24
Have a look at the first 7 members of the ICJ if you thought that South Africa's case had a chance
(lemmygrad.ml)
(good to know in advance)
this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2024
24 points (100.0% liked)
Palestine
884 readers
31 users here now
A community for everything related to Palestine and the occupation currently underway by the occupying force known as Israel.
Anti-Zionism is not anti-Semitism. Existence is resistance for Palestinians.
Please refer to Israel as Occupied Palestine, or occupied territories. The IDF is a fascist and ethnonationalist occupying force. Israelis are settlers. We understand however that the imperial narrative (which tries to legitimise Israel) is internalised in the imperial core and slip-ups are naturally expected.
We always take the sides of Palestine and Palestinians and are unapologetic about it. Israel is an occupying power whose "defence force"'s (note the contradiction) sole purpose for existing is to push Palestinians out so they can resettle their rightful land. If you have anything positive to say about Israel we do not care.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I can see seven pretty easily.
Eight, though, is tough.
Somalia needs some support with Somaliland, and https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Biden-Approves-Redeployment-of-US-Troops-to-Somalia-20220517-0003.html
Jamaica doesn't give any certainty either : https://globalvoices.org/2023/10/30/jamaicans-express-disappointment-over-their-countrys-no-show-un-gaza-vote/
And i don't think Brazil would want to expose themselves as much as South Africa did(, nor China for that matter), more to lose than to gain, that's justice. Bolivia probably only supported the case because Luis Arce has forbidden Evo Morales from being reelected and is trying to show that ~'he's not a traitor to the movement' despite that.
Let's say that they have a chance if you want though, it doesn't matter because that's not what would make a change, do they only have the option of a full-scale war with unknown consequences to do what's right ? We're just supposed to watch and then it'll be as if nothing ever happened, ok.
It does matter, because a success will collapse the so-called "rules based international order" propaganda that the US uses to justify imperialism. Obviously it won't stop the genocide and it won't stop US imperialism, but it raises and heightens the contradictions.
The u.s.a. was already condemned in the case of Nicaragua and nothing changed and nobody knows that, in the very improbable offchance that Israel was condemned, they would just act like Russia when the International Court of Justice ordered them to leave Ukraine.
Let's say that our medias talk about this improbable success and, even more improbable, support the ICJ and condemn Israel, everyone would just forget a month later. Sure, there's nothing to lose by trying, but not much to gain either, it's not the beginning of an effective solution, it'll be the exact same shit as before.
And the ICJ wouldn't even need to be considered the bad guy, the contradiction wouldn't raise an eyebrow, but let's say i'm wrong, have an hope in this if you want.
edit : That's an exaggeration, those who hate Israel won't forget such judgment and would remind us when they got the chance, that's the difference i'm seeing, so you're right to say that it's not nothing to be able to label them officially as genocidal, it'd add a new argument/insult of choice.
That's ~two every three years :
Nicaragua v US was almost 40 years ago, back when the US empire was at the height of its strength. Also, Israel's genocide is ongoing, whereas Nicaragua v US happened several years after the Contra scandal. There are some clear differences here that you should acknowledge before you dismiss this as a nothing burger EDIT oh actually your edit addressed that nvm >.>
I'm not saying this is The Thing that will end the genocide or end the US empire. I'm saying it's one more straw for the camel's back.
👍