ICJ's decision over the Palestinian occupation continues unwinding
September 18, 2024 7:31 PM Subscribe
UN General Assembly overwhelmingly calls for end of Israeli occupation The UNGA demanded that “Israel brings to an end without delay its unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, which constitutes a wrongful act of a continuing character entailing its international responsibility, and do so no later than 12 months”. || previously
Or you can go with the Haaretz headline (ungated): UN Overwhelmingly Votes on Resolution to Impose Sanctions, Arms Embargo on Israel -
The U.S. urged the General Assembly to vote no but lacked veto power, arguing that the resolution undermined the prospects for a two-state solution
Related to other ICJ cases and findings:
Reuters exclusive: Germany has stopped approving war weapons exports to Israel, source says
Or you can go with the Haaretz headline (ungated): UN Overwhelmingly Votes on Resolution to Impose Sanctions, Arms Embargo on Israel -
The U.S. urged the General Assembly to vote no but lacked veto power, arguing that the resolution undermined the prospects for a two-state solution
Related to other ICJ cases and findings:
Reuters exclusive: Germany has stopped approving war weapons exports to Israel, source says
I was reading the text (English here). And it made me realize I don't understand the functioning of the General Assembly, Special and Emergency Special Sessions (wiki) well, or how these resolutions are named. Why has the "Tenth Emergency Special Session" existed for 27 years?
The 10th ESS is uniquely enduring, and the only ESS to have been resumed more than once, since it was inaugurated in April 1997. This is the 31st (non-binding) resolution adopted in the 10th ESS. Israel has been the subject of 5 of 11 ESSs.
posted by rubatan at 8:21 PM on September 18 [5 favorites]
The 10th ESS is uniquely enduring, and the only ESS to have been resumed more than once, since it was inaugurated in April 1997. This is the 31st (non-binding) resolution adopted in the 10th ESS. Israel has been the subject of 5 of 11 ESSs.
posted by rubatan at 8:21 PM on September 18 [5 favorites]
Genocide ruling - it probably will take years, even as South Africa is filing an update around next month iirc. I mean even this ruling over the legality of the occupation only came about after the GA requested an advisory opinion back in 2020.
Re: the 10th ESS - it's not formally closed because a lot of pending issues that no one feels ready to vote for, is the likely reason. But it demonstrates how weird to see it continue, simply because Western powers kept trying to close off formal and legal avenues, so it's just hanging on out of technicality. I didn't realize it's convened when Malaysia was presiding over the GA. Well, that makes my previous description rather... well.
posted by cendawanita at 8:44 PM on September 18 [5 favorites]
Re: the 10th ESS - it's not formally closed because a lot of pending issues that no one feels ready to vote for, is the likely reason. But it demonstrates how weird to see it continue, simply because Western powers kept trying to close off formal and legal avenues, so it's just hanging on out of technicality. I didn't realize it's convened when Malaysia was presiding over the GA. Well, that makes my previous description rather... well.
posted by cendawanita at 8:44 PM on September 18 [5 favorites]
I think it's worth emphasizing that this resolution could even be tabled (BrEng) because the State of Palestine was provided additional rights that allowed it to be seated amongst the other delegates in the GA, and this was their first draft resolution. This AP article has a stronger Palestine angle/context:
The General Assembly’s consideration of the resolution began Tuesday with Mansour stressing that any country that thinks the Palestinian people “will accept a life of servitude” — or that claims peace is possible without a just solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — is “not being realistic.”
The solution remains an independent Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, living side by side in peace and security with Israel, he said.
Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International also urged Israel to heed the call to end its occupation.
The resolution asks U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to submit a report to the General Assembly within three months on putting the resolution in place, “including any actions taken by Israel, other states and international organizations, including the United Nations.”
“We fully abide by the decisions of the International Court of Justice,” Guterres told reporters. “I will implement any decision of the General Assembly in that regard.”
Mansour said most likely Israel won’t pay attention to the resolution and that the Palestinians will then follow up with a stronger one.
(I've shared in the US/Middle East thread, but coincidentally, KSA via MBS in a televised speech pretty much ended any hopes Biden can have to put the so-called Abraham Accords as a feather on his outgoing cap, but am mentioning it here because he's also using the East Jerusalem as Palestine's capital point too.)
posted by cendawanita at 9:10 PM on September 18 [10 favorites]
The General Assembly’s consideration of the resolution began Tuesday with Mansour stressing that any country that thinks the Palestinian people “will accept a life of servitude” — or that claims peace is possible without a just solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict — is “not being realistic.”
The solution remains an independent Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, living side by side in peace and security with Israel, he said.
Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International also urged Israel to heed the call to end its occupation.
The resolution asks U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to submit a report to the General Assembly within three months on putting the resolution in place, “including any actions taken by Israel, other states and international organizations, including the United Nations.”
“We fully abide by the decisions of the International Court of Justice,” Guterres told reporters. “I will implement any decision of the General Assembly in that regard.”
Mansour said most likely Israel won’t pay attention to the resolution and that the Palestinians will then follow up with a stronger one.
(I've shared in the US/Middle East thread, but coincidentally, KSA via MBS in a televised speech pretty much ended any hopes Biden can have to put the so-called Abraham Accords as a feather on his outgoing cap, but am mentioning it here because he's also using the East Jerusalem as Palestine's capital point too.)
posted by cendawanita at 9:10 PM on September 18 [10 favorites]
This won't do much to deter the US, of course, but it may discourage several other, more law abiding countries, from continuing arms exports to Israel, as Germany has done, and as the UK did recently. Again, the US won't stop, but it's clear from their reaction to the UK decision that they know it's a really, really bad look if they're the only ones doing it, and that's where they're headed.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 10:54 PM on September 18 [8 favorites]
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 10:54 PM on September 18 [8 favorites]
Speaking of that: South African lawyers gearing up to file war-crime complicity case against UK, US
A team of forty-seven South African lawyers is finalising its lawsuit against the UK and US for their complicity in Israel’s genocide and other war crimes against Palestinians. The group, which is led by Wikus van Rensburg, is the same team that filed South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), successfully obtaining the finding of ‘plausible genocide’ that effectively put Israel on trial before the court for the crime.
The lawyers plan to use civilian courts to prosecute those who aid and abet Israel in its crimes through civilian courts, in cooperation with UK and US lawyers.
From earlier this month: David Cameron sat on advice that there was breach of law in Gaza, officials say -
The former foreign secretary is said to have been advised on the risk of UK complicity
Which makes this Observer (UK) piece more interesting... I guess the coast is now relatively clear that they can actually do journalism about it: ‘Corbyn had flown too close to the sun’: how Labour insiders battled the left and plotted the party’s path back to power
Specifically: One of McSweeney’s obsessions was the Canary, an alt-left website that had seemed to appear from nowhere and grown to a peak of 8.5m hits a month. Moreover, Corbyn supporters trusted the site equally to the Guardian, their other favourite source of information. And so McSweeney had an aim – to schmooze the Guardian and kill the Canary. “Destroy the Canary or the Canary destroys us,” he told the Labour Together MPs.
After a few months working from a park bench, the group funded a small office in Vauxhall, and soon it reached out to former Labour advisers to work alongside them with a focus on online antisemitism. In an early review, they identified problem posts in hundreds of Facebook groups with links to either the party or leftwing politics. Some of these were aimed at Labour’s female Jewish MPs. They then farmed out the posts they uncovered to journalists who were themselves reporting on rising evidence of antisemitism on the left. Together with a row over whether the party would adopt all the examples linked to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, the scandal was becoming increasingly destabilising for Corbyn.
But I guess the current Labour government can throw Cameron (and the Tories) under the bus for this - certainly Lammy is doing the bare minimum.
---
WaPo: Biden’s arms transfers to Israel under internal investigation -
Inspectors general for the Pentagon and State Department are preparing to disclose multiple reports after complaints that they had done little to scrutinize the U.S. weapons surge.
The inspector general inquiries represent one of the last internal checks on an administration intent on surging weaponry to Israel despite criticisms of the country’s military tactics and the enormous civilian death toll in Gaza. The investigations come as some of Washington’s closest allies, including Britain, Canada, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain and Belgium, have restricted military equipment transfers to Israel because of legal and political concerns that the weapons could be used to commit war crimes.
(...) Meanwhile, “several other projects related to U.S. security assistance for Israel are pending public announcement” by the Defense Department’s inspector general, said the office’s spokeswoman, Mollie F. Halpern. The Pentagon watchdog also is planning to publish the results of a probe of President Joe Biden’s floating pier, a defunct method of delivering aid to Gaza that cost hundreds of millions of dollars before being rendered inoperable by rough seas. The inspector general for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) recently published its own report on the pier, saying experts had warned in advance that choppy waters could pose challenges and that the project itself would detract from diplomatic efforts to secure more reliable land routes for aid.
The inspectors general offices disclosed to The Post their plans to publish these reports while also acknowledging receipt of a letter from dozens of federal employees spanning more than 30 agencies who accused the watchdogs of failing to conduct proper oversight of Washington’s arms policy.
The employee coalition, Feds United for Peace, said it was aware that the inspectors general had received information from government whistleblowers indicating U.S. officials “are knowingly violating domestic and international law, as well as Administration policies and procedures, in order to continue providing U.S. weapons to Israel for its war on Gaza,” according to a copy of the undated letter obtained by The Post.
“Yet we have seen no action to date from the Inspectors General,” the letter states. “This stands in stark contrast to the robust efforts to review and assess U.S. support to Ukraine.”
(...) “The White House has made every excuse in the book for the behavior of the Israeli government when it comes to the obstruction of aid, and there is a degree of frustration that those decisions are being driven more by politics than by law,” said Jeremy Konyndyk, a former senior Biden administration official and now president of Refugees International.
An inspector general has a formal role in the government and is better equipped than humanitarian groups or journalists to demand answers from U.S. officials, he said.
“The IG is asking from inside the tent and so they’re going to have an easier time getting the straight, factual answers than anyone asking from outside,” Konyndyk said.
--- and on the ICC side ---
Report: Netanyahu Seeks Loophole From Israel's AG in 'Limited' Probe to Evade ICC Warrants
posted by cendawanita at 11:14 PM on September 18 [15 favorites]
A team of forty-seven South African lawyers is finalising its lawsuit against the UK and US for their complicity in Israel’s genocide and other war crimes against Palestinians. The group, which is led by Wikus van Rensburg, is the same team that filed South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), successfully obtaining the finding of ‘plausible genocide’ that effectively put Israel on trial before the court for the crime.
The lawyers plan to use civilian courts to prosecute those who aid and abet Israel in its crimes through civilian courts, in cooperation with UK and US lawyers.
From earlier this month: David Cameron sat on advice that there was breach of law in Gaza, officials say -
The former foreign secretary is said to have been advised on the risk of UK complicity
Which makes this Observer (UK) piece more interesting... I guess the coast is now relatively clear that they can actually do journalism about it: ‘Corbyn had flown too close to the sun’: how Labour insiders battled the left and plotted the party’s path back to power
Specifically: One of McSweeney’s obsessions was the Canary, an alt-left website that had seemed to appear from nowhere and grown to a peak of 8.5m hits a month. Moreover, Corbyn supporters trusted the site equally to the Guardian, their other favourite source of information. And so McSweeney had an aim – to schmooze the Guardian and kill the Canary. “Destroy the Canary or the Canary destroys us,” he told the Labour Together MPs.
After a few months working from a park bench, the group funded a small office in Vauxhall, and soon it reached out to former Labour advisers to work alongside them with a focus on online antisemitism. In an early review, they identified problem posts in hundreds of Facebook groups with links to either the party or leftwing politics. Some of these were aimed at Labour’s female Jewish MPs. They then farmed out the posts they uncovered to journalists who were themselves reporting on rising evidence of antisemitism on the left. Together with a row over whether the party would adopt all the examples linked to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism, the scandal was becoming increasingly destabilising for Corbyn.
But I guess the current Labour government can throw Cameron (and the Tories) under the bus for this - certainly Lammy is doing the bare minimum.
---
WaPo: Biden’s arms transfers to Israel under internal investigation -
Inspectors general for the Pentagon and State Department are preparing to disclose multiple reports after complaints that they had done little to scrutinize the U.S. weapons surge.
The inspector general inquiries represent one of the last internal checks on an administration intent on surging weaponry to Israel despite criticisms of the country’s military tactics and the enormous civilian death toll in Gaza. The investigations come as some of Washington’s closest allies, including Britain, Canada, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain and Belgium, have restricted military equipment transfers to Israel because of legal and political concerns that the weapons could be used to commit war crimes.
(...) Meanwhile, “several other projects related to U.S. security assistance for Israel are pending public announcement” by the Defense Department’s inspector general, said the office’s spokeswoman, Mollie F. Halpern. The Pentagon watchdog also is planning to publish the results of a probe of President Joe Biden’s floating pier, a defunct method of delivering aid to Gaza that cost hundreds of millions of dollars before being rendered inoperable by rough seas. The inspector general for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) recently published its own report on the pier, saying experts had warned in advance that choppy waters could pose challenges and that the project itself would detract from diplomatic efforts to secure more reliable land routes for aid.
The inspectors general offices disclosed to The Post their plans to publish these reports while also acknowledging receipt of a letter from dozens of federal employees spanning more than 30 agencies who accused the watchdogs of failing to conduct proper oversight of Washington’s arms policy.
The employee coalition, Feds United for Peace, said it was aware that the inspectors general had received information from government whistleblowers indicating U.S. officials “are knowingly violating domestic and international law, as well as Administration policies and procedures, in order to continue providing U.S. weapons to Israel for its war on Gaza,” according to a copy of the undated letter obtained by The Post.
“Yet we have seen no action to date from the Inspectors General,” the letter states. “This stands in stark contrast to the robust efforts to review and assess U.S. support to Ukraine.”
(...) “The White House has made every excuse in the book for the behavior of the Israeli government when it comes to the obstruction of aid, and there is a degree of frustration that those decisions are being driven more by politics than by law,” said Jeremy Konyndyk, a former senior Biden administration official and now president of Refugees International.
An inspector general has a formal role in the government and is better equipped than humanitarian groups or journalists to demand answers from U.S. officials, he said.
“The IG is asking from inside the tent and so they’re going to have an easier time getting the straight, factual answers than anyone asking from outside,” Konyndyk said.
--- and on the ICC side ---
Report: Netanyahu Seeks Loophole From Israel's AG in 'Limited' Probe to Evade ICC Warrants
posted by cendawanita at 11:14 PM on September 18 [15 favorites]
This won't do much to deter the US, of course, but it may discourage several other, more law abiding countries, from continuing arms exports to Israel, as Germany has done, and as the UK did recently.
The UK stopped a small portion of their arms exports - 30 out of 350 export licenses suspended. It's hardly like they aren't continuing arms exports to Israel.
posted by Dysk at 1:10 AM on September 19 [5 favorites]
The UK stopped a small portion of their arms exports - 30 out of 350 export licenses suspended. It's hardly like they aren't continuing arms exports to Israel.
posted by Dysk at 1:10 AM on September 19 [5 favorites]
And that's why the US exists I suppose, to make the other western allies feel better about themselves.
posted by cendawanita at 1:33 AM on September 19 [7 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 1:33 AM on September 19 [7 favorites]
World reacts to UN vote calling on Israel to end Palestinian occupation
If anyone has a good article-shaped listicle that's not a Twitter thread with highlights of some of what the key abstention said, that would be much appreciated.
posted by cendawanita at 3:17 AM on September 19 [1 favorite]
If anyone has a good article-shaped listicle that's not a Twitter thread with highlights of some of what the key abstention said, that would be much appreciated.
posted by cendawanita at 3:17 AM on September 19 [1 favorite]
If anyone has a good article-shaped listicle that's not a Twitter thread with highlights of some of what the key abstention said, that would be much appreciated.
This article from Al Jazeera has a pretty good overview of what the yeses, abstentions, and nos mean and where the countries are coming from (under the header "What do the votes show?" and below). It also has a great explainer of what all of it really means.
posted by urbanlenny at 9:02 AM on September 19 [9 favorites]
This article from Al Jazeera has a pretty good overview of what the yeses, abstentions, and nos mean and where the countries are coming from (under the header "What do the votes show?" and below). It also has a great explainer of what all of it really means.
posted by urbanlenny at 9:02 AM on September 19 [9 favorites]
I read TFA but those are still a weird collection of votes against. What the hell, Tuvalu?
posted by The Ardship of Cambry at 9:05 AM on September 19 [1 favorite]
posted by The Ardship of Cambry at 9:05 AM on September 19 [1 favorite]
Israel has moved to a new phase of "The War."
Jesus weeps.
posted by mule98J at 6:22 AM on September 20 [3 favorites]
Jesus weeps.
posted by mule98J at 6:22 AM on September 20 [3 favorites]
Israel shuts down Al Jazeera in West Bank
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 9:58 AM on September 22 [5 favorites]
posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 9:58 AM on September 22 [5 favorites]
The Onion, previously and also now, does not have to do much touch-up work to make satire of reality:
Following its ban of the Qatar-based news outlet’s operations in the country, Israel accused Al Jazeera Monday of being a mouthpiece for journalism.posted by away for regrooving at 11:13 PM on September 22 [5 favorites]
...
Prime Minister Netanyahu went on to defend his administration’s record of rooting out journalism, noting that since the war began in October, around 100 journalists had been killed.
FP: The White House’s Defense of Israel Is Undermining International Law -
The United States tends to hail the ICC when it prosecutes American enemies, but assails the court when it goes after U.S. allies.
A related question Thomas-Greenfield refused to answer was whether the United States would comply with the orders issued by the International Court of Justice, which hears disputes between states. In a recent advisory opinion ruling, the ICJ ruled that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal and that it must remove its forces and settlers from there and reverse its illegal annexations.
The court ordered states not to recognize any illegal Israeli acts, such as annexations (The Trump administration recognized Israel’s annexations of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, but the Biden administration has not reversed these.) More significantly, the court said that states are under obligation “not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”
This is a problem for the U.S government, if it is to obey the directives of a court of which it is a founding member, by virtue of Washington’s ratification of the United Nations Charter. That’s because the United States is Israel’s largest aid provider, with over $20 billion in military aid provided in 2024, and more than that in arms sales authorizations.
As a result, such aid not only violates U.S. laws prohibiting arms to states that violate human rights, but a direct order from the ICJ. The U.S. Mission to the United Nation’s tweet this week stating that it will vote against a pending U.N. General Assembly resolution to enforce the advisory opinion is a pretty clear indication that the U.S. has no intention of complying with the ICJ.
The continued transfer of U.S. weapons to Israel may well become the source of charges against the U.S. government in the ICJ occupation case (as well as the separate case South Africa initiated concerning genocide claims against Israel), but also against individual U.S. officials in the ICC case, for aiding and abetting the crimes with which Israel is charged.
Declassified UK: Israel lobbied Britain to change law on war crimes arrests -
Exclusive: The Israeli government waged a decade-long campaign to protect its officials from criminal proceedings in Britain, leaked files show.
When retired Israeli general Doron Almog boarded his flight from Tel Aviv on 11 September 2005, he expected to soon step foot on British soil.
Minutes after landing at Heathrow airport, however, an Israeli embassy official boarded the plane and warned Almog to stay onboard.
An arrest warrant had been issued for the former army chief over alleged war crimes committed in Gaza, and British police officers were waiting at the immigration desk to seize him.
Almog remained on the plane for two hours before departing again for Israel. UK counter-terrorism police had decided not to board the jet, fearing an attempt to do so might lead to a firefight on the tarmac at Heathrow.
The incident seemingly marked the first time that an arrest warrant had been issued in Britain for an Israeli national over abuses against Palestinians, and it sent shockwaves through the Knesset.
What followed was a decade-long campaign by the Israeli government to ensure that something like this could never happen again, leaked files reviewed by Declassified reveal.
The campaign focussed on lobbying Britain to change its approach to universal jurisdiction legislation, which allows for the most serious crimes to be prosecuted in another country.
The goal was to allow Israeli officials to visit Britain without fear of arrest, particularly those accused of serious abuses against the Palestinians.
Brookings: Will the ICC issue arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Sinwar?
Warrants don’t always result in arrests but they still matter.
There is no set time for ICC judges to deliberate, but they are taking longer in this case than they did with the last high-profile arrest warrants. In 2023, the judges took just three weeks to grant warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and one of his deputies for the unlawful deportation and transfer of Ukrainian children to Russia.
The judges may be taking more time for several reasons, including the number of perpetrators and violations, and the many amicus curiae observations (or briefs filed by outside advocates) that states and other groups have submitted for consideration. The judges also may want to decide on all the warrants before making an announcement. Consider this hypothetical: if the judges issue warrants for Hamas leaders first and do so for Israeli leaders at a later date, they could face two types of backlash—first, for appearing to be biased against Palestinians and, second, for seeming to capitulate to pressure to include Israelis. There will be backlash no matter what, but backlash on one front seems better than backlash on two fronts.
(Still, one of those recommended for warrants is now dead so uh, are the judges just running the clock?)
However, the Israeli government isn’t going down without a fight and has threatened to punish Palestinians if the ICC issues warrants. The United States has similarly threatened to withhold aid to Palestinians. But as international law expert Mark Kersten argues,
“There is no moral, legal or political justification for Israel’s allies punishing civilians for an investigation by the only credible, impartial and independent court investigating atrocities against Palestinian and Israeli victims of atrocity crimes.”
During his announcement, Khan made an oblique reference to attempted interference in his investigation and threatened legal action under Article 70 of the Rome Statute, which provides for fines and up to five years imprisonment for individuals who obstruct justice.
A week later, The Guardian reported that Israel has “deployed its intelligence agencies to surveil, hack, pressure, smear and allegedly threaten senior ICC staff in an effort to derail the court’s inquiries”—likely the actions Khan was referencing, though an Israeli spokesperson denied the allegations.
This wouldn’t be the first—or likely the last—time the ICC has faced intimidation. During the Trump administration, the United States levied sanctions against court officials, and it could do so again. Some lawmakers have warned, “Target Israel and we will target you.” But others have spoken out against such threats, including the White House.
Still, Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken have called Khan’s actions “outrageous” and “shameful,” reinforcing the idea that the system is unfair. Israeli officials have gone a step further, accusing the ICC of antisemitic bias, echoing prior allegations of an anti-African bias.
These attacks are intended to undermine the ICC’s credibility and effectiveness—and they shouldn’t continue or be allowed to succeed. Opponents can instead offer legal arguments and evidence to challenge the court’s determinations. States that value the rule of law should make their case using the law—not ad hominem attacks, intimidation, or obstruction.
posted by cendawanita at 9:54 AM on September 23 [10 favorites]
The United States tends to hail the ICC when it prosecutes American enemies, but assails the court when it goes after U.S. allies.
A related question Thomas-Greenfield refused to answer was whether the United States would comply with the orders issued by the International Court of Justice, which hears disputes between states. In a recent advisory opinion ruling, the ICJ ruled that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal and that it must remove its forces and settlers from there and reverse its illegal annexations.
The court ordered states not to recognize any illegal Israeli acts, such as annexations (The Trump administration recognized Israel’s annexations of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, but the Biden administration has not reversed these.) More significantly, the court said that states are under obligation “not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.”
This is a problem for the U.S government, if it is to obey the directives of a court of which it is a founding member, by virtue of Washington’s ratification of the United Nations Charter. That’s because the United States is Israel’s largest aid provider, with over $20 billion in military aid provided in 2024, and more than that in arms sales authorizations.
As a result, such aid not only violates U.S. laws prohibiting arms to states that violate human rights, but a direct order from the ICJ. The U.S. Mission to the United Nation’s tweet this week stating that it will vote against a pending U.N. General Assembly resolution to enforce the advisory opinion is a pretty clear indication that the U.S. has no intention of complying with the ICJ.
The continued transfer of U.S. weapons to Israel may well become the source of charges against the U.S. government in the ICJ occupation case (as well as the separate case South Africa initiated concerning genocide claims against Israel), but also against individual U.S. officials in the ICC case, for aiding and abetting the crimes with which Israel is charged.
Declassified UK: Israel lobbied Britain to change law on war crimes arrests -
Exclusive: The Israeli government waged a decade-long campaign to protect its officials from criminal proceedings in Britain, leaked files show.
When retired Israeli general Doron Almog boarded his flight from Tel Aviv on 11 September 2005, he expected to soon step foot on British soil.
Minutes after landing at Heathrow airport, however, an Israeli embassy official boarded the plane and warned Almog to stay onboard.
An arrest warrant had been issued for the former army chief over alleged war crimes committed in Gaza, and British police officers were waiting at the immigration desk to seize him.
Almog remained on the plane for two hours before departing again for Israel. UK counter-terrorism police had decided not to board the jet, fearing an attempt to do so might lead to a firefight on the tarmac at Heathrow.
The incident seemingly marked the first time that an arrest warrant had been issued in Britain for an Israeli national over abuses against Palestinians, and it sent shockwaves through the Knesset.
What followed was a decade-long campaign by the Israeli government to ensure that something like this could never happen again, leaked files reviewed by Declassified reveal.
The campaign focussed on lobbying Britain to change its approach to universal jurisdiction legislation, which allows for the most serious crimes to be prosecuted in another country.
The goal was to allow Israeli officials to visit Britain without fear of arrest, particularly those accused of serious abuses against the Palestinians.
Brookings: Will the ICC issue arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Sinwar?
Warrants don’t always result in arrests but they still matter.
There is no set time for ICC judges to deliberate, but they are taking longer in this case than they did with the last high-profile arrest warrants. In 2023, the judges took just three weeks to grant warrants for Russian President Vladimir Putin and one of his deputies for the unlawful deportation and transfer of Ukrainian children to Russia.
The judges may be taking more time for several reasons, including the number of perpetrators and violations, and the many amicus curiae observations (or briefs filed by outside advocates) that states and other groups have submitted for consideration. The judges also may want to decide on all the warrants before making an announcement. Consider this hypothetical: if the judges issue warrants for Hamas leaders first and do so for Israeli leaders at a later date, they could face two types of backlash—first, for appearing to be biased against Palestinians and, second, for seeming to capitulate to pressure to include Israelis. There will be backlash no matter what, but backlash on one front seems better than backlash on two fronts.
(Still, one of those recommended for warrants is now dead so uh, are the judges just running the clock?)
However, the Israeli government isn’t going down without a fight and has threatened to punish Palestinians if the ICC issues warrants. The United States has similarly threatened to withhold aid to Palestinians. But as international law expert Mark Kersten argues,
“There is no moral, legal or political justification for Israel’s allies punishing civilians for an investigation by the only credible, impartial and independent court investigating atrocities against Palestinian and Israeli victims of atrocity crimes.”
During his announcement, Khan made an oblique reference to attempted interference in his investigation and threatened legal action under Article 70 of the Rome Statute, which provides for fines and up to five years imprisonment for individuals who obstruct justice.
A week later, The Guardian reported that Israel has “deployed its intelligence agencies to surveil, hack, pressure, smear and allegedly threaten senior ICC staff in an effort to derail the court’s inquiries”—likely the actions Khan was referencing, though an Israeli spokesperson denied the allegations.
This wouldn’t be the first—or likely the last—time the ICC has faced intimidation. During the Trump administration, the United States levied sanctions against court officials, and it could do so again. Some lawmakers have warned, “Target Israel and we will target you.” But others have spoken out against such threats, including the White House.
Still, Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken have called Khan’s actions “outrageous” and “shameful,” reinforcing the idea that the system is unfair. Israeli officials have gone a step further, accusing the ICC of antisemitic bias, echoing prior allegations of an anti-African bias.
These attacks are intended to undermine the ICC’s credibility and effectiveness—and they shouldn’t continue or be allowed to succeed. Opponents can instead offer legal arguments and evidence to challenge the court’s determinations. States that value the rule of law should make their case using the law—not ad hominem attacks, intimidation, or obstruction.
posted by cendawanita at 9:54 AM on September 23 [10 favorites]
Almog remained on the plane for two hours before departing again for Israel. UK counter-terrorism police had decided not to board the jet, fearing an attempt to do so might lead to a firefight on the tarmac at Heathrow.
All by itself this is such a fucking indictment of Israel. UK authorities were seriously worried they would be shot at on their own soil by representatives of a foreign government for enforcing international law.
posted by adrienneleigh at 9:58 AM on September 23 [7 favorites]
All by itself this is such a fucking indictment of Israel. UK authorities were seriously worried they would be shot at on their own soil by representatives of a foreign government for enforcing international law.
posted by adrienneleigh at 9:58 AM on September 23 [7 favorites]
K authorities were seriously worried they would be shot at on their own soil by representatives of a foreign government
This is not an unfounded concern. Two US intelligence ships were strafed by Israeli jets in the late 1960s, killing and wounding several American crewmen. A response from Israel following those incidents was "Ooops."
jGoogle USS Liberty & Cole. I was working as a 98J when the Liberty was attacked.
posted by mule98J at 10:23 AM on September 23 [4 favorites]
This is not an unfounded concern. Two US intelligence ships were strafed by Israeli jets in the late 1960s, killing and wounding several American crewmen. A response from Israel following those incidents was "Ooops."
jGoogle USS Liberty & Cole. I was working as a 98J when the Liberty was attacked.
posted by mule98J at 10:23 AM on September 23 [4 favorites]
the Israeli government isn’t going down without a fight and has threatened to punish Palestinians if the ICC issues warrants. The United States has similarly threatened to withhold aid to Palestinians.
Wow. Right out of the abusers playbook, "Look what you made me do".
posted by Mitheral at 1:42 PM on September 23 [5 favorites]
Wow. Right out of the abusers playbook, "Look what you made me do".
posted by Mitheral at 1:42 PM on September 23 [5 favorites]
mule98J: oh yeah, i'm well aware of the USS Liberty/Cole incident and i know the UK cops' fears weren't unfounded at all. Israel has been a rogue state basically since it was founded.
posted by adrienneleigh at 2:12 PM on September 23 [3 favorites]
posted by adrienneleigh at 2:12 PM on September 23 [3 favorites]
Had to double-check the Almog thing and found other sources... Terror police feared gun battle with Israeli general. I guess the 'Rules Based International Order' is tricky to apply consistently if the rules keep changing to suit the people setting/enforcing the rules.
posted by phigmov at 2:35 PM on September 23 [4 favorites]
posted by phigmov at 2:35 PM on September 23 [4 favorites]
UN Chief António Guterres has been barred from entering Israel after condemning all escalatory military actions.
posted by adamvasco at 3:55 PM on October 2 [4 favorites]
posted by adamvasco at 3:55 PM on October 2 [4 favorites]
« Older You amazing home chefs | "I've seen it all" Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Any idea what the expected timeline looks like on the genocide case ruling? I ask as though there's a meaningful chance it would lead to anything other than the dissolution of the UN as a body with any semblance of enforceable authority, given the trajectory of events so far. Starting to feel too like "before the genocide has been completed" might be asking a bit much of the ol' wheels of justice.
posted by DoctorFedora at 8:19 PM on September 18 [10 favorites]