this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
43 points (86.4% liked)

World News

39005 readers
2080 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

“Israeli politicians have already said that they’re going to ignore the ICJ order,” Mark Lattimer, the executive director of Ceasefire Centre for Civilian Rights, told Al Jazeera. “It is much harder for, particularly, the US and European states including the UK, to ignore the order because they have a much stronger record of holding or supporting the International Court of Justice.”

“The ICJ ruling puts a lot more pressure on the US and other Western allies to move on a ceasefire resolution,” Zaha Hassan, a human rights lawyer and a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told Al Jazeera. “It makes it a lot harder for the US, along with Israel, to make the case to Western governments that are still very much concerned with international legitimacy, to maintain the idea that Israel is acting within the constraints of international law in Gaza and that it’s acting in self-defence.”

Some evidence suggests that Israel knows this, too. Soon after South Africa announced that it would bring a case before the ICJ, Israel’s tactics on the ground started to change, experts said.

There was “a rush to wipe out any possibility for a Palestinian return to the north of Gaza”, Hassan said, pointing to controlled bombings of universities and hospitals. “Once you have hospitals taken out, you make it impossible for people in war to stay. That’s a part of a strategy to force Palestinian population transfer and permanent displacement.”

all 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 6 points 9 months ago (2 children)

What the ICJ’s interim ruling means for Israel’s war on Gaza, in terms of realpolitik: pretty much nothing, to be honest.

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 15 points 9 months ago (3 children)

I think it's an important step to increasing international pressure on Israel. International pressure was a major reason for how the apartheid in South Africa came to an end. But I do agree it's terrible more immediate actions aren't being taken to help Palestinians like an actual ceasefire or aid not being prevented for possible "dual-use"

I agree that it’s important.

I also agree that it’s deeply frustrating that this is effectively just a slap on the wrist for Israel.

[–] Mrkawfee@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Yes this ruling puts pressure on the genocide enablers in Europe and the US. Israel will still act with impunity as it has done since it was founded but it is dependant on the political and military cover of it's backers. If Western politicians are under pressure to comply with domestic laws against genocide then they will start breaking ranks.

[–] 100_percent_a_bot@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago (2 children)

International pressure was not a major reason for the undoing of the Apartheid, massive sanctions were. And there's no way major sanctions will come upon Israel any time soon since everyone pretty much agrees that Hamas has to be removed, even if they don't want to say it out loud.

[–] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

We'll have to see what happens with how the international community reacts to the ICJ ruling. I consider sanctions a form of international pressure.

Hamas should get tried for their war crimes, same for Israeli officials. But unless statehood is addressed I don't see that happening yet. With the massive amount of settlers swiss cheesing the West Bank, I don't see any practical two-state solution. A one-state solution is what I think needs to happen but the realities of creating that would be quite complicated and require a lot of international pressure

[–] 100_percent_a_bot@lemmy.world -1 points 9 months ago

One state is delusional and neither party wants that... Well maybe the Palestinians want it to gain the population majority and vote for a bunch of anti jew legislation or simply pogrom them out of existence.

Two states with less shitty borders would be a bit more realistic, maybe the 1967 parameters or so. But currently both Palestinians and Israeli want to keep fighting because they both think it will help them reach their goals - and one of them is correct, guess who.

[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 2 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Sanctions are exactly that: international pressure.

[–] 100_percent_a_bot@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago

Sure all sanctions are international pressure but not all international pressure is in the form of sanctions. The pressure we are seeing right now is mainly in the form of strongly worded letters and I don't expect that to change unless Israel dramatically escalates its war efforts or annexes areas.

[–] ctkatz@lemmy.ml 4 points 9 months ago

it MIGHT have an effect in the united states. israel is so reliant on us dollars and equipment to survive, it would not be much of a stretch to call them a client state.

I don't think any (democratic) politicians want to be associated with or vocally support a genocidal nation. don't be surprised if you see (democratic) politicians talk about pulling funds from israel. it's something I think we should have done at least 30 years ago.