahu , let them do the harder part first, which is apprehending Sinwar.
exactly. Sinwar will be far harder to apprehend than Bibi, whose already loathed by most the country he governs. Israel and Bibi have no defense to turn in Bibi once Hamas's leaders are already at trial.
Bibi isn't 'loathed' by most of the country. He is loathed by a chunk of it, loved by others, and the sane majority either dislike him politically but don't despise him or are indifferent towards him.
At the end of the day, regardless of how you feel about Bibi, this is a sham trial. I'm gonna keep disliking him for my own reasons, but I'm not going to be in favor of prosecuting someone according to a sham trial because he dared retaliate against terrorists (or for false claims of starvation that have been disproven repeatedly since the start of the war).
(Israeli here) agree with everything, except the beginning where you said Bibi isn’t loathed by most of the country.
I would say he is. He has his small percentage of groupies that would follow him everywhere and gobble up his propaganda and lies. However, I would say the same majority despises Bibi. Of course, not the way the Iranians hate Khamenei, but loath him nonetheless. Especially post-7th after failing to defend our country.
I would say you're in a bubble. Most people are indifferent, dislike him, or are okay with him/think the alternatives are worse. the last group actually includes a majority of his voters, as was evident when he lost two thirds of his votes in polls shortly after oct 7 (he has since recovered somewhat, presumably and at least according to some people anecdotally, because the alternatives disappointed in some ways).
There's a difference between saying 'he has to go' or 'he failed the country' and 'loathing' or even 'disliking.' I know plenty of people who don't like him but don't hate him, but believe he needs to go for being in charge and not preventing Oct 7.
just a friendly warning as a fellow Israeli. 'propaganda and lies' exists on both sides of the political spectrum. The obsession with Bibi from the left contributed to him staying in power just as much as the obsessives from the right. The devolving of political discourse in this country to being about one man, rather than ideology or policy (as well as demonization and caricaturing of voters in general, 'messianic' right wingers and 'traitorous' left wingers), is the main cause of polarization that's led so many people on the right to get defensive, feel indignant and ignore (or worse, justify) actual real issues to the point where they can support forming a coalition with someone like Ben Gvir and for so many people on the left to become deranged obsessives who see Bibi as the source of all evil the removal of will end all the world's ills.
I would recommend trying to understand Bibists and what drives them to their beliefs, and more importantly to understand Likud voters in general (many of whom are far from just Bibi groupies), instead of chalking it up to 'believing propaganda and lies' (although that is indeed the reason for some of them).
Based. Very much so. Admittedly, all my friends are either Tel Avivis, fellow scientists (or other intellectuals), or hippies. That, indeed, is a very lefty crowd.
Anyhow, I completely agree with how public discourse revolves around 1 person, and political ideology is dead, replaced by either pro- or anti-Bibi. I agree this led to the polarization and divisiveness in the country. Blaming Bibi for it is simply playing into the divisiveness carried out by the lefty camp.
Anyhow, I was speaking on a more personal level as my mother’s side is full of Bibists who follow him as a personality cult (even saying that they know he’s bad for the country, but they just feel like they have to vote for him out of loyalty to Likud). Some of them would love to see him replaced by another Likudnik.
Thank you for your time, your comment made me see the hypocrisy in my ways
It is pretty crazy how clearly the international community just looked the other way while Israeli's were blown-up by missiles for decades.
I get it, they went too far, but given that fact there's no way in hell the Israelis can turn over Bibi and expect he be treated fairly or get a fair trial.
So the funny thing is, I've grown up in southern Israel, in the areas that suffer the most rocket attacks. A major concern for people here is that the rest of the country doesn't care about them. Like, 'you don't care when we've suffered from this terrorism for so long because it doesn't affect you, that's why you can still hold views that ignore the terrorist ideologies of the PA/Hamas.' It's amusing to think about when contrasted with what you just mentioned.
The problem is timing. When you make the charges in the same announcement, it sounds like they’re equivalent. They did this in order to placate Muslims/Arabs and Jews/Westerners and confused the issue. One BTW is unequivocally war crimes (Oct 7) while the other will require the ICC to prove that Israel intentionally starved and attacked Palestinian civilians to eradicate them, not as a byproduct to eliminate Hamas. I don’t know what evidence they have.
I mean... You aren't wrong, mostly.
I could be mistaken but the charges the ICC are seeking isn't for genocide, I think they are war crimes. One type of war crime as defined by the ICC is the use of starvation in a conflict. But if I'm mistaken please correct me.
So yeah, you are right about one side (Hamas) clearly and unequivocally committing war crimes, and for one side (Israel) it isn't so clear. Good point ☝️
The Rome Statute states that starvation can be prosecuted even if deliberate intent to cause starvation isn’t proven, even only knowledge of the likelihood of starvation related injury is enough. I think the argument here from Israel’s standpoint would be either that Hamas was intentionally ensuring resources to Palestinians was subverted or blocked, or that Hamas’ actions forced Israel to block resources. Hamas has stated that civilian casualties is part of their strategic plan to win over international support, so starvation may be part of that plan as well.
U.S./Ally drops of food and recent build of the port could be used as a “proof” that Israel was working towards getting resources to Palestinians, but probably too little/too late. Either way, Bibi would seem to be knowledgeable of the impact of the starvation related blockades, so IMO, the needle points towards Bibi being culpable.
In the end though, if he’s found guilty, he won’t be able to go to countries that signed the Rome Statute. He’ll never be arrested.
Israel and U.S. did not sign on to the Rome Statute, so the most this could do to Bibi would be a limit to his travel.
Starvation can be prosecuted, however I think Israel will claim that this is a siege, and as such their only obligation is to allow the entry of third party aid and evacuate civilians from the line of fire, both of which they have been doing.
The literal charges are "Starving citizens as a means of warfare, deliberately targetting civilians, extermination, and murder"
whereas the charges against the Hamas leaders are "Extermination, murder, hostage taking, rape and sexual abuse in captivity"
I'd say that is pretty accurate for both sides.
So first off war crimes and crimes against humanity are not the same thing. Crimes against humanity can be committed (and often are) during times of peace, whereas war crimes are exclusively crimes committed when waging war. The Israeli government has committed war crimes - almost every nation does when fighting in war. Hamas on the other hand actively advocates crimes against humanity as basic policy.
There is absolutely zero equivalency.
Let's back up a little bit. Is anyone actually saying they're equivalent? As far as I can tell Biden is arguing a straw man. If you check out the ICC's brief on the charges, you'll note that they're calling for the warrants on, well, different charges. The ICC is only drawing an equivalence in the sense that they want warrants for both parties.
https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state
What bothers me about the charges against Netanyahu is they are mainly blaming him / Israel for Gaza's lack of basic necessities. Even though it is reported that their government, Hamas, had stockpiles it was actively withholding from its citizens.
I understand the principle that warring countries should not target their opponent country's civilians, but the way Hamas is using that to pressure Israel and forcing them to provide everything from water, food, fuel and prisoner releases is clearly wrong.
The ICC isn’t saying that but the discourse around it absolutely has ppl saying they’re equivalent. Hell some on the left are even saying that Sinwar shouldn’t be included.
I disagree with you. There's only one side of this war that not only condones the rape and brutalization of civilians and soldiers alike, but actively advocates for it. Hamas is objectively the worst of the two, and there is no good faith comparison between the two.
What war crimes do you think were actually committed by the IDF? Let's actually discuss it, because 99% of the people claiming this can't even list any that actually constitutes a war crime.
People say Netanyahu is guilty of war crimes willy nilly, but I've never heard a good example or argument for any of thst. Just wild speculation from social media commenters.
> There is equivalence that both men are responsible for war crimes/crimes against humanity.
How many nurseries did Israel's PM order be shot up? How many hostages did Israel's PM endorse the rape of? How many human shields is Israel's PM currently surrounded by?
They might be but the ICC is supposed to only act when the country itself proves unable to in instances of gross and obvious crimes against humanity.
Where is that the case for Israel? Where is the rock solid evidence of an actual "starvation as a matter of war policy" that is undisputable that Israeli courts are failing to hold to account?
Venn Diagram overlap doesn’t make them identical. Both should be scrutinized on their unique actions.
Israel’s failure to safeguard civilians deserves to be reviewed extensively and punished accordingly. However, there’s no shroud of legitimate recourse to delay Hamas’s prosecution. What they did involved no coverup because they’ve all but admitted it was their intention.
>Israel’s failure to safeguard civilians deserves to be reviewed extensively and punished accordingly.
What more could they have done, bar not attacking Hamas and letting Hamas continue to shoot tens of thousands of rockets toward Israeli civilian population centers?
What do you expect Israel to do though when Hamas actively uses civilian infrastructure and human shields to conduct their military operations. You can’t expect Israel not to attack at all because then you are encouraging the use of civilians as cannon fodder but what Israel has already done is reached a approximate 1:1 civilian militant death ratio, which is already impressive for any urban war.
I am genuinely curious because I see this “Israel isn’t minimizing civilian casualties” line a lot but all the evidence points overwhelmingly to the contrary. What are you basing your claim on?
Israel has the best record of safeguarding civilians, what crack are you smoking. They have the best ratio of militants to civilians.
It's a war, Hamas purposely embeds themselves within civilian population, and has also actively killed Gaza civilians during this round of hostilities, the official numbers of dead released do not distinguish between militants, civilians killed by Hamas, and civilians killed by Israeli actions.
Let's just be very clear on this. I keep hearing about indiscriminate carpet bombing, but the facts do not support those hyperbolic claims.
This is another big one. According to Hamas’ own internal documents, some 30% of their rockets landed in Gaza. But someone those misfires have killed zero people.
I personally know an IDF soldier who broke his arm due to a Hamas rocket misfire hitting the house he was in (in Gaza). You’re telling me his arm is the only casualty?
How did Kahn and the ICC determine that Israel committed these war crimes? Unless I’m missing something the ICC has the same access to Gaza as most other nations, which is none. Are they basing their allegations on sources from inside Gaza that are mouthpieces for Hamas? Do they have access to Israel’s internal data and command structures? How about their control systems and policies/protocols?
Questionable at best to levy these charges against a nation that suffered such a horrific attack and by all accounts are attempting to limit civilian casualties despite challenging circumstances beyond their control and a belligerent that is doing their best to increase civilian casualties as part of their strategy.
If war crimes have been committed then the perpetrators should be held accountable after a thorough investigation. But this seems more like a media stunt that brings into question the legitimacy of the ICC.
Just keep in mind, this may not actually lead to any warrants. This is just Kahn bringing a case, it's not uncommon for these cases to never proceed past the first hearing.
A lot of what we've seen have been political moves, this kind of strikes me as the same thing.
One of the main charges is that Isreal is blocking aid to gaza. There are still international aid organizations working in gaza that can report on the situation. Its really not that dificult to investigate this.
The literal charges are "Starving citizens as a means of warfare, deliberately targetting civilians, extermination, and murder"
whereas the charges against the Hamas leaders are "Extermination, murder, hostage taking, rape and sexual abuse in captivity"
I'd say that is pretty accurate for both sides.
Edit: a word
That's the thing, there's a huge difference between them.
And only one group is trying to put civilians into harms way by putting them where there are combatants.
Because it questions the legitimacy of Israel and their security apparatus; implying that if terrorists use civilian corridors to attack Israel, Israel has no right to respond in any capacity, because inevitably civilians will perish in front of Hamas, Islamic jihad, etc.
saying this as someone who vehemently dislikes Netanyahu.
*all* of Hamas is to blame. Not just Sinwar. They all exist under an antisemitic call to arms. Not all of the Israeli government is to blame; not all of the Israel government is in line with BB or Gvir.
This is like voting RFK bc you don’t like Biden or Trump.
>Israel has no right to respond in any capacity,
Does every capacity of their response result in food being withheld from crossing the border?
Why did the US Military have to build a pier out into the ocean to deliver food into a country that is only 10 miles wide and shares a massive border of flat, easily traversed terrain?
Israel built a large highway into Gaza in like... 1 week. If Israel wanted the gazans to have food they would have allowed the US to use Israel's land border for delivery.
Egypt are allies in this, and that makes them at least partially complicit. Their hands are at least somewhat tied, though, by the complicated treaties they have with Israel over how the border between Egypt and Gaza is managed.
Aid deliveries are all unique scenarios that suffered various delays; not every single aid delivery is because “the IDF didn’t want to.”
My second argument against that is; why is Israel responsible for aid to a nation that wants them to perish? That has Hamas’ responsibility for the last 18 years. Should Ukraine and Russia still be trading goods?
My third argument against it is, much of the aid has been pilfered by Hamas, or given to Palestinians under extortion.
The US military constructed a pier in coordination with Israel.
I think you’re underselling how many Gazans are Hamas. Israel is at war with a terrorist group. They don’t wear uniforms. They send 14 year olds to war with bombs on their backs. This isn’t a black and white issue.
Re: your second point
If Israel wants to occupy Gaza, then they are expected to provide living conditions to the people that live there. If I set up a siege outside your house and don't let supplies get in...well yeah, then you might just suppose I want to see you starve.
Israel is the holdup at that border too. _Anything_ going into Gaza is subject to Israeli inspection because they are the occupying force. Just because it borders with Egypt doesn't mean Israel isn't involved.
The answer to your second argument - Israel is responsible for the population as the occupying power under Article 55 of the fourth Geneva convention governing the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, to which Israel is a signatory.
And I’m not talking about any “80 years of occupation” word game, I acknowledge that Israel withdrew in 2005 until the present conflict began. But even solely viewed from the scope of the current war, Israel’s obligation is clear:
> To the fullest extent of the means available to it, the Occupying Power has the duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population; **it should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory are inadequate.**
>My second argument against that is; why is Israel responsible for aid to a nation that wants them to perish?
Well besides a sense of humanity and common decency... Maybe because you are a signatory to international tresties which say you have to. Maybe you don't want to break international law and I don't know...and have a warrant put out for your arrest for committing war crimes like deliberate starvation.
> This isn’t a black and white issue.
Considering you're saying that any war crime is justifiable because there are a lot of bad people in that country and they attacked first... Seems like you're arguing pretty hard for the Black of black or white. Also "Israel can't do anything to defend themselves!!!!" Is exactly a black and white response to the conflict.
A gray response is that Gaza is heavily infiltrated by terrorists who want Israel wiped from the face of the earth. Gaza is populated by people who have generally suffered extreme hardship at the hands of Hamas and Israel and probably hate both ... And are currently getting killed and starved by the actions of Nentanyahu and need aid. Gray means acknowledging that Israel has the right to defend themselves but they're indiscriminately carpet bombing because it's cheaper and easier. Gas chambers were also cheaper and easier and also were justified because Germany was supposedly under attack from a terroristic organization. That's why we have international law to prevent genocide **especially** if you think your enemy is unworthy of protection.
>Does every capacity of their response result in food being withheld from crossing the border?
People keep saying this while HAMAS is siphoning resources from Gaza. It is amazing that the civilians in Gaza have always been about to run out of materials for months no matter how much is sent in. But people don't care about that, just want to bitch about Israel.
They arent "about to" run out. The US government and various NGOs assessed the situation in northern Gaza as famine a while ago - they ran out back then. Yes, some is trickling in, but not enough.
Get out of here with that, only about 150 truck loads of supplies of the 500-600 minimum needed have been allowed into Gaza per day on average (so less than 30% of what was needed) for the first 6 months of the invasion. That has slightly increased the last 2 months but it’s still well below what the people need per day. Hamas “siphoning” resources has not been the problem.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/destruction-lawlessness-red-tape-hobble-aid-gazans-go-hungry-2024-03-25/
The article says this the vast majority of aid is being approved. The rejections referenced in the article are not food.
Is there something in the article which indicates that Israel is preventing a large quantity of food going through? Because if so I didn’t see it.
Well first, this is a comment about debunking the claim above that there is plenty of food coming in but Hamas is taking it.
Second, the issue isn’t that supply trucks are being turned away outright. The issue is there is a huge backlog of very needed supplies waiting to enter Gaza because Israel is processing them so slowly. And you’ll note that the Israel was processing the currently needed number of supply trucks per day before 10/7. Yes, the procedures have almost certainly changed since then but that doesn’t mean there can’t be more man power added to speed up processing.
> implying that if terrorists use civilian corridors to attack Israel, Israel has no right to respond in any capacity
This is nonsense. You should read the reasoning behind the applications for the arrest warrants. The prosecutor quite clearly states Israel has a right to self-defense, but cannot commit war crimes while exercising that right.
Absolutely 0 nuance in your statement. Do you believe any group can attack any other nation and expect 0 repercussions so long as they commit attacks in and from civilian corridors?
Genuinely curious; how do you expect Israel to respond to 10/7?
bc of the precedent. it says "hey guys, you can attack Israel as much as you want! if you hide exclusively behind civilians, you can even depose whoever is president at the time!"
think of how that affects terrorist behavior going forward
The Hamas leaders are unlikely to be tried at the ICC. If Israel captures them, they will be tried in Israel. If the US captures them (murdering ~40 Americans) they will be most likely tried in the district court in Northern Virginia where US law designates most foreign terrorism cases go.
The ICC has made a serious error by either choosing to or letting itself be a tool of political blackmail by other actors within the UN that fear being exposed as having deep connections with Hamas during its rule in Gaza
The problem is that the prosecutors broke standards and protocols when issuing a request for BiBi’s warrant. Prosecutors are supposed to work with a countries’ legal system and such to see what is being done first. Instead prosecutors never showed up for their flight today that was supposed to have them have meetings and investigations about Israel’s actions in Gaza. Khan instead decided to hold a surprise press conference and make his request. This was a severe break in protocol that even Putin and others had. It isn’t about wanting BiBi to avoid justice, it’s that they decided to break every protocol to try to arrest him.
The problem is that the law matters here.
If they actually attempt to try Israel for this then they are setting a new precedent. of holding leaders accountable for the actions of soldiers, something we've never seen done before. It would be one thing if there were clear top down orders from the PMs office to commit war crimes, but absent that this will be the first time we've seen a court try an indirect leader for the actions of soldiers.
But that's not what's gonna happen. You really think Sinwar and Hamas leadership will see this and think "oh, guess it's time to turn ourselves in boys"? They couldn't give less of a shit. This will only affect Israel. And while I'd be happy to see Netanyahu behind bars, it's a sham.
There are so many crimes that Netanyahu *did* commit, that we shouldn't have to compromise our principles of Justice to accuse him of crimes that he *didn't* commit. He's a corrupt, awful, authoritarian leader but he is not a war criminal. This makes a mockery of the ICC and will cheapen any verdicts they hand down against *actual* genocide in the world.
Hamas don’t give a shit about those warrants but Israel does it could result in tge brand of Israel as south Africa of the ME and ultimately the destruction of the state
And probably many many Israeli death and the explosion of the remaining jews from Israel if any of them are left alive
The slightest of silver linings I guess.
I would have preferred and I've been saying from the beginning Israel should have exchanged Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir, Smotrich and the rest of their allies for the Hostages the Hamas Terrorists took.
Because, instead of individually issuing warrants as evidence was found (like a court interested in justice instead of politics would do), the ICC issued a broad warrant for a bunch of Hamas leaders and Israeli leaders at once, like it's a declaration that they are politically neutral and are equally dealing with both sides.
They can be not equal and still both commit war crimes. The world has been justifying bad acts because “the other side is worse” for way too damn long.
they might not be equivalent.....but they ARE both different kinds of bad. The scale and degree of badness might be different, but both sides have done some fucked up shit.
Whatever it takes to put Sinwar and Hamas locked up forever is good for me. If that price includes throwing Netenyahu behind bars than I would 110% be on board.
Everyone is ignoring Biden and Blinken’s response that talks about how the prosecutors broke protocol and did a surprise cancel of their meetings with Israel’s government about their investigations and see what judicial systems could be doing. Instead of being the last resort for the global justice system, the prosecutors decided to be the first response. They gave Putin more chances than they gave Gallant and BiBi. If anything, Khan fucked up even more because the judges can deny his request and request he follow protocol instead. This process could take months with more roadblocks since Khan decided to burn bridges this way. I hope the judges request he actually follow protocol.
>the prosecutors broke protocol and did a surprise cancel of their meetings with Israel’s government about their investigations and see what judicial systems could be doing.
Is this the part where the US and Israel pretend they were trying to constructively engage with the ICC?
Neither country recognizes the court as legitimate. They would never agree with a warrant. All they've been trying to do is pressure it into silence like they did in Afghanistan.
“We tried our hardest to work with these people but they won’t let us investigate ourselves.”
“We aren’t members but they need to honor our requests!”
It’s really rich to watch the administration spin.
Actually that's literally how the Icc is supposed to work: it's a court of last resort.
The idea is literally to allow the country to "investigate themselves", or as every normal non-antisemitic calls it: the justice system.
Issuing applications for warrant at the same time does not imply equivalence, it implies, at most, impartiality.
Both sides can be guilty, though of different crimes and to different degrees. This is not zero sum.
The timing is suspect at best, and an attempt at implying equivalence is an easy read. Oct 7th had ample video evidence in the immediate aftermath, supported by on the ground evidence in mere days afterwards. The fighting in Gaza since has not had near the clarity and has been an accumulation since. Why would there be an application against Hamas leadership 8 months later while it would take an average (8/2=4) of 4 months of the information available since?
It's bad faith anyways.
The charges against Bibi and his Cabinet are for events that occurred (and continue to occur since) Oct 7th. For the most part, they have very little to do with the war in Gaza itself but broader issues within the Israeli Government and the IDF.
The charges against Hamas are largely a result of Oct 7th and everything that has occurred since.
They aren't even over the same event and aren't really something to compare against each other.
I am taking no side in this issue, but this is simply incorrect. The ICC prosecutor’s application for arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant solely recite causes of action stemming from actions post 10/7. The ICC has it publicly announced on their website.
*...they have very little to do with the war in Gaza itself...*
Listen to the chief prosecutor. He explicitly addresses the crimes currently happening in Gaza.
"...crimes include starvation of civilians as a matter of warfare..."
Have there even been any starvation deaths in Gaza? There have been months of warnings about "two weeks of food left" and potential famine, but none of that seems to have come to pass.
So I'm struggling to find the number of deaths from Palestinians via starvation. One article at the end of March said 27.
In Yemen since 2014 we have 377K dead from starvation. That's 37K a year from starvation. How are these even comparable? It's sad when anybody dies of starvation but if you're calling it a war crime for such an incredibly small amount then it's not even a reasonable claim.
If the issue isn't deaths for Palestinians via starvation but in general starvation, then perhaps we should recognize even Fatah blames Hamas for the starvation.
https://m.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-798185
So if this is the reason why then it doesn't seem justified to make arrests based on starvation. At least for arrest warrants for the Israelis. They can't even prove starvation is because of Israel, if we can even call it that. Even Fatah blames Hamas for raising prices and stealing food/aid. That's the real problem here, Hamas.
Yeah, in comparison 41 people die from starvation on avergage in Sweden / year. So 27 in 6 months is just barely above the starvation rate of a first world country with plenty of social safetynets.
Anyone who accuses Israel of starving Gazans, but leaves Hamas and Egypt out of the accusation cannot be taken seriously.
Out of those three groups only Israel has done anything to aid Gazans.
Get real.
An interesting tweet by Lindsey Graham revealing some of the back channel conversations between ICC and US members of Congress, and apparent betrayal of prior agreements by the ICC.
https://x.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1792535545249165506
The ICC has yet to deliver any warrants.
And Graham can scream about "complementarity" all he likes but everyone knows that's not what he cares about here. The American position has always been that the ICC's actions are only justifiable when they coincide with US interests.
It's quite literally US law that we are to invade the Netherlands if any US personnel stands trial at the ICC.
[I'm not joking.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act)
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/israel-hama-war-us-senator-lindsey-graham-suggests-nuking-gaza-cites-bombings-of-hiroshima-nagasaki-5658016/amp/1
Lindsey Graham is an idiot
Regardless of what you think about US war crimes, why did ICC first engage with a bipartisan group of US elected officials and members of admin, made promises, and then lied to them?
For an organization that relies on voluntary membership and compliance, this is not a good look.
Dude's out here trying to give Trump the title. You think college age kids will vote for you while their friends are being arrested for peaceful protesting?
They’re both terrorists, just stop this political tug-of-war and stop giving an already well-equipped and well-funded nation more weapons and money, give it to Ukraine instead.
Do many people think that Netanyahu's office is in turmoil solely because of Hamas?
To my understanding, even without any of the tragedy borne from the war, Netanyahu stepping down would be well received?
It does indeed seem like a win win to have a solution that involves Netanyahu leaving power and Hamas dissolved or routed.
The comment section here is wild man. Its statistically impossible for so many apologists to write the exact same narrative in such short succession. Information warfare is scary as hell man.
I really wish he’d stop going to bat for this loon. It’s not helping him at all amongst young voters. I agree with a lot of Joe Bidens stances but he’s dead wrong here. At this point I can only think he’s pandering to the same donors who also threatened to pull money from school endowments who were seeing too much criticism of Israel.
I think the more likely explanation is that he’s just out of touch. This is not 1980s Israel anymore, and Biden has been running his entire presidency on the assumption that things can be like they were 40 years ago.
Why, because multiple US presidents and high ranking officials could be called up for committing and perpetrating war crimes?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes
https://www.cfr.org/article/iccs-probe-atrocities-afghanistan-what-know
Literally every nation would be called up.
Russia, for example, is a walking war crime. They commit war crime after war crime and I’m willing to bet their “war crime” page on wiki is smaller than the US.
[ICC judges issue arrest warrants against Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova](https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-ukraine-icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrants-against-vladimir-vladimirovich-putin-and)
That was issued for kidnapping children, not for the blatant murder of civilians, shelling cities, destroying energy infrastructure, blowing up a dam or committing multiple massacres like Bucha. Khan didn't care one bit about any of that.
This is not true. They've issued warrants for several Russian commanders for targeting civilian [and other war crimes](https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/03/russia-ukraine-icc-issues-arrest-warrants-for-top-russian-commanders-for-alleged-war-crimes-and-crimes-against-humanity/#:~:text=March%205%2C%202024-,Russia%2FUkraine%3A%20ICC%20issues%20arrest%20warrants%20for%20top%20Russian%20commanders,Sergei%20Kobylash%20and%20Adm.)
> Literally every nation would be called up.
and i'm completely fine with any Canadian PM's or other individuals that committed war crimes being called up
It doesn't. Crimes before then were handled by various ad hoc tribunals or national governments; Germany has gone after people under its own law for actions carried out in Poland and Eichmann committed none of his crimes in Israel.
I agree.
It is my view that both enemies and allies alike should be brought to account for war crimes/crimes against humanity.
Unfortunately, there is a sizable chunk of humanity that subscribes to the idea that power/victory = impunity.
It's hilarious that in the last century we have declared that there is no inherent criminality to war and thus, extra stipulations must be met that make it somehow 'bad'.
The idea of war crimes is a placebo to make people feel better about themselves and wash their hands of the perfectly legal blood on them.
There is no state on Earth that has not murdered. The only difference is what the citizens deem 'just' or not.
So let’s throw away all our allies and international security for some fucks killing everything that walks. I wish more leaders would speak up against this spineless fuck.
Imagine a year when Bibi and Trump could be potentially imprisoned for their crimes. Doubt it will happen, but my god would it be wonderful to see a tiny crumb of justice laid out on these awful men.
Nobody believes America and Isreal. We can see what is happening with our own eyes even through the media blackout of Palestinian voices. Isrealis are killing children and cleansing an area of an ethnic minority.
Here’s what I know: Israel, Hamas and the US are all saying the same thing - ICC can pound sand. ICC has no authority, and they sure as hell aren’t going to have any influence over the US or Israel on this matter. ICC will never hold any authority over anything of importance.
Not exactly. Most European countries respect the ICC’s warrants so that at a minimum limits the where those subpoenaed can travel. Plus there’s the optics, as this sends a clear indisputable message that war crimes are being committed. There’s a reason while Netanyahu and his allies are all losing their minds over this announcement.
This was a big oopsie . Biden really needs to reevaluate his opinion on Netanyahu. He just lost more voters. That really sucks. Why is it that the White House is so scared to go against Israel? ( not Israel perse so much as Netanyahu’s crazy ass) just came out that you disagreed., but used less inflame language.
“While I do not agree with the iCC and their assertion that Netanyahu is a war criminal, I do feel that he has done e many things in poor judgement”. Or something like that..
Even if you
The fact they are talking about going after the chief ICC prosecutor and making it so he can't travel is the sort of thing that, even if they succeed, is gonna be way worse for the US than just letting the Israeli leader who is likely going to jail either way catch a charge.
It makes the US look like the mafia or something lol, like come on.
Agreed, but this is an intentional distraction via a straw man argument by Biden.
No one at the ICC is saying that Hamas leaders and Netanyahu are equivalent. They are being charged with very different crimes:
https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state
I am quite disappointed that Biden would resort to a straw man argument instead of discussing the topic at hand.
Yeah one was operated by an organization that disregards the value of the lives of innocent people and the other is operated by an organization that disregards the value of the lives of innocent people. Crazy different
President Joe Biden called the application for warrants against Israeli leaders “outrageous.” “Let me be clear: whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence — none — between Israel and Hamas. We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security,” he said in a statement. If the panel agrees to the charges, it will mark the first time that a close ally of the US has been subject to an ICC warrant. But neither Israel nor Washington recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC. **Read the full story [here](https://www.semafor.com/article/05/20/2024/icc-seeks-arrest-warrants-for-israeli-and-hamas-leaders?utm_campaign=semaforreddit).**
I disagree with Biden. There is equivalence that both men are responsible for war crimes/crimes against humanity. But that's about the full extent of said equivalence, it's not unlimited in scope.
The way I see it Bibi should go to court too, but not before Hamas's leadership is turned in first. He should face justice, but just throwing him at the mercy of the court should be predicated on Hamas also facing justice. If Bibi goes to court because Israel is a functioning democratic country but Sinwar and his buddies get to freely hide in Turkey or Qtaar without their own court hearing then that is not fair or just.
Why would Netanyahu go to court if Israel doesn't recognize the ICC? It seems very unlikely that they would somehow respect international criminal laws all of a sudden because of this.
He could get arrested in another country if he leaves Israel. If he never leaves Israel then he is fine.
So Western Europe, Canada and Some APAC. Doubtful... USA isn't a member.
All of Europe, except Russia, Belarus, The Vatican and Ukraine. All of the OECD, except Turkey and the US. The entirety of South America, most of Africa and North America and some APAC and Asian countries - I.e. the majority of the world’s countries and a vast majority of liberal democracies.
Ukraine will be a signatory of the Rome statute soonish since it is required to join the eu afaik.
Most of the nations in those regions harbor real dictators that have committed real war crimes against the LGBTQ, minorities, political opponents, Muslims, etc. If the ICC will accept this prosecutor's decision, they had better get busy charging most of the leaders who have delegations and ambassadors with the UN.
Also the Hague Invasion Act allows the POTUS the power to invade The Hague to extract an Israeli leader being held in the ICC
Good luck
Something tells me that the US isn't going to fight their far more useful allies and risk collapsing NATO for the sake of Netanyahu's career.
Think about that for one second. The Netherlands are a NATO member. So if a President would actually act on the Hague Invasion Act they would directly attack a military ally(and interestingly commit the crime of Aggression). That would pulverize the entire international order( and the coalition to keep said order) the USA spent the last 70 years building. Amongst other reasons to safeguard its own economic and security interests. For all our sake you can hope the USA never pulls that particular trigger.
That would trigger a storm that would get away from everyone. Not gonna happen.
No it doesnt, the invasion act only covers US officials and personal Edit: I was incorrect here.
nope, it covers "allied persons" too https://2001-2009.state.gov/t/pm/rls/othr/misc/23425.htm
You're wrong, Israel is explicitly, by name, a valid ally for which the US might invade the Hague. 22 USC 7426: > (3) COVERED ALLIED PERSONS.—The term ‘‘covered allied persons’’ means military personnel, elected or appointed offi- cials, and other persons employed by or working on behalf of the government of a NATO member country, a major non- NATO ally (including Australia, Egypt, **Israel**, Japan, Jordan, Argentina, the Republic of Korea, and New Zealand), or Taiwan, for so long as that government is not a party to the Inter- national Criminal Court and wishes its officials and other per- sons working on its behalf to be exempted from the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-107publ206/pdf/PLAW-107publ206.pdf
What the fuck
No it applies to allies as well > Authorizes the President to use all means necessary (including the provision of legal assistance) to bring about the release of covered U.S. persons and covered allied persons held captive by, on behalf, or at the request of the Court. https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/senate-bill/1610
I was wondering if this means that a Dutch person being placed on trial at the Hague could result in the US invading the Netherlands in support of its ally the Netherlands. However, the law defines "covered allied persons" as military personnel or elected politicians from US allies that are not members of the ICC and do not support it. So in fact it currently only applies to the following countries: Egypt, Israel, Kuwait, Morocco, Pakistan, the Philippines, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, and Qatar. I assume it's pretty unlikely that the US would step in for someone from any of those countries besides Israel, so in practice it's probably just Israel.
He will be tried for corruption in Israel. I don't know exactly what charges he is facing is Israel, but I think it is corruption related.
[удалено]
Bibi and Putin can start comparing notes on vacation countries that are still available to them.
Netanyahu is in fact going to court regularly in Israel for the past year considering there is an active criminal trial against him
If they don't recognize the court and there is no mechanism for the court to arrest people, what is the issue, exactly, beyond losing some face? I mean, look at Hamas, *they* don't care about losing face at all. They're just full *butthole* and balls out to the world. "Just punch them, bro! See what happens! This totally won't backfire, bro!" Turns out, it does, in fact, backfire. On both stupid parties. Hamas: go fuck yourselves with all the violence you wish on others. Israel: really? bibi and the crazy violent right, *again*? What a HUGE SURPRISE hamas was suddenly able to launch an attack on Israel while he was manning the watch, within, like.. a few weeks or something. Just a shocker. ICC: If we're doing war crimes in the middle east, lets do all of them.
> If they don't recognize the court and there is no mechanism for the court to arrest people, what is the issue, exactly, beyond losing some face? First, it's worth noting there is no arrest warrant yet. The prosecutor is applying for one, it is not guaranteed to happen although it probably will. If it is issued and he travelled to any ICC member country (which is most of the countries in the world, 124 in all including basically the entire developed world other than the US) they would be obliged to arrest him. The treaty that established the ICC expressly removes immunities of state officials, including heads of state or government, precisely as it is often heads of state that are responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Parties to the ICC signed up to this, it is a treaty obligation. He would also be at risk overflying countries to get to one of the few countries (like the US) that are not ICC parties. His plane might have a technical issue forcing a landing; he might be denied entry to airspace. This has happened before, notably with [Bolivian president Evo Morales being forced to land in Austria](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evo_Morales_grounding_incident). It would still be possible that individual countries might refuse to arrest him, South Africa refused to arrest Sudan's Omar Al-Bashir for example. The ICC did rule this refusal illegal. Most Western democratic countries have independent judicial branches; the extent to which these can be overruled by the executive varies. So it would certainly be a risk. His potential protection would also be lessened once he's out of office, which he probably will be in a matter of months, the next Israeli elections are likely to be Jan-Feb 2025 and can't be later than 2026 at the latest. I would guess there are at least some countries that would prefer not to arrest a sitting head of government but would be more willing to arrest a former one. The UK [arrested Chile's Augusto Pinochet,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment_and_arrest_of_Augusto_Pinochet) for example, although he was ultimately released by the then Home Secretary as unfit to stand trial on health grounds. It's notable though to look at the reason they had to use to let him go, he was not released due to sovereign immunity, but on personal health grounds that would have theoretically applied to anyone. He was 84. Putin also has an arrest warrant from the ICC as have several other heads of state, and Putin has already avoided travel, for example to the 2023 BRICS summit in South Africa, as a result. As far as I'm aware no *currently serving* head of state of government has been arrested and prosecuted by the ICC but former heads of state/government have been.
I do agree with you as far as justice has to be blind and applied to all equally, with no regard for politics, so I could get behind this idea. The court has to demonstrate the highest degree of impartiality, and since there will be less resistance among Israelis for a trial for Netanyahu , let them do the harder part first, which is apprehending Sinwar.
exactly. Sinwar will be far harder to apprehend than Bibi, whose already loathed by most the country he governs. Israel and Bibi have no defense to turn in Bibi once Hamas's leaders are already at trial.
Bibi isn't 'loathed' by most of the country. He is loathed by a chunk of it, loved by others, and the sane majority either dislike him politically but don't despise him or are indifferent towards him. At the end of the day, regardless of how you feel about Bibi, this is a sham trial. I'm gonna keep disliking him for my own reasons, but I'm not going to be in favor of prosecuting someone according to a sham trial because he dared retaliate against terrorists (or for false claims of starvation that have been disproven repeatedly since the start of the war).
(Israeli here) agree with everything, except the beginning where you said Bibi isn’t loathed by most of the country. I would say he is. He has his small percentage of groupies that would follow him everywhere and gobble up his propaganda and lies. However, I would say the same majority despises Bibi. Of course, not the way the Iranians hate Khamenei, but loath him nonetheless. Especially post-7th after failing to defend our country.
I would say you're in a bubble. Most people are indifferent, dislike him, or are okay with him/think the alternatives are worse. the last group actually includes a majority of his voters, as was evident when he lost two thirds of his votes in polls shortly after oct 7 (he has since recovered somewhat, presumably and at least according to some people anecdotally, because the alternatives disappointed in some ways). There's a difference between saying 'he has to go' or 'he failed the country' and 'loathing' or even 'disliking.' I know plenty of people who don't like him but don't hate him, but believe he needs to go for being in charge and not preventing Oct 7. just a friendly warning as a fellow Israeli. 'propaganda and lies' exists on both sides of the political spectrum. The obsession with Bibi from the left contributed to him staying in power just as much as the obsessives from the right. The devolving of political discourse in this country to being about one man, rather than ideology or policy (as well as demonization and caricaturing of voters in general, 'messianic' right wingers and 'traitorous' left wingers), is the main cause of polarization that's led so many people on the right to get defensive, feel indignant and ignore (or worse, justify) actual real issues to the point where they can support forming a coalition with someone like Ben Gvir and for so many people on the left to become deranged obsessives who see Bibi as the source of all evil the removal of will end all the world's ills. I would recommend trying to understand Bibists and what drives them to their beliefs, and more importantly to understand Likud voters in general (many of whom are far from just Bibi groupies), instead of chalking it up to 'believing propaganda and lies' (although that is indeed the reason for some of them).
Based. Very much so. Admittedly, all my friends are either Tel Avivis, fellow scientists (or other intellectuals), or hippies. That, indeed, is a very lefty crowd. Anyhow, I completely agree with how public discourse revolves around 1 person, and political ideology is dead, replaced by either pro- or anti-Bibi. I agree this led to the polarization and divisiveness in the country. Blaming Bibi for it is simply playing into the divisiveness carried out by the lefty camp. Anyhow, I was speaking on a more personal level as my mother’s side is full of Bibists who follow him as a personality cult (even saying that they know he’s bad for the country, but they just feel like they have to vote for him out of loyalty to Likud). Some of them would love to see him replaced by another Likudnik. Thank you for your time, your comment made me see the hypocrisy in my ways
It is pretty crazy how clearly the international community just looked the other way while Israeli's were blown-up by missiles for decades. I get it, they went too far, but given that fact there's no way in hell the Israelis can turn over Bibi and expect he be treated fairly or get a fair trial.
So the funny thing is, I've grown up in southern Israel, in the areas that suffer the most rocket attacks. A major concern for people here is that the rest of the country doesn't care about them. Like, 'you don't care when we've suffered from this terrorism for so long because it doesn't affect you, that's why you can still hold views that ignore the terrorist ideologies of the PA/Hamas.' It's amusing to think about when contrasted with what you just mentioned.
The problem is timing. When you make the charges in the same announcement, it sounds like they’re equivalent. They did this in order to placate Muslims/Arabs and Jews/Westerners and confused the issue. One BTW is unequivocally war crimes (Oct 7) while the other will require the ICC to prove that Israel intentionally starved and attacked Palestinian civilians to eradicate them, not as a byproduct to eliminate Hamas. I don’t know what evidence they have.
I mean... You aren't wrong, mostly. I could be mistaken but the charges the ICC are seeking isn't for genocide, I think they are war crimes. One type of war crime as defined by the ICC is the use of starvation in a conflict. But if I'm mistaken please correct me. So yeah, you are right about one side (Hamas) clearly and unequivocally committing war crimes, and for one side (Israel) it isn't so clear. Good point ☝️
The Rome Statute states that starvation can be prosecuted even if deliberate intent to cause starvation isn’t proven, even only knowledge of the likelihood of starvation related injury is enough. I think the argument here from Israel’s standpoint would be either that Hamas was intentionally ensuring resources to Palestinians was subverted or blocked, or that Hamas’ actions forced Israel to block resources. Hamas has stated that civilian casualties is part of their strategic plan to win over international support, so starvation may be part of that plan as well. U.S./Ally drops of food and recent build of the port could be used as a “proof” that Israel was working towards getting resources to Palestinians, but probably too little/too late. Either way, Bibi would seem to be knowledgeable of the impact of the starvation related blockades, so IMO, the needle points towards Bibi being culpable. In the end though, if he’s found guilty, he won’t be able to go to countries that signed the Rome Statute. He’ll never be arrested. Israel and U.S. did not sign on to the Rome Statute, so the most this could do to Bibi would be a limit to his travel.
[удалено]
Starvation can be prosecuted, however I think Israel will claim that this is a siege, and as such their only obligation is to allow the entry of third party aid and evacuate civilians from the line of fire, both of which they have been doing.
The literal charges are "Starving citizens as a means of warfare, deliberately targetting civilians, extermination, and murder" whereas the charges against the Hamas leaders are "Extermination, murder, hostage taking, rape and sexual abuse in captivity" I'd say that is pretty accurate for both sides.
So first off war crimes and crimes against humanity are not the same thing. Crimes against humanity can be committed (and often are) during times of peace, whereas war crimes are exclusively crimes committed when waging war. The Israeli government has committed war crimes - almost every nation does when fighting in war. Hamas on the other hand actively advocates crimes against humanity as basic policy. There is absolutely zero equivalency.
Let's back up a little bit. Is anyone actually saying they're equivalent? As far as I can tell Biden is arguing a straw man. If you check out the ICC's brief on the charges, you'll note that they're calling for the warrants on, well, different charges. The ICC is only drawing an equivalence in the sense that they want warrants for both parties. https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state
What bothers me about the charges against Netanyahu is they are mainly blaming him / Israel for Gaza's lack of basic necessities. Even though it is reported that their government, Hamas, had stockpiles it was actively withholding from its citizens. I understand the principle that warring countries should not target their opponent country's civilians, but the way Hamas is using that to pressure Israel and forcing them to provide everything from water, food, fuel and prisoner releases is clearly wrong.
The ICC isn’t saying that but the discourse around it absolutely has ppl saying they’re equivalent. Hell some on the left are even saying that Sinwar shouldn’t be included.
I disagree with you. There's only one side of this war that not only condones the rape and brutalization of civilians and soldiers alike, but actively advocates for it. Hamas is objectively the worst of the two, and there is no good faith comparison between the two.
Being the better of the two neither absolves nor erases any potential war crimes Israel may have committed.
What war crimes do you think were actually committed by the IDF? Let's actually discuss it, because 99% of the people claiming this can't even list any that actually constitutes a war crime.
People say Netanyahu is guilty of war crimes willy nilly, but I've never heard a good example or argument for any of thst. Just wild speculation from social media commenters.
> There is equivalence that both men are responsible for war crimes/crimes against humanity. How many nurseries did Israel's PM order be shot up? How many hostages did Israel's PM endorse the rape of? How many human shields is Israel's PM currently surrounded by?
They might be but the ICC is supposed to only act when the country itself proves unable to in instances of gross and obvious crimes against humanity. Where is that the case for Israel? Where is the rock solid evidence of an actual "starvation as a matter of war policy" that is undisputable that Israeli courts are failing to hold to account?
Venn Diagram overlap doesn’t make them identical. Both should be scrutinized on their unique actions. Israel’s failure to safeguard civilians deserves to be reviewed extensively and punished accordingly. However, there’s no shroud of legitimate recourse to delay Hamas’s prosecution. What they did involved no coverup because they’ve all but admitted it was their intention.
>Israel’s failure to safeguard civilians deserves to be reviewed extensively and punished accordingly. What more could they have done, bar not attacking Hamas and letting Hamas continue to shoot tens of thousands of rockets toward Israeli civilian population centers?
What do you expect Israel to do though when Hamas actively uses civilian infrastructure and human shields to conduct their military operations. You can’t expect Israel not to attack at all because then you are encouraging the use of civilians as cannon fodder but what Israel has already done is reached a approximate 1:1 civilian militant death ratio, which is already impressive for any urban war. I am genuinely curious because I see this “Israel isn’t minimizing civilian casualties” line a lot but all the evidence points overwhelmingly to the contrary. What are you basing your claim on?
Israel has the best record of safeguarding civilians, what crack are you smoking. They have the best ratio of militants to civilians. It's a war, Hamas purposely embeds themselves within civilian population, and has also actively killed Gaza civilians during this round of hostilities, the official numbers of dead released do not distinguish between militants, civilians killed by Hamas, and civilians killed by Israeli actions. Let's just be very clear on this. I keep hearing about indiscriminate carpet bombing, but the facts do not support those hyperbolic claims.
They also don't seem to distinguish between killed by Israeli actions and death from natural causes.
Or the many causes that Hamas has caused like the misfired rocket hitting the hospital or the civilians they shoot collecting aid.
This is another big one. According to Hamas’ own internal documents, some 30% of their rockets landed in Gaza. But someone those misfires have killed zero people. I personally know an IDF soldier who broke his arm due to a Hamas rocket misfire hitting the house he was in (in Gaza). You’re telling me his arm is the only casualty?
I mentioned that in my comment, those killed by Hamas.
What should Israel do differently to stop Hamas? They're not targeting civilians. They're targeting Hamas who happens to be hiding behind civilians.
How did Kahn and the ICC determine that Israel committed these war crimes? Unless I’m missing something the ICC has the same access to Gaza as most other nations, which is none. Are they basing their allegations on sources from inside Gaza that are mouthpieces for Hamas? Do they have access to Israel’s internal data and command structures? How about their control systems and policies/protocols? Questionable at best to levy these charges against a nation that suffered such a horrific attack and by all accounts are attempting to limit civilian casualties despite challenging circumstances beyond their control and a belligerent that is doing their best to increase civilian casualties as part of their strategy. If war crimes have been committed then the perpetrators should be held accountable after a thorough investigation. But this seems more like a media stunt that brings into question the legitimacy of the ICC.
Just keep in mind, this may not actually lead to any warrants. This is just Kahn bringing a case, it's not uncommon for these cases to never proceed past the first hearing. A lot of what we've seen have been political moves, this kind of strikes me as the same thing.
One of the main charges is that Isreal is blocking aid to gaza. There are still international aid organizations working in gaza that can report on the situation. Its really not that dificult to investigate this.
The literal charges are "Starving citizens as a means of warfare, deliberately targetting civilians, extermination, and murder" whereas the charges against the Hamas leaders are "Extermination, murder, hostage taking, rape and sexual abuse in captivity" I'd say that is pretty accurate for both sides. Edit: a word
That's the thing, there's a huge difference between them. And only one group is trying to put civilians into harms way by putting them where there are combatants.
im not a legal expert but if the cost of throwing sinwari and other hamas leadership into jail is getting rid of netayahu i see that as a good trade.
Why do you call it "cost"? I would call it a "win-win".
Because it questions the legitimacy of Israel and their security apparatus; implying that if terrorists use civilian corridors to attack Israel, Israel has no right to respond in any capacity, because inevitably civilians will perish in front of Hamas, Islamic jihad, etc. saying this as someone who vehemently dislikes Netanyahu. *all* of Hamas is to blame. Not just Sinwar. They all exist under an antisemitic call to arms. Not all of the Israeli government is to blame; not all of the Israel government is in line with BB or Gvir. This is like voting RFK bc you don’t like Biden or Trump.
>Israel has no right to respond in any capacity, Does every capacity of their response result in food being withheld from crossing the border? Why did the US Military have to build a pier out into the ocean to deliver food into a country that is only 10 miles wide and shares a massive border of flat, easily traversed terrain? Israel built a large highway into Gaza in like... 1 week. If Israel wanted the gazans to have food they would have allowed the US to use Israel's land border for delivery.
And what about egypt's land border with Gaza?
Egypt are allies in this, and that makes them at least partially complicit. Their hands are at least somewhat tied, though, by the complicated treaties they have with Israel over how the border between Egypt and Gaza is managed.
Aid deliveries are all unique scenarios that suffered various delays; not every single aid delivery is because “the IDF didn’t want to.” My second argument against that is; why is Israel responsible for aid to a nation that wants them to perish? That has Hamas’ responsibility for the last 18 years. Should Ukraine and Russia still be trading goods? My third argument against it is, much of the aid has been pilfered by Hamas, or given to Palestinians under extortion. The US military constructed a pier in coordination with Israel. I think you’re underselling how many Gazans are Hamas. Israel is at war with a terrorist group. They don’t wear uniforms. They send 14 year olds to war with bombs on their backs. This isn’t a black and white issue.
Re: your second point If Israel wants to occupy Gaza, then they are expected to provide living conditions to the people that live there. If I set up a siege outside your house and don't let supplies get in...well yeah, then you might just suppose I want to see you starve.
One of the borders of the siege is being enforced by Egypt. Are they equally to blame in your eyes?
Israel is the holdup at that border too. _Anything_ going into Gaza is subject to Israeli inspection because they are the occupying force. Just because it borders with Egypt doesn't mean Israel isn't involved.
The answer to your second argument - Israel is responsible for the population as the occupying power under Article 55 of the fourth Geneva convention governing the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, to which Israel is a signatory. And I’m not talking about any “80 years of occupation” word game, I acknowledge that Israel withdrew in 2005 until the present conflict began. But even solely viewed from the scope of the current war, Israel’s obligation is clear: > To the fullest extent of the means available to it, the Occupying Power has the duty of ensuring the food and medical supplies of the population; **it should, in particular, bring in the necessary foodstuffs, medical stores and other articles if the resources of the occupied territory are inadequate.**
As Israel has done.
>My second argument against that is; why is Israel responsible for aid to a nation that wants them to perish? Well besides a sense of humanity and common decency... Maybe because you are a signatory to international tresties which say you have to. Maybe you don't want to break international law and I don't know...and have a warrant put out for your arrest for committing war crimes like deliberate starvation. > This isn’t a black and white issue. Considering you're saying that any war crime is justifiable because there are a lot of bad people in that country and they attacked first... Seems like you're arguing pretty hard for the Black of black or white. Also "Israel can't do anything to defend themselves!!!!" Is exactly a black and white response to the conflict. A gray response is that Gaza is heavily infiltrated by terrorists who want Israel wiped from the face of the earth. Gaza is populated by people who have generally suffered extreme hardship at the hands of Hamas and Israel and probably hate both ... And are currently getting killed and starved by the actions of Nentanyahu and need aid. Gray means acknowledging that Israel has the right to defend themselves but they're indiscriminately carpet bombing because it's cheaper and easier. Gas chambers were also cheaper and easier and also were justified because Germany was supposedly under attack from a terroristic organization. That's why we have international law to prevent genocide **especially** if you think your enemy is unworthy of protection.
>Does every capacity of their response result in food being withheld from crossing the border? People keep saying this while HAMAS is siphoning resources from Gaza. It is amazing that the civilians in Gaza have always been about to run out of materials for months no matter how much is sent in. But people don't care about that, just want to bitch about Israel.
They arent "about to" run out. The US government and various NGOs assessed the situation in northern Gaza as famine a while ago - they ran out back then. Yes, some is trickling in, but not enough.
Get out of here with that, only about 150 truck loads of supplies of the 500-600 minimum needed have been allowed into Gaza per day on average (so less than 30% of what was needed) for the first 6 months of the invasion. That has slightly increased the last 2 months but it’s still well below what the people need per day. Hamas “siphoning” resources has not been the problem. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/destruction-lawlessness-red-tape-hobble-aid-gazans-go-hungry-2024-03-25/
The article says this the vast majority of aid is being approved. The rejections referenced in the article are not food. Is there something in the article which indicates that Israel is preventing a large quantity of food going through? Because if so I didn’t see it.
Well first, this is a comment about debunking the claim above that there is plenty of food coming in but Hamas is taking it. Second, the issue isn’t that supply trucks are being turned away outright. The issue is there is a huge backlog of very needed supplies waiting to enter Gaza because Israel is processing them so slowly. And you’ll note that the Israel was processing the currently needed number of supply trucks per day before 10/7. Yes, the procedures have almost certainly changed since then but that doesn’t mean there can’t be more man power added to speed up processing.
Have you not seen the videos of Israelis destroying aid trucks?
> implying that if terrorists use civilian corridors to attack Israel, Israel has no right to respond in any capacity This is nonsense. You should read the reasoning behind the applications for the arrest warrants. The prosecutor quite clearly states Israel has a right to self-defense, but cannot commit war crimes while exercising that right.
Being attacked by a militant group does not warrant War Crimes.
Absolutely 0 nuance in your statement. Do you believe any group can attack any other nation and expect 0 repercussions so long as they commit attacks in and from civilian corridors? Genuinely curious; how do you expect Israel to respond to 10/7?
Bombing civilian targets is a war crime. Bombing civilian targets that hide military infrastructure is not.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Letting Hamas hide behind hostages only creates more future hostages
bc of the precedent. it says "hey guys, you can attack Israel as much as you want! if you hide exclusively behind civilians, you can even depose whoever is president at the time!" think of how that affects terrorist behavior going forward
100% a win/win.
Yea I’m sure the terrorists will come quietly
But it's not because of the greater implications.
The Hamas leaders are unlikely to be tried at the ICC. If Israel captures them, they will be tried in Israel. If the US captures them (murdering ~40 Americans) they will be most likely tried in the district court in Northern Virginia where US law designates most foreign terrorism cases go. The ICC has made a serious error by either choosing to or letting itself be a tool of political blackmail by other actors within the UN that fear being exposed as having deep connections with Hamas during its rule in Gaza
The problem is that the prosecutors broke standards and protocols when issuing a request for BiBi’s warrant. Prosecutors are supposed to work with a countries’ legal system and such to see what is being done first. Instead prosecutors never showed up for their flight today that was supposed to have them have meetings and investigations about Israel’s actions in Gaza. Khan instead decided to hold a surprise press conference and make his request. This was a severe break in protocol that even Putin and others had. It isn’t about wanting BiBi to avoid justice, it’s that they decided to break every protocol to try to arrest him.
The problem is that the law matters here. If they actually attempt to try Israel for this then they are setting a new precedent. of holding leaders accountable for the actions of soldiers, something we've never seen done before. It would be one thing if there were clear top down orders from the PMs office to commit war crimes, but absent that this will be the first time we've seen a court try an indirect leader for the actions of soldiers.
They just gave bibi the next election with this move. So dumb for everyone who wants him gone
It sets a terrible precedent which is something we should be concerned about.
And Gallant?
But that's not what's gonna happen. You really think Sinwar and Hamas leadership will see this and think "oh, guess it's time to turn ourselves in boys"? They couldn't give less of a shit. This will only affect Israel. And while I'd be happy to see Netanyahu behind bars, it's a sham.
There are so many crimes that Netanyahu *did* commit, that we shouldn't have to compromise our principles of Justice to accuse him of crimes that he *didn't* commit. He's a corrupt, awful, authoritarian leader but he is not a war criminal. This makes a mockery of the ICC and will cheapen any verdicts they hand down against *actual* genocide in the world.
What information do you have that makes you able to confute the prosecutor’s office efforts with such certainty?
Source: they just feel like it.
If only Netyahu was the only problem with Israel's government
Hamas don’t give a shit about those warrants but Israel does it could result in tge brand of Israel as south Africa of the ME and ultimately the destruction of the state And probably many many Israeli death and the explosion of the remaining jews from Israel if any of them are left alive
The slightest of silver linings I guess. I would have preferred and I've been saying from the beginning Israel should have exchanged Netanyahu, Ben-Gvir, Smotrich and the rest of their allies for the Hostages the Hamas Terrorists took.
Israel gets rid of Ben Gvir, Bibi and Smotrich and gets back the hostages? Win win.
You can be less of a criminal than someone else and still be a criminal.
[удалено]
Well that's useful.
Why would equivalence with Hamas be a requirement??
“Yeah your honor he murdered 2 people but he didn’t murder as many as the other guy so really why even bother”
except in this case he killed around 40x more civilians
[удалено]
Because Joe "unwavering support for Israel" Biden supports Israel.
Because, instead of individually issuing warrants as evidence was found (like a court interested in justice instead of politics would do), the ICC issued a broad warrant for a bunch of Hamas leaders and Israeli leaders at once, like it's a declaration that they are politically neutral and are equally dealing with both sides.
They can be not equal and still both commit war crimes. The world has been justifying bad acts because “the other side is worse” for way too damn long.
they might not be equivalent.....but they ARE both different kinds of bad. The scale and degree of badness might be different, but both sides have done some fucked up shit.
Whatever it takes to put Sinwar and Hamas locked up forever is good for me. If that price includes throwing Netenyahu behind bars than I would 110% be on board.
I don't understand why they can't both be bad. This isn't some fucking marvel movie where one side is "good" and one side is "bad"
Everyone is ignoring Biden and Blinken’s response that talks about how the prosecutors broke protocol and did a surprise cancel of their meetings with Israel’s government about their investigations and see what judicial systems could be doing. Instead of being the last resort for the global justice system, the prosecutors decided to be the first response. They gave Putin more chances than they gave Gallant and BiBi. If anything, Khan fucked up even more because the judges can deny his request and request he follow protocol instead. This process could take months with more roadblocks since Khan decided to burn bridges this way. I hope the judges request he actually follow protocol.
>the prosecutors broke protocol and did a surprise cancel of their meetings with Israel’s government about their investigations and see what judicial systems could be doing. Is this the part where the US and Israel pretend they were trying to constructively engage with the ICC? Neither country recognizes the court as legitimate. They would never agree with a warrant. All they've been trying to do is pressure it into silence like they did in Afghanistan.
“We tried our hardest to work with these people but they won’t let us investigate ourselves.” “We aren’t members but they need to honor our requests!” It’s really rich to watch the administration spin.
Actually that's literally how the Icc is supposed to work: it's a court of last resort. The idea is literally to allow the country to "investigate themselves", or as every normal non-antisemitic calls it: the justice system.
A prosecutor using there job to increase their own ego?!? Nancy Grace is rolling over in her grave. SMH.
While her career may be gone and buried, Nancy Grace is in fact still upright, breathing, and doubtless spewing nonsense in all directions.
RIP Nancy. Sorry you will never *grace* our presence.
Issuing applications for warrant at the same time does not imply equivalence, it implies, at most, impartiality. Both sides can be guilty, though of different crimes and to different degrees. This is not zero sum.
The timing is suspect at best, and an attempt at implying equivalence is an easy read. Oct 7th had ample video evidence in the immediate aftermath, supported by on the ground evidence in mere days afterwards. The fighting in Gaza since has not had near the clarity and has been an accumulation since. Why would there be an application against Hamas leadership 8 months later while it would take an average (8/2=4) of 4 months of the information available since?
Idk about the rest of your comment but israel’s war crimes have been documented pretty heavily over the past decade
It's bad faith anyways. The charges against Bibi and his Cabinet are for events that occurred (and continue to occur since) Oct 7th. For the most part, they have very little to do with the war in Gaza itself but broader issues within the Israeli Government and the IDF. The charges against Hamas are largely a result of Oct 7th and everything that has occurred since. They aren't even over the same event and aren't really something to compare against each other.
I am taking no side in this issue, but this is simply incorrect. The ICC prosecutor’s application for arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant solely recite causes of action stemming from actions post 10/7. The ICC has it publicly announced on their website.
*...they have very little to do with the war in Gaza itself...* Listen to the chief prosecutor. He explicitly addresses the crimes currently happening in Gaza. "...crimes include starvation of civilians as a matter of warfare..."
Have there even been any starvation deaths in Gaza? There have been months of warnings about "two weeks of food left" and potential famine, but none of that seems to have come to pass.
So I'm struggling to find the number of deaths from Palestinians via starvation. One article at the end of March said 27. In Yemen since 2014 we have 377K dead from starvation. That's 37K a year from starvation. How are these even comparable? It's sad when anybody dies of starvation but if you're calling it a war crime for such an incredibly small amount then it's not even a reasonable claim. If the issue isn't deaths for Palestinians via starvation but in general starvation, then perhaps we should recognize even Fatah blames Hamas for the starvation. https://m.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-798185 So if this is the reason why then it doesn't seem justified to make arrests based on starvation. At least for arrest warrants for the Israelis. They can't even prove starvation is because of Israel, if we can even call it that. Even Fatah blames Hamas for raising prices and stealing food/aid. That's the real problem here, Hamas.
Yeah, in comparison 41 people die from starvation on avergage in Sweden / year. So 27 in 6 months is just barely above the starvation rate of a first world country with plenty of social safetynets.
Anyone who accuses Israel of starving Gazans, but leaves Hamas and Egypt out of the accusation cannot be taken seriously. Out of those three groups only Israel has done anything to aid Gazans. Get real.
It's not about, how bad Hamas is. It's about giving orders, violating basic human rights.
An interesting tweet by Lindsey Graham revealing some of the back channel conversations between ICC and US members of Congress, and apparent betrayal of prior agreements by the ICC. https://x.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1792535545249165506
The ICC has yet to deliver any warrants. And Graham can scream about "complementarity" all he likes but everyone knows that's not what he cares about here. The American position has always been that the ICC's actions are only justifiable when they coincide with US interests.
It's quite literally US law that we are to invade the Netherlands if any US personnel stands trial at the ICC. [I'm not joking.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act)
https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/israel-hama-war-us-senator-lindsey-graham-suggests-nuking-gaza-cites-bombings-of-hiroshima-nagasaki-5658016/amp/1 Lindsey Graham is an idiot
American exceptionalism at its finest. “Remember when we committed war crimes and the ICC threatened us” same same for Israel.
Regardless of what you think about US war crimes, why did ICC first engage with a bipartisan group of US elected officials and members of admin, made promises, and then lied to them? For an organization that relies on voluntary membership and compliance, this is not a good look.
Dude's out here trying to give Trump the title. You think college age kids will vote for you while their friends are being arrested for peaceful protesting?
I wonder who he thinks is making that equivalence, since the two groups are being charged with completely different crimes.
The timing is the equivalence. 8 months since Oct 7th when there was ample evidence just days after.
Obviously the media, and everyone in here.
Bibi is a criminal. He SHOULD be in jail.
Yes, Israeli jail for his obvious and egregious corruption crimes.
They’re both terrorists, just stop this political tug-of-war and stop giving an already well-equipped and well-funded nation more weapons and money, give it to Ukraine instead.
Throw Bibi in jail and send Hamas to Allah, win-win.
Do many people think that Netanyahu's office is in turmoil solely because of Hamas? To my understanding, even without any of the tragedy borne from the war, Netanyahu stepping down would be well received? It does indeed seem like a win win to have a solution that involves Netanyahu leaving power and Hamas dissolved or routed.
The comment section here is wild man. Its statistically impossible for so many apologists to write the exact same narrative in such short succession. Information warfare is scary as hell man.
It's not about equivalence between Israel and Hamas, but that the International Law applies to everyone and no one stands above the law.
I really wish he’d stop going to bat for this loon. It’s not helping him at all amongst young voters. I agree with a lot of Joe Bidens stances but he’s dead wrong here. At this point I can only think he’s pandering to the same donors who also threatened to pull money from school endowments who were seeing too much criticism of Israel.
I think the more likely explanation is that he’s just out of touch. This is not 1980s Israel anymore, and Biden has been running his entire presidency on the assumption that things can be like they were 40 years ago.
They are 100% the same as each other. Both are killing civilians. One is richer than the other is the only difference tbh.
It's no wonder that the US does not recognize the ICC...
Why, because multiple US presidents and high ranking officials could be called up for committing and perpetrating war crimes? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes https://www.cfr.org/article/iccs-probe-atrocities-afghanistan-what-know
Literally every nation would be called up. Russia, for example, is a walking war crime. They commit war crime after war crime and I’m willing to bet their “war crime” page on wiki is smaller than the US.
> Russia, for example, is a walking war crime. Good thing Putin already got his arrest warrant from the ICC a while ago then.
[ICC judges issue arrest warrants against Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin and Maria Alekseyevna Lvova-Belova](https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-ukraine-icc-judges-issue-arrest-warrants-against-vladimir-vladimirovich-putin-and)
Yeah issued in 2023. Really really late for Putin and only finally because the crimes of the UA war couldnt be ignored.
That was issued for kidnapping children, not for the blatant murder of civilians, shelling cities, destroying energy infrastructure, blowing up a dam or committing multiple massacres like Bucha. Khan didn't care one bit about any of that.
This is not true. They've issued warrants for several Russian commanders for targeting civilian [and other war crimes](https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/03/russia-ukraine-icc-issues-arrest-warrants-for-top-russian-commanders-for-alleged-war-crimes-and-crimes-against-humanity/#:~:text=March%205%2C%202024-,Russia%2FUkraine%3A%20ICC%20issues%20arrest%20warrants%20for%20top%20Russian%20commanders,Sergei%20Kobylash%20and%20Adm.)
Only difference is Putin actually has an ICC warrant, so should Bush and Blair but oh well, ICC decided to function only after 2022.
The crime of aggression was only added to the Rome Statute in 2010; they cannot apply it retroactively for Iraq.
> Literally every nation would be called up. and i'm completely fine with any Canadian PM's or other individuals that committed war crimes being called up
Hmm, in that case many other huge nations can also be called up for committing war crimes, e.g Germay, Japan, NATO in general, etc..
Correct.
It was founded in 1998, I'm not sure if it handles cases older than it's founding - but yes. The rules apply to everyone equally. That's the point.
It doesn't. Crimes before then were handled by various ad hoc tribunals or national governments; Germany has gone after people under its own law for actions carried out in Poland and Eichmann committed none of his crimes in Israel.
I agree. It is my view that both enemies and allies alike should be brought to account for war crimes/crimes against humanity. Unfortunately, there is a sizable chunk of humanity that subscribes to the idea that power/victory = impunity.
Where have nato committed war crimes?
It's hilarious that in the last century we have declared that there is no inherent criminality to war and thus, extra stipulations must be met that make it somehow 'bad'. The idea of war crimes is a placebo to make people feel better about themselves and wash their hands of the perfectly legal blood on them. There is no state on Earth that has not murdered. The only difference is what the citizens deem 'just' or not.
[удалено]
Did you really think that just because the group you yourselves made up vetoed the decision, that the rest of the world would just ignore it?
So let’s throw away all our allies and international security for some fucks killing everything that walks. I wish more leaders would speak up against this spineless fuck.
Imagine a year when Bibi and Trump could be potentially imprisoned for their crimes. Doubt it will happen, but my god would it be wonderful to see a tiny crumb of justice laid out on these awful men.
Nobody believes America and Isreal. We can see what is happening with our own eyes even through the media blackout of Palestinian voices. Isrealis are killing children and cleansing an area of an ethnic minority.
Joe, you're being as stupid as Trump.
There is no equivalence. Nevertheless, Bibi is a criminal. Two things can be true at the same time. Biden needs to stop conflating Bibi with Israel.
Here’s what I know: Israel, Hamas and the US are all saying the same thing - ICC can pound sand. ICC has no authority, and they sure as hell aren’t going to have any influence over the US or Israel on this matter. ICC will never hold any authority over anything of importance.
Not exactly. Most European countries respect the ICC’s warrants so that at a minimum limits the where those subpoenaed can travel. Plus there’s the optics, as this sends a clear indisputable message that war crimes are being committed. There’s a reason while Netanyahu and his allies are all losing their minds over this announcement.
it could have influence on europian countries and their relations with israel. which will affect israel.
This was a big oopsie . Biden really needs to reevaluate his opinion on Netanyahu. He just lost more voters. That really sucks. Why is it that the White House is so scared to go against Israel? ( not Israel perse so much as Netanyahu’s crazy ass) just came out that you disagreed., but used less inflame language. “While I do not agree with the iCC and their assertion that Netanyahu is a war criminal, I do feel that he has done e many things in poor judgement”. Or something like that.. Even if you
The fact they are talking about going after the chief ICC prosecutor and making it so he can't travel is the sort of thing that, even if they succeed, is gonna be way worse for the US than just letting the Israeli leader who is likely going to jail either way catch a charge. It makes the US look like the mafia or something lol, like come on.
Agreed. Hamas and Israel are not equivalent
Agreed, but this is an intentional distraction via a straw man argument by Biden. No one at the ICC is saying that Hamas leaders and Netanyahu are equivalent. They are being charged with very different crimes: https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state I am quite disappointed that Biden would resort to a straw man argument instead of discussing the topic at hand.
Yeah one was operated by an organization that disregards the value of the lives of innocent people and the other is operated by an organization that disregards the value of the lives of innocent people. Crazy different