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

[Sujo]

19 minutes ago, dexterm said:

The ICC judges have examined the PA's credentials for statehood and given the go ahead for an investigation. So your technical objections would appear to be somewhat superfluous. Rather like attempting to shut the stable door after the horse has bolted. 

True again, palestine is a member of the icc so they are entitled to investigate.

 

Some people just dont like that they are doing their job.

[Morch]

17 minutes ago, dexterm said:

The ICC judges have examined the PA's credentials for statehood and given the go ahead for an investigation. So your technical objections would appear to be somewhat superfluous. Rather like attempting to shut the stable door after the horse has bolted. 

 

The ICC decision was not unanimous (as far as I recall), and there were ICC member countries disagreeing with it as well. So not 'my' objections, but rather more than that. I doubt that the next prosecutor is thrilled with this too.

 

The way these things go is like this - for diplomatic and international purposes, it is much easier to treat the PA as the official Palestinian representative. The fact that everyone knows the score is simply swept under the carpet. Reasons for that range from economic (acknowledging the issue would stop much of the international funds Palestinians are receiving), diplomatic (if not Abbas and the PA, who to talk to? Hamas can't be it as it's designated a terrorist group by many relevant countries), and practical (Israel finds it easier to deal with the PA on security issues, for example), among others. Hamas, by the way, sometimes says it recognizes the PA as the international representative, and sometimes not, as it suits.

 

What happened when this motion was dreamed up was that PA officials and politicians were pushing for it as a international opinion point scorer. PA legal advisors warned that Hamas actions would be investigated as well. The PA pressured Hamas to issue a statement it supports the move, recognizes the PA's authority in this manner and so on. Armed with that the motion was lodged, and that's part of the reason it was accepted. The fact that Hamas had no intentions of submitting to the PA, or cooperating with such investigations was just conveniently ignored. This was discussed, in length, on relevant topics back in the day.

[Morch]

12 minutes ago, Sujo said:

True again, palestine is a member of the icc so they are entitled to investigate.

 

Some people just dont like that they are doing their job.

 

Palestine, as represented by the PA, is basically asking the ICC to initiate an investigation in an area not under its control, and into actions perpetrated by Palestinians. It's straightforward only if one is bent on a political agenda but not in any realistic sense.

[dexterm]

12 hours ago, Morch said:

 

The ICC decision was not unanimous (as far as I recall), and there were ICC member countries disagreeing with it as well. So not 'my' objections, but rather more than that. I doubt that the next prosecutor is thrilled with this too.

 

The way these things go is like this - for diplomatic and international purposes, it is much easier to treat the PA as the official Palestinian representative. The fact that everyone knows the score is simply swept under the carpet. Reasons for that range from economic (acknowledging the issue would stop much of the international funds Palestinians are receiving), diplomatic (if not Abbas and the PA, who to talk to? Hamas can't be it as it's designated a terrorist group by many relevant countries), and practical (Israel finds it easier to deal with the PA on security issues, for example), among others. Hamas, by the way, sometimes says it recognizes the PA as the international representative, and sometimes not, as it suits.

 

What happened when this motion was dreamed up was that PA officials and politicians were pushing for it as a international opinion point scorer. PA legal advisors warned that Hamas actions would be investigated as well. The PA pressured Hamas to issue a statement it supports the move, recognizes the PA's authority in this manner and so on. Armed with that the motion was lodged, and that's part of the reason it was accepted. The fact that Hamas had no intentions of submitting to the PA, or cooperating with such investigations was just conveniently ignored. This was discussed, in length, on relevant topics back in the day.

>>The fact that Hamas had no intentions of submitting to the PA, or cooperating with such investigations was just conveniently ignored. 

 

On the contrary, Hamas welcomes the investigation. So it looks like Israel is the only one that objects to the ICC, because of course they have much to hide. Will Israel or the Egyptian dictator Sisi even allow ICC investigators entry into the West Bank or Gaza. Will supposedly democratic Israel prevent its own citizens from giving evidence? There's always Zoom and Skype I suppose.

 

Hamas also welcomed ICC decision to investigate into Israeli "war crimes" on and defended its actions as "legitimate resistance" on Wednesday.
https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/palestinian-authority-hamas-welcome-icc-decision-to-investigate-israel-660837

 

 

[Sujo]

2 hours ago, dexterm said:

>>The fact that Hamas had no intentions of submitting to the PA, or cooperating with such investigations was just conveniently ignored. 

 

On the contrary, Hamas welcomes the investigation. So it looks like Israel is the only one that objects to the ICC, because of course they have much to hide. Will Israel or the Egyptian dictator Sisi even allow ICC investigators entry into the West Bank or Gaza. Will supposedly democratic Israel prevent its own citizens from giving evidence? There's always Zoom and Skype I suppose.

 

Hamas also welcomed ICC decision to investigate into Israeli "war crimes" on and defended its actions as "legitimate resistance" on Wednesday.
https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/palestinian-authority-hamas-welcome-icc-decision-to-investigate-israel-660837

 

 

Exactly correct yet again.

[Morch]

20 hours ago, Solinvictus said:

Review who is supporting Israel within this thread. To be quite frank, anyone who does not support the Palestinians are sorry people IMO.

 

How can one support an aggressive and oppressive occupier?

 

Sounds pretty much like Netanyahu's views, in reverse.

 

The Palestinians are no saints, nor 100% righteous. It is perfectly legit to criticize them, or not fully identify with each and every element of their struggle.

 

Maybe let the ICC know how you feel, given that they assert the Palestinians might have committed war crimes as well. How dare they, eh?

[Morch]

7 hours ago, dexterm said:

>>The fact that Hamas had no intentions of submitting to the PA, or cooperating with such investigations was just conveniently ignored. 

 

On the contrary, Hamas welcomes the investigation. So it looks like Israel is the only one that objects to the ICC, because of course they have much to hide. Will Israel or the Egyptian dictator Sisi even allow ICC investigators entry into the West Bank or Gaza. Will supposedly democratic Israel prevent its own citizens from giving evidence? There's always Zoom and Skype I suppose.

 

Hamas also welcomed ICC decision to investigate into Israeli "war crimes" on and defended its actions as "legitimate resistance" on Wednesday.
https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/palestinian-authority-hamas-welcome-icc-decision-to-investigate-israel-660837

 

 

 

Do you read the links you provide? The Hamas is not into the ICC investigating its actions, but those of Israel. That's pretty much was the point made earlier. Hamas 'agreeing' to the PA's move featured as well. Which part was unclear?

 

How will Israel prevent its citizens from giving evidence? There were representatives of various Israeli NGO's opposing the occupation speaking in the UN and other international venues for years. There's no reason to believe this would be any different. Just another red herring.

[stevenl]

39 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Do you read the links you provide? The Hamas is not into the ICC investigating its actions, but those of Israel. That's pretty much was the point made earlier. Hamas 'agreeing' to the PA's move featured as well. Which part was unclear?

 

How will Israel prevent its citizens from giving evidence? There were representatives of various Israeli NGO's opposing the occupation speaking in the UN and other international venues for years. There's no reason to believe this would be any different. Just another red herring.

Hamas's onesided view of the investigation doesn't mean it is not welcoming it, as you assert.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

Hamas's onesided view of the investigation doesn't mean it is not welcoming it, as you assert.

 

Nitpicking. In anything but a contrived sense, Hamas does not welcome an investigation into the war crimes allegedly committed by it. In the same way, it could be claimed that Israel would welcome an investigation solely focused on Hamas. Doubt you would see this as a legitimate, or reasonable, position.

[Sujo]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

Hamas's onesided view of the investigation doesn't mean it is not welcoming it, as you assert.

I cannot see the post you respond to but you are correct. One can welcome an investigation whilst having its own view on how they think it should be done. I would think that is quite easy to comprehend.

[stevenl]

24 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Nitpicking. In anything but a contrived sense, Hamas does not welcome an investigation into the war crimes allegedly committed by it. In the same way, it could be claimed that Israel would welcome an investigation solely focused on Hamas. Doubt you would see this as a legitimate, or reasonable, position.

Nonsense. Hamas is stating it is welcoming the investigation, while claiming they have not committed any warcrimes. Israel is opposing the investigation, and are denying to have committed warcrimes.

I don't support Hamas' position, but from their perspective it is a logical one. Also Israel's position is a logical one from their perspective.

Edited March 6, 2021 by stevenl

[Morch]

8 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Nonsense. Hamas is stating it is welcoming the investigation, while claiming they have not committed any warcrimes. Israel is opposing the investigation, and are denying to have committed warcrimes.

I don't support Hamas' position, but from their perspective it is a logical one. Also Israel's position is a logical one from their perspective.

 

Taking Hamas words at face value is a choice. In any real sense, Hamas does not welcome an investigation into its own actions. Since many comments cheer-leading the investigations make much of it being directed at both sides, the petty obfuscations in the posts above is sad.

 

Hamas position relies on the knowledge that it can block the investigation at will, or limit the scope of what's investigated to Israel's actions (guess they won't have issues providing what evidence they got on this). It also relies on the knowledge that there will be no real consequences for Hamas personnel, even if they are charged with committing war crimes. At most, some travel restrictions, with a lot of them being irrelevant anyway.

 

Do you actually believe that the Hamas will open the inner workings of it's military wing to investigation? Or that personnel charged by the ICC investigation would be arrested by Hamas? By the PA?

[Solinvictus]

9 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Sounds pretty much like Netanyahu's views, in reverse.

 

The Palestinians are no saints, nor 100% righteous. It is perfectly legit to criticize them, or not fully identify with each and every element of their struggle.

 

Maybe let the ICC know how you feel, given that they assert the Palestinians might have committed war crimes as well. How dare they, eh?

I will disagree, about being in reverse of his views, given the history and context of the situation. Well, the thing is one group of people are 'occupiers' and the other group are original land owners & those that resist the occupation. Who encroaches on land and continues to do so?

 

You mentioned 'might.' So at this time, has PA been actually been charged with war crimes? More than the nuclear armed country, Israel? I should read up on it a bit more.

[Morch]

3 hours ago, Solinvictus said:

I will disagree, about being in reverse of his views, given the history and context of the situation. Well, the thing is one group of people are 'occupiers' and the other group are original land owners & those that resist the occupation. Who encroaches on land and continues to do so?

 

You mentioned 'might.' So at this time, has PA been actually been charged with war crimes? More than the nuclear armed country, Israel? I should read up on it a bit more.

 

You may disagree all you like. In essence, there is no difference - both points of view (Netanyahu and yours) reject criticism of one side, and label anyone not fully seeing things one way. Both rely on loaded interpretations and claims as "support".

 

The Hamas is clearly named as one of the parties who will be investigated. Unless you're trying to claim they are not Palestinians, not exactly sure what your point was. Or if you actually had one. Nuclear arms have nothing to do with this, just another red herring of a deflection.

[stevenl]

6 hours ago, Morch said:

 

You may disagree all you like. In essence, there is no difference - both points of view (Netanyahu and yours) reject criticism of one side, and label anyone not fully seeing things one way. Both rely on loaded interpretations and claims as "support".

 

The Hamas is clearly named as one of the parties who will be investigated. Unless you're trying to claim they are not Palestinians, not exactly sure what your point was. Or if you actually had one. Nuclear arms have nothing to do with this, just another red herring of a deflection.

Main difference is Hamas is welcoming the investigation, Israel is not. Now you can try and obfuscate that fact as you are doing, but the fact remains. Now most likely both parties involved will do whatever they can to limit the scope and whiten themselves and blacken the other, but still the fact remains.

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

Main difference is Hamas is welcoming the investigation, Israel is not. Now you can try and obfuscate that fact as you are doing, but the fact remains. Now most likely both parties involved will do whatever they can to limit the scope and whiten themselves and blacken the other, but still the fact remains.

I dont get the argument here. Its quite a simple fact. Hamas says they welcome it, Israel doesnt.

 

What is so difficult to understand about that.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, stevenl said:

Main difference is Hamas is welcoming the investigation, Israel is not. Now you can try and obfuscate that fact as you are doing, but the fact remains. Now most likely both parties involved will do whatever they can to limit the scope and whiten themselves and blacken the other, but still the fact remains.

 

You're just repeating the same nonsense on loop. If the 'welcome' doesn't really mean 'welcome', then it's hollow. If what you care about is the semantics, and the word "welcome" is enough for you, that's up to you - but it's not an informed point of view, more like wilful ignorance.

 

And the post you quotes was referring to something else - a poster who alleges anyone not supporting the Palestinians is this or that. Not different than Netanyahu's rejection of any criticism, and labeling dissenters as being antisemitic. The same poster also tossed in some pointless comment about the PA not being charged with anything, apparently not fully on-board with the concept that Hamas are just as Palestinian.

 

Maybe you meant to quote a different post.