newYou can now listen to Fox News articles.
This week in Theater of the Absurd, the state of Israel will appear before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague on Thursday and Friday. Israel will respond militarily to the Oct. 7 terrorist attack by Hamas and will join in to defend itself against South Africa’s accusations that it is committing genocide against Gaza residents.
The 84-page filing is absurd on its face.under Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes of Genocide; Genocide is a crime that requires specific and deliberate acts committed with the intention of destroying, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group itself.
By all accounts, including South Africa, Israel has the undeniable military capability to completely destroy the entire Gaza Strip in minutes if it wanted to. Remarkably, Israel did not do so and instead took extreme measures to protect civilians in Gaza. The complete lack of genocide and genocidal intent is evident in the actions and intentions of Hamas, a group that is incapable of destroying Israel but has repeatedly publicly vowed to do so and has attempted to commit genocide. Let’s compare.
Biden faces fierce backlash after saying he is ‘quietly working’ to get Israel out of Gaza
This application is grossly flawed both in fact and in law. Of the 29 pages that South Africa devotes to describing “the acts of genocide committed against the Palestinian people,” Hamas is mentioned only in two sentences, in passing, about the moratorium that Hamas later broke. is.
Both the Geneva Convention and the Hague Convention contain instructions for conducting sieges in accordance with international law, and Israel adheres to their rules.
The entire context of Israel’s military response is completely and indefensibly ignored. The application states that Israel’s actions may be lawful based on principles such as military necessity, proportionality, armed protection, and deterrence in response to terrorist organizations bent on killing entire populations. Gender is not considered anywhere. This omission completely undermines the core of the South African case. There is no evidence of genocidal behavior or intent, as the act in question is arguably even legal.
In fact, none of the actions described in these 29 pages are entirely consistent with international humanitarian law, except for South Africa’s refusal to apply it properly, or even to mention it. I am. Yes, blockades and sieges can be war crimes, but not in this case. Both the Geneva Convention and the Hague Convention contain instructions for conducting sieges in accordance with international law, and Israel adheres to their rules.
Israeli-American rapper Kosher Dills fearlessly embraces tradition and skewers anti-Semitism in viral video
Yes, Israel is killing doctors and fighting in hospitals. But those doctors are also clearly terrorist commanders, and these hospitals are clearly commanding bases, legitimate military targets under international law.
Yes, Israel has killed many people in Gaza, but South Africa makes no distinction between terrorists and civilians and cannot cite a single instance of Israel intentionally targeting civilians.
It is true that innocent Palestinians suffer as a result of military operations against Hamas, and every civilian death is nothing short of a tragedy. But that doesn’t mean the deaths are illegal, and certainly not genocide.
As the experts have already pointed out, according to the ICJ’s own case law on genocidal intent, “a pattern of conduct must be such that, in order to be accepted as evidence of its existence, it can only demonstrate the existence of such an intent.” (Bosnia v. Serbia (2007)).
Genocidal intent must be “the only inference that can reasonably be drawn from the act in question” (Croatia v. Serbia (2015)), and the evidentiary standard required for that inference must be “absolutely conclusive.” There is.
To even claim that the only inference is genocide would require doing exactly what South Africa actually did. It just blindly pretends that Hamas isn’t there, still firing rockets indiscriminately at innocent Israeli civilians and brutally using its own people as essential human shields. But despite Israel’s repeated claims that the war will stop once it surrenders, Hamas is there, taking hostages and committing war crimes every day.
No matter what anyone thinks about Israel’s military response, no reasonable person would conclude that the only possible inference here is that Israel intends to commit genocide. .
Biden administration to hold ‘morale-boosting’ party for staff amid renewed domestic backlash against Israel: Report
South Africa does not accept in any way positive, despite all evidence, selected, out-of-context and sometimes blunt and imaginary statements allegedly made by Israeli politicians and pundits. It weakly attempts to avoid the lack of intent by grouping together various statements that claim that it is. vice versa. This section continues to ignore the existence of Hamas and boldly claims that quotes about annihilating terrorists are actually about innocent civilians.
For example, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s reference to the Biblical commandment to exterminate the Amalekites has been cited as a prima facie case of genocidal intent. Unless, of course, you’re ignoring the previous sentence in which Netanyahu specifically said he was referring to “the destruction of Hamas.”
There were also several instances in South Africa where people used less than prudent language to retaliate against brutal enemies who attacked them and their families, some of which clearly should never have been said. . But they say that even after the non-decision makers apologized and explained that they were only speaking figuratively, the Israeli leadership still criticized them, clarified Israel’s actual mission and position, and There is no mention of the government distancing itself from negative opinions and, in some cases, suspending officials. for making such a statement.
South Africa’s application also echoes Israel’s official position, which the prime minister, president, defense minister, and IDF spokesperson have repeatedly ad nauseam: “This war is against Hamas, not the people of Gaza.” never mentioned.
Again, under United Nations jurisprudence, incitement to genocide cannot be “merely vague or indirect suggestions,” but can be made by people who fabricate sentences, ignore facts, or have no basis. By selectively including comments (which have been widely condemned), Israeli authorities cannot pretend to be calling for genocide. It is nothing short of ridiculous for an authority figure with no decision-making authority to do something that clearly goes against official policy and bears no resemblance to what is actually happening on the ground.
For more FOX News opinions, click here
For comparison, the United States did not commit genocide in destroying ISIS, even though President Trump once suggested that nuclear bombs should be used against ISIS strongholds.
And even though General Mattis once recalled, “It’s so much fun to shoot them…men who spend five years slapping a woman for not wearing a veil,” we are still in Iraq and Afghanistan. did not commit genocide. Just because the Air Force Chief of Staff once said he thought America should “bomb us back to the Stone Age,” doesn’t mean America committed genocide in Vietnam.
Also, when the Allies bombed German cities in World War II, they did not commit genocide against the Germans—Winston Churchill once said, “If tonight the people of London “If asked to vote on whether there should be a treaty to stop the bombing of In the cities, the overwhelming majority will shout, “No, we will give the Germans the same measures they have shown us, and more.”
These statements did not turn the war into genocide. This is because even a clumsy comment made on the spur of the moment by someone in power does not change the fact that it is clearly not the actual position of the parties involved.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
I hope the ICJ sees this cynical ploy for what it is. It is extremely unfair for Jews to protect themselves, and is another example of anti-Semitic victim-blaming by an invader who believes that fact, law, and Jewish life are cursed.
In fact, this is the only inference a rational person would make.
Click here to read more about Mark Goldfeder