ICC prosecutor to probe war crimes in Palestinian Territories, angering Israel

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

We've been through this in the past - how is the investigation to be conducted in any 'open and transparent' manner? What is the imperative to ignore previous investigations, reviews and whatnot commissioned by international bodies often fail to deliver when it comes to both the conduct of the investigation or the results being unbiased?

 

Your comment regarding bias doesn't actually serve to support the investigation being unbiased - it simply opts to ignore the issue.

My point is that neither side are going to accept criticism, hence the need for the investigation to be open and transparent.

 

But I don’t see achieving openness and transparency as the main challenge, there are other far more difficult issues to address.

 

As you rightly state, the legal basis for what constitutes a war crime needs to be demonstrated in each case.

 

For some cases this will be clear cut, for other cases the outcome of an action might warrant a charge of a war crime only if there is evidence of a command having been given/or withheld. I doubt either party will open their records to the investigation, so these cases will not be resolved.

 

I suspect the investigation will become a cataloguing exercise of clear cut war crimes and probable war crimes and of course with nobody actually held to account.

 

While I believe this investigation is long overdue I also believe there is a real danger of it not resolving any part of the conflict, only serving to provide ‘ammunition’ for on going tot for tat accusations.

 

Courts bring justice by compelling the offender to face justice for their action. The ICC has zero means to do this with either party(s) in this conflict.

[Sujo]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

My point is that neither side are going to accept criticism, hence the need for the investigation to be open and transparent.

 

But I don’t see achieving openness and transparency as the main challenge, there are other far more difficult issues to address.

 

As you rightly state, the legal basis for what constitutes a war crime needs to be demonstrated in each case.

 

For some cases this will be clear cut, for other cases the outcome of an action might warrant a charge of a war crime only if there is evidence of a command having been given/or withheld. I doubt either party will open their records to the investigation, so these cases will not be resolved.

 

I suspect the investigation will become a cataloguing exercise of clear cut war crimes and probable war crimes and of course with nobody actually held to account.

 

While I believe this investigation is long overdue I also believe there is a real danger of it not resolving any part of the conflict, only serving to provide ‘ammunition’ for on going tot for tat accusations.

 

Courts bring justice by compelling the offender to face justice for their action. The ICC has zero means to do this with either party(s) in this conflict.

Which is sad that it cannot be compelled. Simply opening an investigation is not anti semitic, especially when it is to investigate both sides.

 

Good on them for doing their job, but they do need more power.

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

No deflection at all. As is the case with the other poster I was replying to, you make a general fig leaf comment, then the focus reverts to the usual agenda.

 

The deflection is yours. It was pointed out that for some reason you think (or hope) Israel's image will be negatively effected, while expecting the Palestinian side to benefit. Why wouldn't 'exposing' possible war crimes committed by the Palestinian hurt them? 

 

As for your expert take on legal matters, the example cited for an Israeli action would necessarily qualify as a war crime. That would depend on intent, circumstances and information available at the time. War crimes are not just any military action in which innocents get killed.

I have commented numerous times that I view the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, and the Israeli settlement effort both, as illegal. The latter probably qualifying as a war crime as well, on the grounds of transferring civilian population to conquered areas being a no no. Addressed even on this topic. Whether the ICC investigation decides to go ahead with labeling as such and prosecuting is another matter.

 

Israel taking legal precautions to protect its officials is prudent. Bottom line, seems like it's a list of a few hundred people, guess being drawn on the cautious side, so effectively less than that are under any risk. As said, it's more of an inconvenience to those involved.

[dexterm]

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

My point is that neither side are going to accept criticism, hence the need for the investigation to be open and transparent.

 

But I don’t see achieving openness and transparency as the main challenge, there are other far more difficult issues to address.

 

As you rightly state, the legal basis for what constitutes a war crime needs to be demonstrated in each case.

 

For some cases this will be clear cut, for other cases the outcome of an action might warrant a charge of a war crime only if there is evidence of a command having been given/or withheld. I doubt either party will open their records to the investigation, so these cases will not be resolved.

 

I suspect the investigation will become a cataloguing exercise of clear cut war crimes and probable war crimes and of course with nobody actually held to account.

 

While I believe this investigation is long overdue I also believe there is a real danger of it not resolving any part of the conflict, only serving to provide ‘ammunition’ for on going tot for tat accusations.

 

Courts bring justice by compelling the offender to face justice for their action. The ICC has zero means to do this with either party(s) in this conflict.

Resolving the conflict is a separate issue and not within the brief of this ICC investigation. That's the job of politicians, in particular IMO outside pressure from other powerful countries with carrots and sticks.

 

The job of the ICC is to investigate and expose war crimes...that's the least we can do for the victims. The perpetrators cannot be allowed to think they can get away with war crimes with impunity.

 

The ICC does have some teeth and can issue arrest warrants. It's up to member countries to act upon those warrants if a war criminal enters their country. I don't know if there is a time limit on any warrants issued.

Edited March 4, 2021 by dexterm

[Morch]

11 minutes ago, nobodysfriend said:

A Palestinian going on a stabbing spree in Jerusalem , killing innocent Israelis just because he ( or she ) is totally lost in an indoctrinated ideology that teaches hate , is , without any doubt a murderer and terrorist .

But , most of the times , these actions are carried out by individuals , and not organized .

 

On the contrary , if a state organizes actions against minorities or ethnic groups  with the help of the army , that is another dimension ...

 

There is no state sponsored terrorism on a quasi industrial scale by the palestinians , as they do not even have a state ... It is the Ideology ( holy war ) that makes individuals become terrorists . 

 

And , again :

"Unlawful killings, torture and ill treatment ... the wanton destruction of property ... the fact that they have been done in a systematic and widespread manner, and in pursuit of government policy, makes them crimes against humanity under the definition of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The grave breaches of the Fourth Geneva Convention make it clear that they are serious war crimes as well."

 

 

This isn't about individuals going on stabbing sprees. The actions associated with the Palestinians, as far as the investigation is concerned are more along the lines of mortar and rocket attacks, use of civilians as human shields, and organizing violent mass protests. These are sponsored and organized by the de-facto ruling party in the Gaza Strip.

 

War crimes investigations aren't about the actions of individuals, other than when they represent or act on behalf of their country.

 

Your comment that there is no Palestinian equivalent to 'state-sponsored terrorism on a quasi industrial scale' is at odds with reality. The Hamas's arsenal of rockets is quite impressive, so is the Islamic Jihad's. It simply boggles the mind someone would make such a comment, when the OP pretty much contradicts it.

 

If there was nothing like this on the Palestinian side, then there would be nothing for the ICC to investigate with regard to the Palestinians.

 

 

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

@dexterm

 

No deflection at all. As is the case with the other poster I was replying to, you make a general fig leaf comment, then the focus reverts to the usual agenda.

 

The deflection is yours. It was pointed out that for some reason you think (or hope) Israel's image will be negatively effected, while expecting the Palestinian side to benefit. Why wouldn't 'exposing' possible war crimes committed by the Palestinian hurt them? 

 

As for your expert take on legal matters, the example cited for an Israeli action would necessarily qualify as a war crime. That would depend on intent, circumstances and information available at the time. War crimes are not just any military action in which innocents get killed.

I have commented numerous times that I view the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, and the Israeli settlement effort both, as illegal. The latter probably qualifying as a war crime as well, on the grounds of transferring civilian population to conquered areas being a no no. Addressed even on this topic. Whether the ICC investigation decides to go ahead with labeling as such and prosecuting is another matter.

 

Israel taking legal precautions to protect its officials is prudent. Bottom line, seems like it's a list of a few hundred people, guess being drawn on the cautious side, so effectively less than that are under any risk. As said, it's more of an inconvenience to those involved.

>> It was pointed out that for some reason you think (or hope) Israel's image will be negatively effected [sic], while expecting the Palestinian side to benefit. 

 

Quote exactly where you think I said that. If you cannot, it's a blatant lie.

Edited March 4, 2021 by onthedarkside
personal comment removed

[Morch]

19 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

My point is that neither side are going to accept criticism, hence the need for the investigation to be open and transparent.

 

But I don’t see achieving openness and transparency as the main challenge, there are other far more difficult issues to address.

 

As you rightly state, the legal basis for what constitutes a war crime needs to be demonstrated in each case.

 

For some cases this will be clear cut, for other cases the outcome of an action might warrant a charge of a war crime only if there is evidence of a command having been given/or withheld. I doubt either party will open their records to the investigation, so these cases will not be resolved.

 

I suspect the investigation will become a cataloguing exercise of clear cut war crimes and probable war crimes and of course with nobody actually held to account.

 

While I believe this investigation is long overdue I also believe there is a real danger of it not resolving any part of the conflict, only serving to provide ‘ammunition’ for on going tot for tat accusations.

 

Courts bring justice by compelling the offender to face justice for their action. The ICC has zero means to do this with either party(s) in this conflict.

 

Given that much of the premise of investigation is challenged (by sides, and others), it is difficult to see how disengaging it from the political angle (perceived or real)may work out.

 

I pretty much agree with your description of how things will pan out. That's how most past forays into it ended up. At the bottom line, no one is punished, and both sides use findings as propaganda material. Until the next time.

 

As for the investigation 'resolving' any part of the conflict, that was never a thing. The ICC is not a replacement for negotiations or agreements between sides, nor (as pointed out) does it possess any way to enforce even its own rulings, let along their wider implications. In this case too, the court's verdict, is bound to effectively have no more value than serving as propaganda fodder. If anything, it can be counted on to keep the conflict going. 

[Morch]

25 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Resolving the conflict is a separate issue and not within the brief of this ICC investigation. That's the job of politicians, in particular IMO outside pressure from other powerful countries with carrots and sticks.

 

The job of the ICC is to investigate and expose war crimes...that's the least we can do for the victims. The perpetrators cannot be allowed to think they can get away with war crimes with impunity.

 

The ICC does have some teeth and can issue arrest warrants. It's up to member countries to act upon those warrants if a war criminal enters their country. I don't know if there is a time limit on any warrants issued.

 

The point being made is that perpetrators are unlikely to be brought to justice.

 

The statute of limitations does not apply (unless the investigation is closed, I think). Also, the ICC cannot get into stuff that happened before 2002.

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by Morch

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

>> It was pointed out that for some reason you think (or hope) Israel's image will be negatively effected [sic], while expecting the Palestinian side to benefit. 

 

Quote exactly where you think I said that. If you cannot, it's a blatant lie.

 

I was commenting on your post. ... Just so that it will be clear again -

 

You asserted Israel's image will be negatively effected by the investigations' results, and on the other hand, that the Palestinians will make gains. Since the investigation is supposedly looking into potential war crimes on both sides, why do you feel 'exposing' Palestinian war crimes would not effect them negatively as well?

 

From your first post on this topic, two bottom paragraphs....

 

Quote

 It will put Israeli war crimes in the spotlight for several years to come. More people worldwide will be more aware of the darker side of the Zionist narrative, which is why Netanyahu so vehemently wants to silence the ICC investigation. And perhaps the airing of Israeli war crimes may actually haunt Biden and Harris's dreams, with some prompting from Sanders and other Democrat party progressives. 

 

    It gives the Palestinian state legitimacy, as a recognised party to the ICC, which irks Israel bearing in mind it is not that long ago that it was illegal and a shootable offense even to wave the Palestinian flag.

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by onthedarkside
personal comment removed

[Morch]

33 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Which is sad that it cannot be compelled. Simply opening an investigation is not anti semitic, especially when it is to investigate both sides.

 

Good on them for doing their job, but they do need more power.

 

More power how?

Power to override national governments?

An international law enforcement force under its command?

Considering the US, China, Russia and India aren't members (there are others, of course), maybe the focus ought to be not on power, but legitimacy and wider membership.

[Sujo]

6 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

More power how?

Power to override national governments?

An international law enforcement force under its command?

Considering the US, China, Russia and India aren't members (there are others, of course), maybe the focus ought to be not on power, but legitimacy and wider membership.

Read the post i replied to.

[Morch]

1 minute ago, Sujo said:

Read the post i replied to.

 

I did, of course.

Still not making your comment clear. How would the ICC be given power? By whom? What form or means will this cover? How far ranging is such a power to be? And further, does the world wish to be placed under the ICC authority in such a manner?

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

More power how?

Power to override national governments?

An international law enforcement force under its command?

Considering the US, China, Russia and India aren't members (there are others, of course), maybe the focus ought to be not on power, but legitimacy and wider membership.

I think an important job, perhaps the most important job the ICC can do is to bear witness to war crimes, record them and call them out.

 

To do this in a meaningful manner requires the ICC maintains the one power it has, moral authority.

 

Don’t expect that to last if they fail to navigate the minefield of this particular conflict.

 

A wiser move might have been to announce that the ICC will actively record war crimes in the conflict.

 

Standing and bearing witness is very far from being passive and is far less likely to drag the ICC into accusations bias than will an ‘investigation’.

 

 

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

I was commenting on your post. ... Just so that it will be clear again -

 

 

In my very first post in this thread and repeated I wrote: "It will expose war crimes on both sides"

 

[Morch]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I think an important job, perhaps the most important job the ICC can do is to bear witness to war crimes, record them and call them out.

 

To do this in a meaningful manner requires the ICC maintains the one power it has, moral authority.

 

Don’t expect that to last if they fail to navigate the minefield of this particular conflict.

 

A wiser move might have been to announce that the ICC will actively record war crimes in the conflict.

 

Standing and bearing witness is very far from being passive and is far less likely to drag the ICC into accusations bias than will an ‘investigation’.

 

 

 

But then its more of an archive, less of a court. Also, with regard to future investigations, there might be calls for the ICC to 'record' war crimes rather than investigate them. Not saying it's not a worthy cause, but not the reason for the ICC's existence.

 

Claiming that the ICC has moral authority does not make it so - at least not with that many powerful countries representing a fair chunk of the World's population casting doubt on the proposition.

 

And to echo what you've said earlier - sides will bitterly complain anyway, even if it's "just" a record.

[dexterm]

23 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

But then its more of an archive, less of a court. Also, with regard to future investigations, there might be calls for the ICC to 'record' war crimes rather than investigate them. Not saying it's not a worthy cause, but not the reason for the ICC's existence.

 

Claiming that the ICC has moral authority does not make it so - at least not with that many powerful countries representing a fair chunk of the World's population casting doubt on the proposition.

 

And to echo what you've said earlier - sides will bitterly complain anyway, even if it's "just" a record.

>>Claiming that the ICC has moral authority does not make it so - at least not with that many powerful countries representing a fair chunk of the World's population casting doubt on the proposition.

It's a very sad indictment of humanity if in 2021 war criminals can get away with murder simply because they have powerful friends, who can muddy the waters while having skeletons in their own cupboard.
Might is not right.

 

The ICC has got this far despite all obstacles, and the evidence will be presented.

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

I did, of course.

Still not making your comment clear. How would the ICC be given power? By whom? What form or means will this cover? How far ranging is such a power to be? And further, does the world wish to be placed under the ICC authority in such a manner?

Last paragraph.

 

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by onthedarkside
personal comments removed

[Morch]

45 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Last paragraph.

 

 

Neither your previous posts, nor the current deflection, actually suggest how this power can be granted or manifest itself. The rest of my comments apply as well - is there a general agreement or will that the court will have such authority over national governments?

Edited March 4, 2021 by onthedarkside
quote of hidden comments removed

[onthedarkside]

A flame post and reply have been removed, along with some personal comments regarding other members.

 

[Morch]

45 minutes ago, dexterm said:

>>Claiming that the ICC has moral authority does not make it so - at least not with that many powerful countries representing a fair chunk of the World's population casting doubt on the proposition.

It's a very sad indictment of humanity if in 2021 war criminals can get away with murder simply because they have powerful friends, who can muddy the waters while having skeletons in their own cupboard.
Might is not right.

 

The ICC has got this far despite all obstacles, and the evidence will be presented.

 

That's just pointless moralizing. And not even a clear one.

 

Other than in alternative realities, was there ever any indication powerful nations will let go of their power? So far there's no World government, and until then, we'll have to wait for history to take it's course - with people bonding in ever larger frameworks. Not in our lifetimes, unless some super-calamity comes on, perhaps.

 

And then, of course, there's the less gloomy way of looking at things - it's 2021, and war crimes can be prosecuted on an international level. Unthinkable a couple of centuries back.

 

Might is not right. But it is what it is, simply whining about it doesn't change facts. Ignoring reality is an option.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

 

In my very first post in this thread and repeated I wrote: "It will expose war crimes on both sides"

 

 

My comment was about the last two paragraphs of that post.

 

As in when you allege the investigation results would have a negative impact on Israel's image, while at the same time earning the Palestinians greater legitimacy. Since the investigation will supposedly investigate war crimes allegations on both sides, it is not clear why you think that the Palestinians will not be similarly effected in a negative manner.

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

My comment was about the last two paragraphs of that post.

 

As in when you allege the investigation results would have a negative impact on Israel's image, while at the same time earning the Palestinians greater legitimacy. Since the investigation will supposedly investigate war crimes allegations on both sides, it is not clear why you think that the Palestinians will not be similarly effected in a negative manner.

If you ever bothered to quote what I wrote or even read it more slowly. My post...
"It gives the Palestinian state legitimacy, as a recognised party to the ICC, which irks Israel bearing in mind it is not that long ago that it was illegal and a shootable offense even to wave the Palestinian flag."

 

i.e the very fact that the ICC launched the investigation having satisfied itself that Palestine has the necessary attributes of a state is progress in itself ...nothing to do with any adverse findings re the IDF or Hamas, being better for one side or the other.

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

That's just pointless moralizing. And not even a clear one.

 

Other than in alternative realities, was there ever any indication powerful nations will let go of their power? So far there's no World government, and until then, we'll have to wait for history to take it's course - with people bonding in ever larger frameworks. Not in our lifetimes, unless some super-calamity comes on, perhaps.

 

And then, of course, there's the less gloomy way of looking at things - it's 2021, and war crimes can be prosecuted on an international level. Unthinkable a couple of centuries back.

 

Might is not right. But it is what it is, simply whining about it doesn't change facts. Ignoring reality is an option.

The old "it is what it is"; it's all in the too hard basket routine, which conveniently sweeps war crimes and any investigation under the rug.

But that's your schtick.

 

I prefer to be proactive
“It always seems impossible until it's done.” ― Nelson Mandela

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

[Sujo]

27 minutes ago, dexterm said:

The old "it is what it is"; it's all in the too hard basket routine, which conveniently sweeps war crimes and any investigation under the rug.

But that's your schtick.

 

I prefer to be proactive
“It always seems impossible until it's done.” ― Nelson Mandela

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

Agree. I cannot see the post you quote but you are correct.

 

Posts on solutions. Instead of prevarications.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

If you ever bothered to quote what I wrote or even read it more slowly. My post...
"It gives the Palestinian state legitimacy, as a recognised party to the ICC, which irks Israel bearing in mind it is not that long ago that it was illegal and a shootable offense even to wave the Palestinian flag."

 

i.e the very fact that the ICC launched the investigation having satisfied itself that Palestine has the necessary attributes of a state is progress in itself ...nothing to do with any adverse findings re the IDF or Hamas, being better for one side or the other.

 

I have quoted the relevant part of your post twice. And I think you're still dodging the point made and question asked.

 

In your post, you comment about Israel's image being adversely effected by the investigations' results. I am curious as to why the same expectation is not expressed with regard to the Palestinian side, given that alleged war crimes committed by them are investigated as well.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

The old "it is what it is"; it's all in the too hard basket routine, which conveniently sweeps war crimes and any investigation under the rug.

But that's your schtick.

 

I prefer to be proactive
“It always seems impossible until it's done.” ― Nelson Mandela

Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

 

That's one cliché heavy post. Not a whole lot of substance, but to repeat myself - it is what is it.

Being proactive implies actually doing something to promote things. Don't know that rants qualify.

 

Ignoring reality in favor of fantasies is a choice.

On the other hand, there is no contradiction in addressing reality, while acknowledging it could be better.

 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Sujo said:

Agree. I cannot see the post you quote but you are correct.

 

Posts on solutions. Instead of prevarications.

 

Because posts on here matter and can 'solve' issues of magnitude in the real world ? Seems like another "requirement" is for such 'solutions' to be out of touch with reality. Also, apart from another poster's comment (@Chomper Higgot), there aren't really any posts on this topic which would qualify as 'solutions' to anything.

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by Morch

[Morch]

Here's another angle, maybe highlighting some issues with the petition and investigation.

 

Israel already said it will not cooperate with the ICC investigation, and I would guess that will apply too, if and when witnesses will be called or warrants for arrest issued. No surprises there. It should be noted that Israel is not a member of the ICC community, and does not recognize it's authority.

 

Now the other side of the fence is where things get complicated. The Palestinians have long been politically (and geographically) divided - the PA (effectively controlled by Fatah) rules the Palestinian areas in the West Bank, while the Hamas is the de-facto ruler of the Gaza Strip.

 

The petition to the ICC was initiated by the PA, but it is actions by Hamas which will be investigated for alleged war crimes. Hamas is unlikely to cooperate with the the investigation, or with measures taken against personnel charged with committing war crimes. Given that the PA does not hold any effective authority over the Hamas, and no effective means to coerce compliance, the PA and the ICC may find themselves in the odd position with the initiating party unable/unwilling to comply with the legal action it called for. I have no idea if there's relevant precedent or credible legal views on this matter.

 

To make things even more complicated, the Palestinian recently launched a new bid to hold general elections (something that's been put off for over a decade). If all goes as planned (no placing chips on that), then the Fatah and the Hamas may run a a joint "unity" party list (main purpose being blocking of potential competition from "independents"). If so, then the next Palestinian government would include Hamas representatives, and this while potentially not complying with ICC subpoenas etc.

[Chomper Higgot]

5 hours ago, Morch said:

 

But then its more of an archive, less of a court. Also, with regard to future investigations, there might be calls for the ICC to 'record' war crimes rather than investigate them. Not saying it's not a worthy cause, but not the reason for the ICC's existence.

 

Claiming that the ICC has moral authority does not make it so - at least not with that many powerful countries representing a fair chunk of the World's population casting doubt on the proposition.

 

And to echo what you've said earlier - sides will bitterly complain anyway, even if it's "just" a record.

I don’t disagree, but here’s my ‘divergence’ on the above:

 

The ICC can only fulfill the duties of a court where it has authority over those before it, the ICC has no authority over either party (or any other parties) in this conflict.

 

The ICC has therefore set on a course for a hiding for nothing - at stake is the ICC’s moral authority.

 

To give a simplistic analogy, we frequently read complaints here on TVF that a national justice system (pick one at random) does not deliver justice. The root of this complaint is invariably the complainants idea of what is a just outcome but also a recognition that the ‘miscreant’ might be beyond the reach of the courts. The inevitable outcome is to blame the courts.

 

This is precisely the mess the ICC is stepping into.

 

The ICC has no authority over either side of this conflict, will produce findings that are attacked by both sides and will not deliver justice  which is the primary purpose of courts.

 

The investigation is a fail before it starts, worse still it will provide both camps with propaganda.

 

I believe the ICC would be far better to stand witness to war crimes on both sides and hold these up to the international community to act.

 

The priority should be to bring the parties to a peaceful settlement, a ‘blame game’ is not going o help that happen.

 

[edit]

 

Given the ICC’s lack of authority over both sides it is blatantly obvious the ICC is acting beyond its authority.

 

Establish a non judicial commission to record war crimes and place these findings before the international community.

 

 

Edited March 4, 2021 by Chomper Higgot

[Morch]

59 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I don’t disagree, but here’s my ‘divergence’ on the above:

 

The ICC can only fulfill the duties of a court where it has authority over those before it, the ICC has no authority over either party (or any other parties) in this conflict.

 

The ICC has therefore set on a course for a hiding for nothing - at stake is the ICC’s moral authority.

 

To give a simplistic analogy, we frequently read complaints here on TVF that a national justice system (pick one at random) does not deliver justice. The root of this complaint is invariably the complainants idea of what is a just outcome but also a recognition that the ‘miscreant’ might be beyond the reach of the courts. The inevitable outcome is to blame the courts.

 

This is precisely the mess the ICC is stepping into.

 

The ICC has no authority over either side of this conflict, will produce findings that are attacked by both sides and will not deliver justice  which is the primary purpose of courts.

 

The investigation is a fail before it starts, worse still it will provide both camps with propaganda.

 

I believe the ICC would be far better to stand witness to war crimes on both sides and hold these up to the international community to act.

 

The priority should be to bring the parties to a peaceful settlement, a ‘blame game’ is not going o help that happen.

 

[edit]

 

Given the ICC’s lack of authority over both sides it is blatantly obvious the ICC is acting beyond its authority.

 

Establish a non judicial commission to record war crimes and place these findings before the international community.

 

 

 

The last line of your post outlines an interesting idea.

 

I have my doubts as to such an archive not turning into a place where testimonies go to die, or alternatively, that it will simply become yet another list of mutual woes inflicted by sides on each other - to be pulled out whenever "proof" of the opponents evil nature is needed. But as for taking the ICC of the hook such an investigation represents, maybe yes.

 

To date, ICC investigations usually dealt with third-world countries, deposed dictators, and such. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is more than a few notches up, in terms of political pressures, legal and compliance issues (from parties involved and others). Botch this one, and the message is that the ICC isn't really all that it's supposed to (ideally) be. Quite a lot at stake.

 

This may relate to one of my previous posts, discussing the current prosecutor making a big policy decision, and leaving it up to her predecessor to deal with.