The ICC's decision to issue an arrest warrant against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has certainly attracted a lot of attention. It's also put a lot of countries in a challenging position. But do you think that he will ever be brought to trial? Is this the end of any visits to Europe (or almost anywhere else)? Or do you think this is little more than a dangerous political stunt that calls international justice into question? Let me know your thoughts and comments below.
I am not a fan of Netenyahu, but i have serious doubts about the legitimacy of these accusations against him. The problem is that the Palestinian cause - as an extension of the Arab nationalist cause before it - has been largely fought as a propaganda war consisting of strategic disinformation (originally with the aid of the Soviets) and "propaganda of the deed" since the First Intifada. The target of that propaganda war was ALWAYS the international community at large, but especially communist bloc leaders and diplomats, the Arab world in general and the broad left wing in the West. One of the tactics has been to issue frequent accusations of Israeli misdeeds - which later turn out to have been false or, at minimum, vastly exaggerated. Personally, i don't trust people who have been caught lying and decieving many times - no matter how popular the the lies have become. Case in point: one of the propaganda lines that spread through the Arab world during the recent war in Gaza was a new version of the old antisemitic "blood libel" myth. So ... To answer your question... I don't think he will come to trial because IF history is a good indicator, the charges will have to be deopped. I'm prepared to be wrong, of course. But the 1500 year history of antisemitism leads me to be highly skeptical.
I appreciate the historical overview of war crimes trials by the way. I don't think most people know this history at all. Nuremberg is famous. The rest ... Less so. I have students who don't even know about the Yugoslav wars!
I tend to think France is right that Netanyahu's head of state immunity does not allow France to arrest him (Israel not being a signatory to the Rome Statute). Of course the same should then apply to Putin. I am aware that the ICC Appeals Chamber disagrees with me, but their reasoning seems unconvincing to me. Someone should put this issue before the ICJ.
@@Robespierre-lI sir, the Jewish people found much more stability in those 1500 years in Muslim countries than anywhere in Christendom. The problem began with the Nakba, fundamentally. This is closer to he honest truth you value.
What the Ukraine and Gaza wars have shown unfortunately is that international law is dead and we have returned to the era of might is right The precedent was set already by Bush in Iraq. What we are seeing is the normalization of this trend
@@JamesKerLindsaythe precedent was set by the West, most specifically by the US, Anglo Saxon culture ie: the British Empire and now the Empire of Lies and Hypocrisy, are the pinnacle of extreme propaganda, piracy, Hypocrisy, double standards....
If France doesn't have to arrest Netanyahu, then South Africa doesn't have to arrest Putin, I think. Of course I don't think France sees it that way based on other statements, I think this highlights the danger that international law becomes a hegemonic "rule by law" rather than a mutually protective "rule of law."
Well, If France doesn't have to arrest Netanyahu it doesn't have to arrest Mohammed El-Deif either who was the third name at that arrest warrant that included Netanyahu and Yaouv Galant, yet if Mohammed El-Deif visited France they'd arrest him. Real hypocrisy but What to expect from a then hard colonizer and a now remote-colonizer!
Putin is humanist compared to Bibi war crimes; he didn’t siege food-water-medicine, blocked aid trucks and vetoing the 2-state, Palestinian sovereignty & ceasefire since 1970s
The reasoning is that the ICC doesn't have jurisdiction (because Israel is not a signatory, and the Palestine is not a state). In such cases the ICC should only be activated if there is no independent local Judiciary, but Israel has independent local judiciary that had investigated high ranking official in the past.
@@eyalnir1327Palestine is a state for the purposes of the ICC. The mere fact that some members of the UN, including the US which has blocked it’s full membership in defiance of the General Assembly, do not recognise Palestine as a state doesn’t preclude the ICC from accepting it as a signatory, nor does it preclude the ICC from investigating and prosecuting war crimes committed in the State of Palestine by foreign actors.
What nonsense. The Arabs have been trying to destroy Israel and murder all the Jews in it since 1948. International law hasn’t done a darn thing to call them to account for that. The western civilized nations have a duty not only to ignore warrants from that kangaroo court, but also to sanction it and eliminate it
@@Charlzton Let's see: They are obligated to obey the ICC and extradite if needed. The Palestinian authority could not extradite Hamas members in Gaza even if they wanted to. Now that's ridiculous to say that they are a state (and Gaza is part of that state) for the purposes of the ICC when they can't be expected to comply with the ICC.
It’s a shame for US and some members of EU even to discuss this. Countries on Balkan were forced for years to cooperate with ICC by those same countries. Does anyone think we liked it? Does anyone think we thought it was fair? That ICC only prosecuted our kin? But we sent our presidents and generals. Who was innocent, they returned back, but war criminals remained in prison to pay their crimes.
This was never the case even back then(China,Russia,North Korea and dozens of more countries)this is political kangaroo court that like all international organisations has no sovereignty outside those who choose to apply its laws upon themselves,you can twist or turn it however you like it is what it is…
@@markomilojevic8792 Yes there hypocrisy in applying the law(it is much worse with those dictatorial mafia regimes),It is obvious that Europeans would want you to accept the authority of European institutions,the fact that you accepted the authority(like all international treaties)is why it is binding.
France has a serious argument against the legality of France arresting Netanyahu (and Putin, for that matter). Netanyahu and Putin are heads of state of countries which are not bound by the Rome Statute and therefore have not waived head of state immunity. The ICC Appeals Chamber has ruled that states which are party to the Rome Statute are anyway under an obligation to arrest heads of state of such countries because the ICC is an "international court", but this argument lacks any logic. Why should a group of two or more countries be able to circumvent head of state immunity by setting up a common "international" court? The Appeals Chamber refers to Article 7 of the Nuremberg Charter, but that merely states that being a head of state does not result in impunity for crimes against humanity. It does not mean that an incumbent head of state can be arrested by other states.
@@markomilojevic8792 It was the Security Council that set up the ICTY in Resolution 827. China and Russia are permanent members of the Security Council, and they could have vetoed the ICTY. At the time, all 15 members of the Security Council voted for Resolution 827.
Thanks so much, Henry. I really appreciate the comment. :-) I like to think that the historical background adds some extra context that isn’t found elsewhere.
This is mud that will stick to Netanyahu & the Israeli state despite their bravado. It is a humiliation. He is the first so-called Western leader to be tarred as such. I think signatory countries who are ambivalent will ask him not to visit so both sides will save face.
It doesn't matter what we say. Innocent people people are dying and children there's only one life and if it's gone isn't a bit coming back we shouldn't condone the war
26 днів тому+2
I dont know why this is even debated palestine is not a country
France’s decision not to enforce the arrest warrant because Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statute is a perfect example of the French double standards. When Milošević was indicted by the UN established ICTY, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, whose head of state he de facto was at the time, was not a member of the UN. Yet, he was arrested and extradited to The Hague. France should have objected to that arrest based on the logic they now use to avoid confrontation with Israel and the US. There are always “special cases’ in the international politics which will inevitably lead to unwanted consequences just like the recognition of Kosovo’s declaration of independence by the West, France included, has led to Putin’s use of that precedent for justification of the land grab in Ukraine and Georgia with likely more cases to come in the near future. The French decision today will erode any future arguments they might use when it comes to Putin’s arrest.
I also heard rumors about netenyahu conditioning lebanon ceasfite on french refusal to arrest him (though nothing confirmed) in this case, it might make more sense, potentially saving hundreds of lives can take precedence over a single arrest.
I think regarding whether to issue the arrest warrant was the right thing to do for the court, I think there is no question. After the Putin warrant, most of the world had serious concerns about the court's neutrality and whether the court would be primarily a cudgel of Western hegemony. This decision affirms the court's geopolitical independence to some extent (though the delay in issuing the warrant still leaves that concern intact). This decision should have been made a long time ago in order to regain legitimacy by the court. This being said, it now risks creating a situation where warrants are widely ignored by parties to the Rome Statute but at the moment this looks like it is the doing of France and similar countries rather than the court itself.
I'm more concerned with the ability of the court to gather evidence that is not tained by propaganda and disinformation campaigns before issuing warrants. There are very sizable logistical challenges to the gathering of independently verified evidence - certainly during an ongoing war. However, issuing warrants without adequate neutral and objectively verified evidence of charges means that the authority of the court is ALREADY jeapordized. This is a fairly large problem for those of us who think that international law is our best hope to do something about war crimes and other atrocities.
@@Robespierre-lI That's just as true in the Russo-Ukrainian war as it is in Israel isn't it? In fact probably more so because you don't have as much UN involvement in Ukraine. And you have others in Gaza too like Doctors without Borders who have a good reputation and can provide evidence.
@@WorldTravelerCooking I was not actually implying any comparison between the two situations - Ukraine and Gaza - but I understand how you might have perceived it that way. Indeed, while I feel fairly certain about Putin's geopolitical ambitions and how Ukraine fits into that, I am keeping an open mind about Ukraine's reports about the mass graves from the early days of the war. After all, Kiev is forced to use its own investigators to compile that evidence and it would be challenging for any people to remain entirely objective in the midst of a military invasion by a neighboring power. As for the specific accusations the ICC has charged Putin with, I have not yet examined what evidence they have of child abductions in any detail and cannot comment. As for the accused war crimes in Gaza, there are various reasons to maintain reasonable skepticism. Due to the Hamas government before this war and now the wartime conditions themselves, international organizations operating within Gaza often depend on Gazans themselves to (1) issue reports to circulate to media outlets and (2) operate aid programs. That has meant that information out of Gaza has often been tained by the propaganda wing of Hamas and their allies outside Gaza (in Qatar, Lebanon and Tehran especially.) The independence of the international aid programs operated by the UN was also seriously called into question when it emerged that their operations in Gaza had been infiltrated by people tied to Hamas, leading to the building of one of the tunnels under the UN headquarters in Gaza. Finally, there is that lingering problem that the aid trucks had been used to smuggle in arms and were diverted frequently to supply Hamas instead of providing relief aid for MANY years; but when the IDF tried to protect the aid trucks within Gaza, they were mobbed and attacked. For those reasons, I would encourage caution for the time being. The truth will emerge eventually. Personally, having studied the history of the Palestinian cause in some detail, I have to point out that their one strength has been their use of strategic disinformation. It might seem like an unkind thing to say, but it is simply the strategy one takes when you do not have any hope of military success.
@@WorldTravelerCookingthey can provide *Testimonies*, not evidence. Vibes and ant’s eye view of events is hardly considered evidence. And it’s a plain fact that even glaring evidence which exonerate Netanyahu from those trumped up charges have been grossly ignored by the icc.. like that bs forced starvation allegation when it is the easiest evidence to gather that over one million ton of humanitarian aid has been documented to have been sent into Gaza and that hamxs has been filmed stealing 70% of it… for example. Just Sounds to me like instead of the icc being a western political cudgel you’d rather it being an Islamist and global south and anti western cudgel. That’s all.
@@Robespierre-lI So the thing is that I think the argument in defense of these relocations by Russia in the war is that you have to evacuate children somewhere and the only practical way to remove them from the conflict zone is to move them back to one's own country pending relocation back to their country and reunification with family members. I think the ICC's view is that this is a matter for trial, but I don't think it is a crazy defense. Israel is a very different situation. You have a lot of press over protests blocking aid and doing so with the blessings of the Minister of National Security. There are also impressive studies done of social media activity of some IDF units which suggest significant war crimes committed. Again, the question of the solidity of the evidence is a matter for trial but in Israel's case it comes from groups ranging from the UN to the Israeli Press and the US government. If I were to have to assess these, I would actually suggest that the case against Putin would be more likely to fail than the case against Netanyahu who is a legally vulnerable politician who is held hostage by the crazy 10% of Israeli politics. Though I think Ben Gvir, despite not being directly involved in the war, is a clearer war criminal than Gallant is and Gallant is more likely to be acquitted than Netanyahu is if there is a trial.
I would say that a year in prison for each hospital and or school that no longer exists is a fine measure. Sure a single year is not enough, but if I said 10 years, then it would be in the thousands or tens of thousands. And that is ridiculous. Just like that Turkish guy who got like a hundred thousand years in prison, 5 or so years for each victim he abused......... Yeah it was, the worst thing I have ever read about. Cosmetic surgery on 9 year olds to give them big B. -_- and big B. -----______------ It would be against the Geneve Convention to send Benjamin to be a victim of that freak. But I think it would be fine.
Professor, i appreciate your devotion to international law but what exactly is the point when each geopolitical bloc, including the "liberal-democratic" one operates according to the naked interest and Schmittian "friend-enemy" distinction rather than any respect for law, ethics or justice. Case in point the ongoing deluge of headchopping islamist terrorists upon Aleppo being welcomed by the West (including Israel) which had spent the last year raving about "islamist terrorists" from Hamas. This sort of cognitive dissonance is simply unsustainable and leads to psychosis (that is, if we assume the actors are honest rather than liars consciously breaking their own rules to pursue their goals).
Thanks. I agree. And that’s precisely why the more I consider the issues, the more I realise that adhering to international law is the most sensible and stable approach. When we create exceptions, even for the people we “like” we just open the door to exceptions for those we don’t. The world is in a mess precisely because of this willingness of the West to bend rules when it suited them, but expected others to fall into line. The question is whether it can be fixed now and order restored. Or has the rubicon been crossed?
When did Israel welcome these Jihadists? No government official expressed his support to these groups. At best we are happy both of our enemies are fighting each other, Sunni Jihadists vs Shia Jihadists.
@@JamesKerLindsay Appreciate the response. I question whether the rules in question were ever universal in the first place rather than an expedient moral cudgel to beat up any potential opposition to the American hegemony during the unipolar moment. Nowadays people of authority openly say the ICC was never intended for the West but for Yugoslavs and Africans. If that's the case, and given that we're firmly past that era, i don't think we should yearn for those past times. Either we build rules and institutions that are truly universal and objective or perhaps Schmitt was right and this is an inevitable feature of human politics.
@@JamesKerLindsay the rubicon has been crossed and it was by the moralising West, long time ago in Serbia/Kosovo if not earlier than that. There's nothing that justifies the violation of the sovereign territory of Serbia, I've read all your justifications for it and how Serbia should just accept it. The question I will ask you: Shouldn't Ukraine accepeted Eastern Ukraine and Crimea freedom, they see themselves as Russian, and they surely didn't accept the turn Ukraine took after the western backed anti Russian maidan coup or color revolution.
Blimey! It only kicked off yesterday! I will see how things pan out. The trouble is that there are another few topics I’d really like to cover at the moment. Too much news!
The reason why there is even a question about Netanyahu being held to account by the ICC is because our politicians here in the United States have been so thoroughly corrupted and bought out by AIPAC that it would be accurate to say the United States has surrendered its sovereignty to a bird dropping on the map. In the United States, we know we don’t really have freedom of action anymore, and that everything has to be cleared by Israel before we do anything. It is our national shame. To claim that this question goes any further than that is to lend it a legitimacy that simply doesn’t exist. This is purely a matter of corruption.
True. The legality of lobbying has essentially turned the US into a vassal state. It's compromising its own interests to serve another, half a planet away.
@@AnonymousAlcoholic772 it's amazing how your presidential debates are about protection of Israel and how you will send them more money rather then helping your average Americans.
Do you realize what you have just said amount to a anti-Jewish conspiracy theory? AIPAC isn't that strong. The US simply has a histoical commitment to protect Israel against enemies who have declared repeatedly a desire to eliminate it from the map. You can disagree with the foreign policy in more rational terms. Try again.
So busy this Saturday. I watched in bits. This is a very important topic that may not be able to be resolved while the nation state is the highest level of sovereignty. I need to rewatch from start to finish. Thank you for posting this.
For the signatories of the Rome Statue, it's legally binding and for a signatory country not to carry out the arrest warrant deems the court utterly useless. The excuse for Netanyahu is that as head of state, he's immune from prosecution but I've not heard any European signatory country argue the same diplomatic immunity for Putin. The Netanyahu case shows the hypocrisy of the court and in my opinion it is because of this that members of the Global South/Global Majority should leave the Rome Statute. Sure it was all great for Africans to be prosecuted in a European country and court house for war crimes but not for two Israelis.
Israel isn't a signatory of the Rome statute or a member of the ICC. Their argument is that the court doesn't have jurisdiction. I haven't seen anyone argue that the head of state is immune. You're just making that up.
@CedarHunt Russia isn't a signatory to the Rome Statute either but yet Pres. Putin's indictment isn't opposed by European states. France argues that Netanyahu has immunity as a head of state yet does not argue the same for Pres. Putin. I ain't making anything up and I believe the video covers my points
@@jesusaguilar4585Well, duh, Ukraine is a member of the court, and the war crimes that Russia is committing are occurring on Ukrainian soil. "Palestine" is not a country, and it doesn't have a defined territory to give the ICC jurisdiction over. They're two completely different situations.
@@jesusaguilar4585Also you are totally lying there. France is arguing that netanyahu has immunity because Israel isn't a member of the court and the ICC doesn't have jurisdiction. It's has nothing to do with your head of state fiction. “A state cannot be held to act in a way that is incompatible with its obligations in terms of international law with regard to immunities granted to states which are not party to the ICC. Such immunities apply to prime minister Netanyahu and other ministers in question, and must be taken into consideration should the ICC ask us to arrest them and hand them over.”
@@CedarHunt ICC accepted Palestine as a member. We can go back and forth over whether Palestine is a country regardless of the fact that it has Observer Status in the UN but nevertheless Palestine is a member of the ICC and war crimes committed against the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza; generally recognized as Palestine, are applicable for legal prosecution under the jurisdiction of the ICC. It's not difficult to understand. As for defined territory or borders, Israel has never defined its borders and refuses to do so. You do realize this. Right?
Can you make a video about the recent events in South Korea regarding Yoon Suk Yeol and the emergency martial law that he imposed? It marked the first time since 1980 that it was imposed in South Korea. I think it is a topic worth discussing.
Thanks so much. Great suggestion. On its way! What a bizarre situation. But there is a rather dark history behind all this. Definitely something I wanted to explore.
This is not how international law works. So you think that after 9/11 US had the right to block food water to people in Afganistan after they invaded? Block medicine and vital supplies for babies? You obviously dont understand international law.
The 7th October would never have happened if the European zoinest had to stay in Britain where they came from 😳 what is the European zoinest doing amongst the arabs Israel lives on stolen land now its Syria
I didn't really learn anything new from this, though I had hoped & expected to. Of course it was necessary for arrest warrant to be issued against Netanyahu although many will still consider it to have a strong western bias.
It's highly likely Netanyahu will never be arrested for war crimes as he will simply avoid countries that will via prior arrangement . I was surprised to hear Lammy of the UK say that if Netanyahu stepped on UK soil he wouldn't hesitate to instruct the police in issuing an arrest warrant . I think as a result of this and his popularity in Israel which has plummeted Netanyahu is more likely to step aside and retire from politics .
Apart from whether Netanyahu will ever be arrested, I think it is also interesting to consider how this may affect Israel's standing in World. How long can the West justify supporting Israel unconditionally? Is it time to think about sanctions instead?
Perhaps if the ICC is to have legitimacy, it may be worthwhile putting Netanyahu on trial. This is because the power of rationale and global democratic openness should be viewed as a fair way to deal with international crime. Both sides can at least provide evidence, and law could prevail above partisan politics. Remember, Netanyahu has been indicted in Israel (trial is currently stalled due to political immunity as PM). Other world leaders (Trump, Rouseff in Brazil) were also subject to impeachment in recent years, although no political impartiality seemed present.
Once accused, fleeing from a court of law is admitting guilt. That, or an insult saying the court is either illegitimate or powerless to pursue justice. The Rome Statute needs to punish signatories who deny to arrest the accused. The law must be above politics.
This is like having a foreign country trying to enforce law on your citizens. Plus UN has a few things to explain, such as terrorist hideouts right next to their base in Lebanon.
I think the ICC should consider its mandate when getting after a leader of the only country in the region scoring above 7.5 (out of 10) in the democracy index with a well-functioning justice system, which by the way was attacked first. Still over 100 civilian hostages are being held by the terrorists. It’s easy to sit in ur safe The Hague office lecturing law without having to deal with terror groups in a daily basis.
I think the big difference between here and Russia is that Palestine even if it's a recognized state in the UNGA it isn't really a state in facts on the ground at least in insofar as the Rome treaty . It has no clear single government and most of its territory have almost always occupied or had their sovereignty comprised by Israel. Another issue is that the PA signed the treaty but Hamas never did ,yet all the crimes Israel are accused of are happening in Hamas controlled regions. Thus there is a stronger sense of the ICC hosting its jurisdictions upon Israel. The need for a Palestinian state aside considering the facts on the grounds it does feel like the ICC is overreaching its jurisdiction.
Nice video and I liked the historical insight into the courts, especially on the Leipzig Trials on which I read more following your video. I think ICC has made the right decision in issuing the arrest warrant. Unfortunately, it is also signalling the end of the so called 'rules-based-order' as clearly US and their allies think this order does not apply to them. Me being from France (which now has a minority government that nobody voted for), I felt the so called clarification France diplomatie, was a shame - which does not have public support and the double standard is so clear, where is was the same Quai d'Orsay which welcomed the Arrest warrants for Putin (and rightly so). With this new interpretation, maybe Putin can visit France - given the Russian Federation is not a signatory either ? I do not know. US too welcomed the arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin. I am worried about these blatant double standards, which I guess a lot of the public do not support but the politicians do - which is threatening these rules based order.
Got a question about your Kosovo video James: how did international law work in transferring Yugoslav law to International law? Did the fact that Yugoslav law stated that Kosovo had no right to secession mean that Yugoslav law became international law? In other words, how is a state’s domestic law interpreted or applied by international law? Thanks JKL!
From a German perspective the historie of the Eichmann Case could also be an intresting reference. I recommend a read of Hannah Arendt: Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (ger. Eichmann in Jerusalem. Ein Bericht von der Banalität des Bösen), 1963. I jugest getting the rivised edition or an later commented version.
France argues that Netanyahu cannot be arrested unless Israel waives his head-of-state immunity. Signatories of the Rome Statute have waived head-of-state immunity against ICC arrest warrants by signing up, but Israel (and Russia) are not signatories. The ICC Appeals Chamber has ruled in the past that this makes no difference, though. I think there is a strong argument that the ICC Appeals Chamber is wrong, but I think only the ICJ could settle this.
It is neither Just nor lawfull for the ICC to issue this arrest warrant. It is not lawful since Palestine is not a Sovereign State, and it is not just because as far as urban warfare goes, Gaza is not worse than any other urban battle, and Israel had gone to extraordinary lengths to limit civilian casualties there. That's not to downplay the suffering of the people of Gaza tho.
@@elibrahams5566Palestine is a sovereign state according to the UN, it's been a non-member observer state for 12 years. The Civilian to Military deaths of Palestinians is higher than it was of Israelis on October 7th, it is absolutely worse than other urban battles and Israel has in no way gone to extraordinary lengths to limit civilian causalities, which is obviously by the fact there are so many of them
You cannot be serious. I follwed all wars for the past decades. Literally i have never seen anything like that, not because it was documented in real time- i cannot watch, but all doctors who survived said they have never witnessed anything like that, nowhere, not in Africa, Szenegal, Syria, Iraq. Nowhere.
Part of the charges relate to cutting off food and water supply to the civilian population. I think most people will agree that deliberately preventing food and water from reaching a civilian population for a prolonged period of time may count as a crime against humanity. Perhaps these charges lack sufficient factual basis (I do not know), but this is an aspect that potentially goes well beyond normal urban warfare.
"we can do anything we want to them, because they are not a sovereign state" is awesome logic. Also, they are not a sovereign state in part because the US vetoes every step towards that from the Security Council.
The ICC's warrants are definitely politically motivated. Hamas, who orchestrated some of the most blatant war crimes that lead us all to this situation are slightly ignored, since 7.10 masterminds (Sinwar & Deif, but also Haniyeh who was the political leader) are dead. Hamas celebrated the warrants and that proves the entire point. Real war crimes go unpunished by the ICC. Do the warrants even mention something about the fact they took 100s of hostages, hold them in subhuman conditions and still don't let them go? Many countries in Europe (and rightly so) condemned the false moral equivalence the ICC tried to make between Israel which was nevertheless the victim of 7.10, and Hamas, the perpetrator of those crimes.
And that’s the whole point of the video! It’s not an issue because they would arrest Putin. The issue I am discussing is how they respond to Netanyahu.
Don't forget that there are not-guilty verdicts. Why should Netanyahu be afraid, if he's convinced he's innocent? Present the evidence, let the verdict fall where it should.
He would still be locked up for a couple of years (for the duration of the trial). So, even if he believes to be innocent, why would he voluntarily do that?
If someone could answer this question i have, that would be wonderful. Can Bush and Blair be tried by the ICC for the Iraq war? If no, why not? Thanks, thats been on my mind.
The ICC did a preliminary examination into UKs involvement, but concluded that even though the ICC had concerns, British authorities were was at least not actively hindering the investigation and prosecution of war criminals. (Not judged to be "genuinely unwilling"). Other cases could be brought. US leaders, probably not, because neither USA nor Iraq are members of the ICC. ..Plus, ICC will not go after US leaders because the US is too powerful and aggressive. USA even passed a law saying they can invade the Hague in the Netherlands if a US citizen is arrested. Pretty nuts.
The reflexisive defence of Netanyahu by US leaders is unfortunate at best. Biden and others could have said they will no longer deal with him and Israel would have been forced to pick another leader.
8:50 no surprises here, Hungary also loves russia. And the links between Israeli ruling politicians and Russian establishment are unbeatable. (Yaakov Livne) The methods are the same as well.
I saw an Atlantic article that described it this way. For the first time in history, the ICC issued warrants against a liberal democracy (with a judiciary currently prosecuting Netanyahu), for the first time in history issued warrants for a country that was attacked first, for the first time issued warrants to a country not recognized by the UN (and keep in mind the government that signed the Rome statue isn’t even the one that has controlled Gaza for almost 20 years), and for the first time applied the charge of starvation when the famine review and Hamas’s own figures refuted that claim anyway.
"who was attacked first" is interesting. Ignoring the 17 year blockade. Ignoring "mowing the lawn", ignoring all those deaths and mutilations in the March of Return. Ignoring all that, just wondering, how many children can morally be killed because "we were attacked first." When the targets are neighborhoods, what exactly is "a defensive bomb"
@ you can play this game permanently. The blockade imposed by both israel and Egypt was because Hamas attacked israel and funded and participated in illegal activities in Egypt. The blockade is to block weapons smuggling. Obviously was not effective enough.
If only Netanyahu had remembered the image of Sharon in his last years and his tragic end, he remained between life and death in the intensive care unit for 8 years, as well as Stalin’s hideous end told by his daughter. It was so bas as it was a Bad Karma or moral consequence Whoever did not learn a lesson from those before him became him-self a new lesson!
The answer is likely no and rightly so. Setting aside that the charges against him are absurd and counterfactual, Israel is not a signatory of the rome statute or a member of the ICC, and "Palestine" doesn't have a defined territory in which the ICC has jurisdiction. The court has overstepped their authority and put their credibility in question.
Palestine is recognized as a non-member observer state by the UN, which underpins the jurisdiction argument. Trying to imply that they aren't eligible for this because they are really just a Bantustan of Israel isn't exactly a great defense of Israel's non-violation of international law here. In what ways do you think it is counterfactual regarding Netanyahu.
@@beepoboopo546 Palestine isn't a country and fails the basic definition. They have no government and no defined territory. The PA who signed up to the UN didn't even have control of Gaza when they applied and haven't for decades. The ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel.
@@beepoboopo546 I'm not allowed to speak the truth on here apparently so I won't bother addressing the ICCs absurd nonsense. The Jurisdiction issue and the lack of standing to even bring an indictment is enough.
you can't ask 'will he face charges' without first questioning the legitimacy of the accusation..................................THERE IS NO LEGITIMATE CASE FOR HIM TO ANSWER..............................the prosecutor is MUSLIM I have every reason to suspect he is NOT neutral his faith is guiding his judgement simple as that.....................therefore its all bull!!
I can certainly ask if he will face the Court without questioning the allegations. The ICC is an internationally mandated legal institution. The prosecutor has investigated and presented his findings to the judges who have said they believe there is enough evidence to issue a warrant. You may certainly feel that he shouldn’t face charges. But, equally, you haven’t reviewed the evidence.
@@JamesKerLindsay DEFINITION Genocide is the intentional destruction of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, in whole or in part.....................it is nonsense, Israel is engaged in a war there are always casualties, I would argue Israel has gone OUT OF ITS WAY to minimise loss of life.....................if PM's actions truly merited this accusation there would be a million or more dead, wounded, starved to death or crippled.........THERE IS NOTHING LIKE THAT..................LOOK TO UKRAINE & THE ACTIONS OF RUSSIA IF ICC WANT TO PROSECUTE GENOCIDE.............. NOT ISRAEL!
Is this the first time that the icc has issued a warrant for a leader on the defending side of a conflict? (I recognize that my question disregards the opinion of those who think that Hamas had a right to commit the attack of Oct 7th)
Yes, the ICC arrest warrant was a proper decision. He will get a fair trial and, if guilty, will be found guilty, and will be exonerated if not guilty. But no doubt he knows his own record of decisions so well, that he will lack the courage to answer for his deeds and policies. That Israel and the US claim this damages the reputation of the ICC is irrelevant, not only have they never done anything to strengthen the reputation of the court, not only do they only care for International Law when the suspects are not their own nationals, the US even has issued a formal Act of Congress (The "The Hague Invasion Act") allowing the president of the US to order American troops to extricate any US citizens held at the court by force. That would present an interesting NATO Art.5 case
If the Americans try that: we Dutch have a few good subs, some decent stealthy F-35’s courtesy of the USA, and while our army is tiny it is decently trained. We won’t win, but we will not just stand aside.
What about Syria? The crimes alleged against Netanyahu may be true, but there is a strong suspicion of selective prosecution that reduces the impact and the trust that an objective juror, if one could exist, could have in judging the case.
@Serocco yeah, but are their sponsor states gonna turn them over? No. There's no real system for holding these people accountable other than sponsors or the states themselves pledging to turn over the people in question. That very rarely happens.
Why? I just presented the facts as they stand. Netanyahu has been accused of war crimes. I explained those charges. I’m not here to prosecute or defend him. But this is not actually a video about Israel, as such. It’s a video about war crimes trials and how the latest indictments present some very real questions about how and when international law is applied. Europe and the West talk about upholding international law. But many feel it is only selectively applied. This will reinforce that point. It is a sad fact of modern discourse that anyone talking about Israel-Palestine has to be painted as favouring one side or the other. I support the right of Israel to exist. I also support the right of the Palestinians to have their own state. And I stand against human rights abuses, no matter which side commits them.
Following the British Mandate of Palestine, did not the Arabs get their own state and call it Jordan? Were not the remaining Arabs offered a state in 1947, but they refused it? Are not the stated aims of groups like Hamas and Hezbollah to drive the Israeli completely out of the land? Why should the Arabs have another state in Palestine? The way you talk about the ICC warrant suggests you think that in theory Israel may defend itself, but in practice it may not because people may die.@JamesKerLindsay
@@iansmith2129 Sorry, but none of this has anything to do with the topic. I am happy to discuss them. And have done so in other videos. But this is about the war crimes indictments. Let’s focus on that.
@JamesKerLindsay we'll have to agree to differ on that one. Personally I think the history is very pertinent to whether the indictment is right or wrong. I think the history points to a political rather than judicial motive for the indictment.
With today's information explosion I would have liked to think it is much more easy to travel towards a just world than ever before. Imperfection or perfection lies in the human beings involved, future will show imperfection had its consequences too if history has not shown that yet to many types of people. My personal view is , objective of any persecution and rule of law must be very clear, its bit eye for an eye, its not revenge but its creation and maintenance of a just world. If it is believed thats not possible then all hell will break loose around the world, history will be dug up to generate mountains of excuses and there will be no arguments of un-justification to lean upon.
There are always many things to be mentioned. But one thing you discover when writing scripts is that every mention then means you have to find your way back to the main path of the story. It’s not as easy as it seems.
Yes. Issuing the warrant is the right thing to do because the court has jurisdiction in Palestine and because Netanyahu is clearly orchestrating and carrying out a genocide. Beyond this, the arrest warrant is simply the moral and correct thing to issue and act upon because crimes against humanity must always be punished. All this, and he will not be arrested, and he will get away with all of it because so many governments long to demonstrate their joyous collaboration in this genocide and their own abilities to carry out such atrocities.
@@mesamies123 just some more leftist virtue signalling drivel. No it’s not clear that Netanyahu is orchestrating a genocide. Not clear at all, weekend international lawyer. The icc’s arrest warrant is nothing but a political stunt against Israel itself in a desperate attempt to save the hamxs from destruction. Further than that Israel has a long trusted record of presiding over war criminals in its on country and I argue it’s much more sensible that if Netanyahu should be judged ..*IF*, there actually enough evidence besides pathetic straw grasping at tweets and media comments to justify bringing this to a court, then he should be judged under a tribune that uses facts and logic rather than political bias like the kangaroo court that is the ICC. And finally I’ll say, I don’t have to but it worth pointing out, that you saying world leaders who would refuse to respect this sham are genocide supporters - it just sounds like Whiny cope to me. You, like every leftist out there, always live in some echo chamber of seething anti establishment hate, you always live in a reality of your own making and when your expectations come in collision with how normal, sensible people think and behave you throw a childish tantrum and rather blame everybody else around you for being “evil” instead of, god forbid, do some introspection and self critique. Stay that way, by all means. You get the attention and sense of narcissistic validation you seek and we get a perfect example of how *NOT* to think. Not to mention a good laugh as well..
You can’t compare Putin to Netanyahu Putin is Russian in Russia And Netanyahu who is originally Mileikowsky ( his father’s original family name) is Polish in Palestine One is defending his country, the other is occupying other countries and committing gen o cide
The ICC's decision to issue an arrest warrant against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has certainly attracted a lot of attention. It's also put a lot of countries in a challenging position. But do you think that he will ever be brought to trial? Is this the end of any visits to Europe (or almost anywhere else)? Or do you think this is little more than a dangerous political stunt that calls international justice into question? Let me know your thoughts and comments below.
I am not a fan of Netenyahu, but i have serious doubts about the legitimacy of these accusations against him. The problem is that the Palestinian cause - as an extension of the Arab nationalist cause before it - has been largely fought as a propaganda war consisting of strategic disinformation (originally with the aid of the Soviets) and "propaganda of the deed" since the First Intifada. The target of that propaganda war was ALWAYS the international community at large, but especially communist bloc leaders and diplomats, the Arab world in general and the broad left wing in the West.
One of the tactics has been to issue frequent accusations of Israeli misdeeds - which later turn out to have been false or, at minimum, vastly exaggerated.
Personally, i don't trust people who have been caught lying and decieving many times - no matter how popular the the lies have become.
Case in point: one of the propaganda lines that spread through the Arab world during the recent war in Gaza was a new version of the old antisemitic "blood libel" myth.
So ... To answer your question... I don't think he will come to trial because IF history is a good indicator, the charges will have to be deopped.
I'm prepared to be wrong, of course. But the 1500 year history of antisemitism leads me to be highly skeptical.
I appreciate the historical overview of war crimes trials by the way. I don't think most people know this history at all. Nuremberg is famous. The rest ... Less so.
I have students who don't even know about the Yugoslav wars!
Wasn't too excited about Besiktas losing 3-1 to Maccabi Tel Aviv in Hungary for yesterday's Europa League match.
🇹🇷🇪🇺🇮🇱
I tend to think France is right that Netanyahu's head of state immunity does not allow France to arrest him (Israel not being a signatory to the Rome Statute). Of course the same should then apply to Putin. I am aware that the ICC Appeals Chamber disagrees with me, but their reasoning seems unconvincing to me. Someone should put this issue before the ICJ.
@@Robespierre-lI sir, the Jewish people found much more stability in those 1500 years in Muslim countries than anywhere in Christendom. The problem began with the Nakba, fundamentally. This is closer to he honest truth you value.
It may be time to consider whether the leaders accountable for the large-scale invasion of Iraq in 2003 should stand trial.
Exactly
Kinda off topic.
Don't say that the professor's arse gets red as beet 😂😂😂
The US isn't a signatory to the ICC. Also, good luck with that lol.
"Put countries in Europe in a tough spot" is a very coded way to say "France declared it will violate international law"
No, it's a tough spot because if you threaten Israel you get payback by the US, and many of these countries still face post-WW2 occupation by the US.
International laws are violated all the time
What the Ukraine and Gaza wars have shown unfortunately is that international law is dead and we have returned to the era of might is right
The precedent was set already by Bush in Iraq. What we are seeing is the normalization of this trend
Thanks. This is exactly what worries me as well.
It was always like that, we were just living in an illusion of a rule based world order after the cold war.
@@JamesKerLindsaythe precedent was set by the West, most specifically by the US, Anglo Saxon culture ie: the British Empire and now the Empire of Lies and Hypocrisy, are the pinnacle of extreme propaganda, piracy, Hypocrisy, double standards....
Unfortunately since the beginning of life itself and probably until the end of time, might is right. We were just able to kid ourselves for a bit.
@@claudiopereira9900One Uk minister or US senator, can't remember, said "The ICC was only meant to prosecute African warlords"
The West: rules for thee, not for me
If France doesn't have to arrest Netanyahu, then South Africa doesn't have to arrest Putin, I think. Of course I don't think France sees it that way based on other statements, I think this highlights the danger that international law becomes a hegemonic "rule by law" rather than a mutually protective "rule of law."
South Africa will never arrest Putin. Mongolia didn't so...
Well, If France doesn't have to arrest Netanyahu it doesn't have to arrest Mohammed El-Deif either who was the third name at that arrest warrant that included Netanyahu and Yaouv Galant, yet if Mohammed El-Deif visited France they'd arrest him. Real hypocrisy but What to expect from a then hard colonizer and a now remote-colonizer!
South Africa claimed they wouldn't arrest Putin. They should have kept their mouth shut.
Putin is humanist compared to Bibi war crimes; he didn’t siege food-water-medicine, blocked aid trucks and vetoing the 2-state, Palestinian sovereignty & ceasefire since 1970s
@@WorldTravelerCooking I think France now agrees that South Africa cannot arrest Putin.
This adds validity to the double standards that 3rd world countries face when it comes to international law
Russia is a third world country?
The reasoning is that the ICC doesn't have jurisdiction (because Israel is not a signatory, and the Palestine is not a state). In such cases the ICC should only be activated if there is no independent local Judiciary, but Israel has independent local judiciary that had investigated high ranking official in the past.
@@eyalnir1327Palestine is a state for the purposes of the ICC. The mere fact that some members of the UN, including the US which has blocked it’s full membership in defiance of the General Assembly, do not recognise Palestine as a state doesn’t preclude the ICC from accepting it as a signatory, nor does it preclude the ICC from investigating and prosecuting war crimes committed in the State of Palestine by foreign actors.
What nonsense. The Arabs have been trying to destroy Israel and murder all the Jews in it since 1948. International law hasn’t done a darn thing to call them to account for that. The western civilized nations have a duty not only to ignore warrants from that kangaroo court, but also to sanction it and eliminate it
@@Charlzton Let's see: They are obligated to obey the ICC and extradite if needed. The Palestinian authority could not extradite Hamas members in Gaza even if they wanted to.
Now that's ridiculous to say that they are a state (and Gaza is part of that state) for the purposes of the ICC when they can't be expected to comply with the ICC.
It’s a shame for US and some members of EU even to discuss this.
Countries on Balkan were forced for years to cooperate with ICC by those same countries. Does anyone think we liked it? Does anyone think we thought it was fair? That ICC only prosecuted our kin?
But we sent our presidents and generals. Who was innocent, they returned back, but war criminals remained in prison to pay their crimes.
This was never the case even back then(China,Russia,North Korea and dozens of more countries)this is political kangaroo court that like all international organisations has no sovereignty outside those who choose to apply its laws upon themselves,you can twist or turn it however you like it is what it is…
@ it was not China, nor Russia, nor North Korea that pressured my country to cooperate with ICC/ICT. It was US, UK and EU.
@@markomilojevic8792 Yes there hypocrisy in applying the law(it is much worse with those dictatorial mafia regimes),It is obvious that Europeans would want you to accept the authority of European institutions,the fact that you accepted the authority(like all international treaties)is why it is binding.
France has a serious argument against the legality of France arresting Netanyahu (and Putin, for that matter). Netanyahu and Putin are heads of state of countries which are not bound by the Rome Statute and therefore have not waived head of state immunity.
The ICC Appeals Chamber has ruled that states which are party to the Rome Statute are anyway under an obligation to arrest heads of state of such countries because the ICC is an "international court", but this argument lacks any logic. Why should a group of two or more countries be able to circumvent head of state immunity by setting up a common "international" court?
The Appeals Chamber refers to Article 7 of the Nuremberg Charter, but that merely states that being a head of state does not result in impunity for crimes against humanity. It does not mean that an incumbent head of state can be arrested by other states.
@@markomilojevic8792 It was the Security Council that set up the ICTY in Resolution 827. China and Russia are permanent members of the Security Council, and they could have vetoed the ICTY. At the time, all 15 members of the Security Council voted for Resolution 827.
Focused and comprehensive. Worth gold. Thanks James.
Thank you very much indeed!
Should He: Yes
Would He: No
Exactly my thoughts
Should he: No. Will he: No.
@@jonathanrotem251 🤡
@@Pavlos_Charalambousthoughts…. Dare I scoff? Why yes I would sir.. perhaps a healthy snigger for good measure as well.
If making war on Hamas is a crime then so was making war on nazi germany
*Answer:* just like the trial of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin.
Or George Bush
ICC has barely ever worked, as far as I remember
@@enoughofthis Bush is not the subject of any ICC arrest warrant.
@@MapsaiLiv What do you mean by that? The ICC website lists cases against 32 defendants, 10 of whom are "at large".
@@ronald3836 Well, that doesn't sound like it's much, considering it's been for over 20 years. Not even 2x per year
ICC did its part. now it's up to the signatory governments to enforce it.
No it didn't after months
😂
Bro you really are gullable
This is just theatrics
which means nothing
Professor Ker-Lindsay going through controversial topics at lightspeed.
And plenty more where those came from. Rather too much news at the moment!
A ceasefire in Lebanon (violations pending) and new developments in Syria mean the Professor has his work cut out for him toward the end of this 2024!
Always such thoughtful and educated videos. Enjoy the history at the start of each video which helps contextualise what we see happening now.
Thanks so much, Henry. I really appreciate the comment. :-) I like to think that the historical background adds some extra context that isn’t found elsewhere.
This is mud that will stick to Netanyahu & the Israeli state despite their bravado. It is a humiliation. He is the first so-called Western leader to be tarred as such.
I think signatory countries who are ambivalent will ask him not to visit so both sides will save face.
French here, Macron backtracking on the decision probably has to do with the ceasefire agreement between Israel and Lebanon.
Thanks. I did wonder that as well.
Yes, when Putin will face trial...
if we go that route there is a lot of Soviet, USA, UK, France,... officials who should be in jail
@@fpsserbia6570 Indeed. I cannot think of a former US president who is still alive aside from *maybe* Jimmy Carter who isn't guilty.
It doesn't matter what we say. Innocent people people are dying and children there's only one life and if it's gone isn't a bit coming back we shouldn't condone the war
I dont know why this is even debated palestine is not a country
It’s a signatory the Rome Statute and a non-member observer state at the UN. I know Israel will challenge this, though.
France’s decision not to enforce the arrest warrant because Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statute is a perfect example of the French double standards. When Milošević was indicted by the UN established ICTY, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, whose head of state he de facto was at the time, was not a member of the UN. Yet, he was arrested and extradited to The Hague. France should have objected to that arrest based on the logic they now use to avoid confrontation with Israel and the US. There are always “special cases’ in the international politics which will inevitably lead to unwanted consequences just like the recognition of Kosovo’s declaration of independence by the West, France included, has led to Putin’s use of that precedent for justification of the land grab in Ukraine and Georgia with likely more cases to come in the near future. The French decision today will erode any future arguments they might use when it comes to Putin’s arrest.
I also heard rumors about netenyahu conditioning lebanon ceasfite on french refusal to arrest him (though nothing confirmed) in this case, it might make more sense, potentially saving hundreds of lives can take precedence over a single arrest.
I think regarding whether to issue the arrest warrant was the right thing to do for the court, I think there is no question. After the Putin warrant, most of the world had serious concerns about the court's neutrality and whether the court would be primarily a cudgel of Western hegemony. This decision affirms the court's geopolitical independence to some extent (though the delay in issuing the warrant still leaves that concern intact). This decision should have been made a long time ago in order to regain legitimacy by the court.
This being said, it now risks creating a situation where warrants are widely ignored by parties to the Rome Statute but at the moment this looks like it is the doing of France and similar countries rather than the court itself.
I'm more concerned with the ability of the court to gather evidence that is not tained by propaganda and disinformation campaigns before issuing warrants. There are very sizable logistical challenges to the gathering of independently verified evidence - certainly during an ongoing war. However, issuing warrants without adequate neutral and objectively verified evidence of charges means that the authority of the court is ALREADY jeapordized.
This is a fairly large problem for those of us who think that international law is our best hope to do something about war crimes and other atrocities.
@@Robespierre-lI That's just as true in the Russo-Ukrainian war as it is in Israel isn't it? In fact probably more so because you don't have as much UN involvement in Ukraine.
And you have others in Gaza too like Doctors without Borders who have a good reputation and can provide evidence.
@@WorldTravelerCooking I was not actually implying any comparison between the two situations - Ukraine and Gaza - but I understand how you might have perceived it that way.
Indeed, while I feel fairly certain about Putin's geopolitical ambitions and how Ukraine fits into that, I am keeping an open mind about Ukraine's reports about the mass graves from the early days of the war. After all, Kiev is forced to use its own investigators to compile that evidence and it would be challenging for any people to remain entirely objective in the midst of a military invasion by a neighboring power. As for the specific accusations the ICC has charged Putin with, I have not yet examined what evidence they have of child abductions in any detail and cannot comment.
As for the accused war crimes in Gaza, there are various reasons to maintain reasonable skepticism. Due to the Hamas government before this war and now the wartime conditions themselves, international organizations operating within Gaza often depend on Gazans themselves to (1) issue reports to circulate to media outlets and (2) operate aid programs. That has meant that information out of Gaza has often been tained by the propaganda wing of Hamas and their allies outside Gaza (in Qatar, Lebanon and Tehran especially.) The independence of the international aid programs operated by the UN was also seriously called into question when it emerged that their operations in Gaza had been infiltrated by people tied to Hamas, leading to the building of one of the tunnels under the UN headquarters in Gaza. Finally, there is that lingering problem that the aid trucks had been used to smuggle in arms and were diverted frequently to supply Hamas instead of providing relief aid for MANY years; but when the IDF tried to protect the aid trucks within Gaza, they were mobbed and attacked.
For those reasons, I would encourage caution for the time being. The truth will emerge eventually.
Personally, having studied the history of the Palestinian cause in some detail, I have to point out that their one strength has been their use of strategic disinformation. It might seem like an unkind thing to say, but it is simply the strategy one takes when you do not have any hope of military success.
@@WorldTravelerCookingthey can provide *Testimonies*, not evidence. Vibes and ant’s eye view of events is hardly considered evidence. And it’s a plain fact that even glaring evidence which exonerate Netanyahu from those trumped up charges have been grossly ignored by the icc.. like that bs forced starvation allegation when it is the easiest evidence to gather that over one million ton of humanitarian aid has been documented to have been sent into Gaza and that hamxs has been filmed stealing 70% of it… for example.
Just Sounds to me like instead of the icc being a western political cudgel you’d rather it being an Islamist and global south and anti western cudgel. That’s all.
@@Robespierre-lI So the thing is that I think the argument in defense of these relocations by Russia in the war is that you have to evacuate children somewhere and the only practical way to remove them from the conflict zone is to move them back to one's own country pending relocation back to their country and reunification with family members. I think the ICC's view is that this is a matter for trial, but I don't think it is a crazy defense.
Israel is a very different situation. You have a lot of press over protests blocking aid and doing so with the blessings of the Minister of National Security. There are also impressive studies done of social media activity of some IDF units which suggest significant war crimes committed. Again, the question of the solidity of the evidence is a matter for trial but in Israel's case it comes from groups ranging from the UN to the Israeli Press and the US government.
If I were to have to assess these, I would actually suggest that the case against Putin would be more likely to fail than the case against Netanyahu who is a legally vulnerable politician who is held hostage by the crazy 10% of Israeli politics. Though I think Ben Gvir, despite not being directly involved in the war, is a clearer war criminal than Gallant is and Gallant is more likely to be acquitted than Netanyahu is if there is a trial.
He’ll face trial the same way Putin will…not at all. The better question, in my opinion, is should he. And the answer, I believe, is yes.
I would say that a year in prison for each hospital and or school that no longer exists is a fine measure. Sure a single year is not enough, but if I said 10 years, then it would be in the thousands or tens of thousands. And that is ridiculous. Just like that Turkish guy who got like a hundred thousand years in prison, 5 or so years for each victim he abused......... Yeah it was, the worst thing I have ever read about. Cosmetic surgery on 9 year olds to give them big B. -_- and big B. -----______------
It would be against the Geneve Convention to send Benjamin to be a victim of that freak. But I think it would be fine.
I finally managed to buy your book on secession recently. It's a great read! I'm enjoying it and it's very informative.
Thank you so much!!! That is brilliant to hear. And truly appreciated! I am so glad you’re finding it useful. :-) 🙏🏻👏😀
Professor, i appreciate your devotion to international law but what exactly is the point when each geopolitical bloc, including the "liberal-democratic" one operates according to the naked interest and Schmittian "friend-enemy" distinction rather than any respect for law, ethics or justice. Case in point the ongoing deluge of headchopping islamist terrorists upon Aleppo being welcomed by the West (including Israel) which had spent the last year raving about "islamist terrorists" from Hamas. This sort of cognitive dissonance is simply unsustainable and leads to psychosis (that is, if we assume the actors are honest rather than liars consciously breaking their own rules to pursue their goals).
Thanks. I agree. And that’s precisely why the more I consider the issues, the more I realise that adhering to international law is the most sensible and stable approach. When we create exceptions, even for the people we “like” we just open the door to exceptions for those we don’t. The world is in a mess precisely because of this willingness of the West to bend rules when it suited them, but expected others to fall into line. The question is whether it can be fixed now and order restored. Or has the rubicon been crossed?
When did Israel welcome these Jihadists? No government official expressed his support to these groups. At best we are happy both of our enemies are fighting each other, Sunni Jihadists vs Shia Jihadists.
@@JamesKerLindsay Appreciate the response. I question whether the rules in question were ever universal in the first place rather than an expedient moral cudgel to beat up any potential opposition to the American hegemony during the unipolar moment. Nowadays people of authority openly say the ICC was never intended for the West but for Yugoslavs and Africans.
If that's the case, and given that we're firmly past that era, i don't think we should yearn for those past times. Either we build rules and institutions that are truly universal and objective or perhaps Schmitt was right and this is an inevitable feature of human politics.
@@JamesKerLindsay the rubicon has been crossed and it was by the moralising West, long time ago in Serbia/Kosovo if not earlier than that. There's nothing that justifies the violation of the sovereign territory of Serbia, I've read all your justifications for it and how Serbia should just accept it. The question I will ask you: Shouldn't Ukraine accepeted Eastern Ukraine and Crimea freedom, they see themselves as Russian, and they surely didn't accept the turn Ukraine took after the western backed anti Russian maidan coup or color revolution.
@@drdr8859 Hasbara shill, your government has a record of giving medical aid to Syrian Islamist rebels
I was expecting a video on the latest developments in the Syrian war, but I guess you probably already had this one written.
Blimey! It only kicked off yesterday! I will see how things pan out. The trouble is that there are another few topics I’d really like to cover at the moment. Too much news!
The reason why there is even a question about Netanyahu being held to account by the ICC is because our politicians here in the United States have been so thoroughly corrupted and bought out by AIPAC that it would be accurate to say the United States has surrendered its sovereignty to a bird dropping on the map. In the United States, we know we don’t really have freedom of action anymore, and that everything has to be cleared by Israel before we do anything. It is our national shame. To claim that this question goes any further than that is to lend it a legitimacy that simply doesn’t exist. This is purely a matter of corruption.
True. The legality of lobbying has essentially turned the US into a vassal state. It's compromising its own interests to serve another, half a planet away.
@@AnonymousAlcoholic772 it's amazing how your presidential debates are about protection of Israel and how you will send them more money rather then helping your average Americans.
Do you realize what you have just said amount to a anti-Jewish conspiracy theory? AIPAC isn't that strong. The US simply has a histoical commitment to protect Israel against enemies who have declared repeatedly a desire to eliminate it from the map.
You can disagree with the foreign policy in more rational terms. Try again.
@@AnonymousAlcoholic772 it has no jurisdiction
So busy this Saturday. I watched in bits. This is a very important topic that may not be able to be resolved while the nation state is the highest level of sovereignty.
I need to rewatch from start to finish. Thank you for posting this.
Thanks. No problem! I hope you’re having a good Saturday.
For the signatories of the Rome Statue, it's legally binding and for a signatory country not to carry out the arrest warrant deems the court utterly useless. The excuse for Netanyahu is that as head of state, he's immune from prosecution but I've not heard any European signatory country argue the same diplomatic immunity for Putin.
The Netanyahu case shows the hypocrisy of the court and in my opinion it is because of this that members of the Global South/Global Majority should leave the Rome Statute. Sure it was all great for Africans to be prosecuted in a European country and court house for war crimes but not for two Israelis.
Israel isn't a signatory of the Rome statute or a member of the ICC. Their argument is that the court doesn't have jurisdiction. I haven't seen anyone argue that the head of state is immune. You're just making that up.
@CedarHunt Russia isn't a signatory to the Rome Statute either but yet Pres. Putin's indictment isn't opposed by European states. France argues that Netanyahu has immunity as a head of state yet does not argue the same for Pres. Putin. I ain't making anything up and I believe the video covers my points
@@jesusaguilar4585Well, duh, Ukraine is a member of the court, and the war crimes that Russia is committing are occurring on Ukrainian soil. "Palestine" is not a country, and it doesn't have a defined territory to give the ICC jurisdiction over. They're two completely different situations.
@@jesusaguilar4585Also you are totally lying there. France is arguing that netanyahu has immunity because Israel isn't a member of the court and the ICC doesn't have jurisdiction. It's has nothing to do with your head of state fiction.
“A state cannot be held to act in a way that is incompatible with its obligations in terms of international law with regard to immunities granted to states which are not party to the ICC. Such immunities apply to prime minister Netanyahu and other ministers in question, and must be taken into consideration should the ICC ask us to arrest them and hand them over.”
@@CedarHunt ICC accepted Palestine as a member. We can go back and forth over whether Palestine is a country regardless of the fact that it has Observer Status in the UN but nevertheless Palestine is a member of the ICC and war crimes committed against the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza; generally recognized as Palestine, are applicable for legal prosecution under the jurisdiction of the ICC. It's not difficult to understand.
As for defined territory or borders, Israel has never defined its borders and refuses to do so. You do realize this. Right?
Can you make a video about the recent events in South Korea regarding Yoon Suk Yeol and the emergency martial law that he imposed? It marked the first time since 1980 that it was imposed in South Korea. I think it is a topic worth discussing.
Thanks so much. Great suggestion. On its way! What a bizarre situation. But there is a rather dark history behind all this. Definitely something I wanted to explore.
It’s crazy how ppl are ignoring the law …
Rescuing his citizens using one of the most advanced modern militaries from a bunch crazy lawless people is not a warcrime.
Surely if a country doesn't want to arrest him but also doesn't want to go against the ICC they can just refuse to let him enter the country?
If he doesn't face trial, no war criminal will ever be charged or tried with conviction.
These heads of state should be first to serve time.
ICC trial was not fair trial not mentioning about the attacker and oct7th genocide, so Israel doesn't have any obligation to follow the wrong tria
This is not how international law works. So you think that after 9/11 US had the right to block food water to people in Afganistan after they invaded? Block medicine and vital supplies for babies? You obviously dont understand international law.
The 7th October would never have happened if the European zoinest had to stay in Britain where they came from 😳 what is the European zoinest doing amongst the arabs Israel lives on stolen land now its Syria
The US didn’t establish these institutions to be constrained by them, Professor.
The ICC's decision is similar to a parent threatening a child to be punished when it is kicked own by both parties that will never materialize.
I didn't really learn anything new from this, though I had hoped & expected to. Of course it was necessary for arrest warrant to be issued against Netanyahu although many will still consider it to have a strong western bias.
It's highly likely Netanyahu will never be arrested for war crimes as he will simply avoid countries that will via prior arrangement .
I was surprised to hear Lammy of the UK say that if Netanyahu stepped on UK soil he wouldn't hesitate to instruct the police in issuing an arrest warrant .
I think as a result of this and his popularity in Israel which has plummeted Netanyahu is more likely to step aside and retire from politics .
Fantastic video as always
Apart from whether Netanyahu will ever be arrested, I think it is also interesting to consider how this may affect Israel's standing in World. How long can the West justify supporting Israel unconditionally? Is it time to think about sanctions instead?
Defending oneself against an attack is a crime, if the victim is a Jew and the attacker is an Arab
No. Defence is not a crime. Carrying out war crimes in the course of defence is a crime.
This whole situation is just hypocritic.
My comment is this will not happen if Hamas not attack so we can't blames Prime Minister of Israel.
No, netanyahu will never go on trial. The ICC's days however are numbered. As are those of the Useless Nations.
Geo stratigic ally of the US and thus international law does not apply to "israel"
Classic game theory: get Europeans to sign onto this and handicap themselves while we never sign onto anything. America W.
Non-European nations should leave the ICC. Europe has mad eit clear hrta they're just making the rules up as they go along.
Perhaps if the ICC is to have legitimacy, it may be worthwhile putting Netanyahu on trial. This is because the power of rationale and global democratic openness should be viewed as a fair way to deal with international crime. Both sides can at least provide evidence, and law could prevail above partisan politics. Remember, Netanyahu has been indicted in Israel (trial is currently stalled due to political immunity as PM). Other world leaders (Trump, Rouseff in Brazil) were also subject to impeachment in recent years, although no political impartiality seemed present.
Once accused, fleeing from a court of law is admitting guilt. That, or an insult saying the court is either illegitimate or powerless to pursue justice. The Rome Statute needs to punish signatories who deny to arrest the accused. The law must be above politics.
Why do you believe there should be no recourse to an unjust court? That is a ridiculous belief to have
This is like having a foreign country trying to enforce law on your citizens. Plus UN has a few things to explain, such as terrorist hideouts right next to their base in Lebanon.
I think the ICC should consider its mandate when getting after a leader of the only country in the region scoring above 7.5 (out of 10) in the democracy index with a well-functioning justice system, which by the way was attacked first. Still over 100 civilian hostages are being held by the terrorists. It’s easy to sit in ur safe The Hague office lecturing law without having to deal with terror groups in a daily basis.
I think the big difference between here and Russia is that Palestine even if it's a recognized state in the UNGA it isn't really a state in facts on the ground at least in insofar as the Rome treaty . It has no clear single government and most of its territory have almost always occupied or had their sovereignty comprised by Israel. Another issue is that the PA signed the treaty but Hamas never did ,yet all the crimes Israel are accused of are happening in Hamas controlled regions. Thus there is a stronger sense of the ICC hosting its jurisdictions upon Israel. The need for a Palestinian state aside considering the facts on the grounds it does feel like the ICC is overreaching its jurisdiction.
Nice video and I liked the historical insight into the courts, especially on the Leipzig Trials on which I read more following your video.
I think ICC has made the right decision in issuing the arrest warrant.
Unfortunately, it is also signalling the end of the so called 'rules-based-order' as clearly US and their allies think this order does not apply to them. Me being from France (which now has a minority government that nobody voted for), I felt the so called clarification France diplomatie, was a shame - which does not have public support and the double standard is so clear, where is was the same Quai d'Orsay which welcomed the Arrest warrants for Putin (and rightly so). With this new interpretation, maybe Putin can visit France - given the Russian Federation is not a signatory either ? I do not know.
US too welcomed the arrest warrants for Vladimir Putin. I am worried about these blatant double standards, which I guess a lot of the public do not support but the politicians do - which is threatening these rules based order.
The law must rule, not the force
@@HauptmanKoening they're sadly not mutually exclusive, you can't enforce law without force
Got a question about your Kosovo video James: how did international law work in transferring Yugoslav law to International law? Did the fact that Yugoslav law stated that Kosovo had no right to secession mean that Yugoslav law became international law? In other words, how is a state’s domestic law interpreted or applied by international law? Thanks JKL!
From a German perspective the historie of the Eichmann Case could also be an intresting reference.
I recommend a read of Hannah Arendt: Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (ger. Eichmann in Jerusalem. Ein Bericht von der Banalität des Bösen), 1963.
I jugest getting the rivised edition or an later commented version.
Probably not in this life but he sure will the next
No better time for Israeli government to prove everyone wrong 😅
Why has France welcomed Netanyahu despite the warrant?
Probably in return for being allowed to sit on the Lebanon ceasefire supervision committee.
France argues that Netanyahu cannot be arrested unless Israel waives his head-of-state immunity.
Signatories of the Rome Statute have waived head-of-state immunity against ICC arrest warrants by signing up, but Israel (and Russia) are not signatories.
The ICC Appeals Chamber has ruled in the past that this makes no difference, though. I think there is a strong argument that the ICC Appeals Chamber is wrong, but I think only the ICJ could settle this.
Yes. Faster than you can say Tommy Robinson.
does israel has 'the right to defend themselves' still? i mean its genocide and you still havent said it
8:58 even Hamas welcomes it…. Despite having leadership also up for arrest
Nothing will happen to him.
It is neither Just nor lawfull for the ICC to issue this arrest warrant.
It is not lawful since Palestine is not a Sovereign State, and it is not just because as far as urban warfare goes, Gaza is not worse than any other urban battle, and Israel had gone to extraordinary lengths to limit civilian casualties there. That's not to downplay the suffering of the people of Gaza tho.
@@elibrahams5566Palestine is a sovereign state according to the UN, it's been a non-member observer state for 12 years. The Civilian to Military deaths of Palestinians is higher than it was of Israelis on October 7th, it is absolutely worse than other urban battles and Israel has in no way gone to extraordinary lengths to limit civilian causalities, which is obviously by the fact there are so many of them
Go to court and prove your innocence, if you think the truth is undisputable.
You cannot be serious. I follwed all wars for the past decades. Literally i have never seen anything like that, not because it was documented in real time- i cannot watch, but all doctors who survived said they have never witnessed anything like that, nowhere, not in Africa, Szenegal, Syria, Iraq. Nowhere.
Part of the charges relate to cutting off food and water supply to the civilian population. I think most people will agree that deliberately preventing food and water from reaching a civilian population for a prolonged period of time may count as a crime against humanity. Perhaps these charges lack sufficient factual basis (I do not know), but this is an aspect that potentially goes well beyond normal urban warfare.
"we can do anything we want to them, because they are not a sovereign state" is awesome logic.
Also, they are not a sovereign state in part because the US vetoes every step towards that from the Security Council.
The ICC's warrants are definitely politically motivated. Hamas, who orchestrated some of the most blatant war crimes that lead us all to this situation are slightly ignored, since 7.10 masterminds (Sinwar & Deif, but also Haniyeh who was the political leader) are dead. Hamas celebrated the warrants and that proves the entire point. Real war crimes go unpunished by the ICC. Do the warrants even mention something about the fact they took 100s of hostages, hold them in subhuman conditions and still don't let them go?
Many countries in Europe (and rightly so) condemned the false moral equivalence the ICC tried to make between Israel which was nevertheless the victim of 7.10, and Hamas, the perpetrator of those crimes.
They did give Hamas warrants before they died
@@khalilh8182 So Hamas is committing war crimes?
@@alexblackhills4752 Mohammad Deif Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh commited war crimes according to the ICC but are all dead now
I reccomend BadEmpanadas video on the bosnian genocide. Its a good watch if anyone wants to loose more hope in the ICC
THEY are above the law!
PERIOD.
At the moment, yes, but in a slightly better world, they aren't.
Who are they?
@@kireaea It's up to us as world citizens to make the world better.
We are all equals in the eye of international law, unless it negativly impacts me or my buddies.
I see JKL didn't mention Russia & Myanmar aren't signatories either, and western countries didn't have a problem with those arrest warrants.
And that’s the whole point of the video! It’s not an issue because they would arrest Putin. The issue I am discussing is how they respond to Netanyahu.
Don't forget that there are not-guilty verdicts. Why should Netanyahu be afraid, if he's convinced he's innocent? Present the evidence, let the verdict fall where it should.
Of course he is afraid, antisemitism has grown exponentially in the last 2 years. He knows he won't have a fair trial.
@@alexblackhills4752: Exactly. This arrest warrant is political, using the law as a _weapon_ of war.
He would still be locked up for a couple of years (for the duration of the trial). So, even if he believes to be innocent, why would he voluntarily do that?
If someone could answer this question i have, that would be wonderful.
Can Bush and Blair be tried by the ICC for the Iraq war? If no, why not? Thanks, thats been on my mind.
The ICC did a preliminary examination into UKs involvement, but concluded that even though the ICC had concerns, British authorities were was at least not actively hindering the investigation and prosecution of war criminals. (Not judged to be "genuinely unwilling").
Other cases could be brought.
US leaders, probably not, because neither USA nor Iraq are members of the ICC.
..Plus, ICC will not go after US leaders because the US is too powerful and aggressive.
USA even passed a law saying they can invade the Hague in the Netherlands if a US citizen is arrested. Pretty nuts.
@Spacemongerr Okay that helps, thank you.
The reflexisive defence of Netanyahu by US leaders is unfortunate at best. Biden and others could have said they will no longer deal with him and Israel would have been forced to pick another leader.
@@Matt_The_Hugenot that's not how democracy works....
@maverick9409 It's how politics works. When your head of government becomes and international pariah you change them if you don't want to be isolated.
@@Matt_The_Hugenot So the international community has power over the people to oust the national leader who was democratically elected?
Do you believe Gaza policy is singlehandedly dictated by Netanyahu?
@@bicker31 No, however if no one would support them because of that policy they would soon change their minds.
Some people are above the law
Even though that thumbnail pic is cleaner than Nutrogena. I don't think Netanyahu will be held accountable by the ICC in my honest opinion.
🏴☠️
ICC is not part of the UN btw
@Spacemongerr I stand corrected. Thanks mate.
🗣️📢
@@FlamingBasketballClub No problem. The ICC is easily confused with the ICJ, which is a part of the UN.
tl;dr: almost certainly no.
Dude, there is no question. Could he face trial but when he’s going to phase trial?
8:50 no surprises here, Hungary also loves russia. And the links between Israeli ruling politicians and Russian establishment are unbeatable. (Yaakov Livne)
The methods are the same as well.
I saw an Atlantic article that described it this way. For the first time in history, the ICC issued warrants against a liberal democracy (with a judiciary currently prosecuting Netanyahu), for the first time in history issued warrants for a country that was attacked first, for the first time issued warrants to a country not recognized by the UN (and keep in mind the government that signed the Rome statue isn’t even the one that has controlled Gaza for almost 20 years), and for the first time applied the charge of starvation when the famine review and Hamas’s own figures refuted that claim anyway.
Israel is an ethnostate, not a liberal democracy.
Buloshit!
"who was attacked first" is interesting. Ignoring the 17 year blockade. Ignoring "mowing the lawn", ignoring all those deaths and mutilations in the March of Return. Ignoring all that, just wondering, how many children can morally be killed because "we were attacked first."
When the targets are neighborhoods, what exactly is "a defensive bomb"
@ you can play this game permanently. The blockade imposed by both israel and Egypt was because Hamas attacked israel and funded and participated in illegal activities in Egypt. The blockade is to block weapons smuggling. Obviously was not effective enough.
Never. You would be fool to think otherwise. His Western allies will protect him at all costs.
If only Netanyahu had remembered the image of Sharon in his last years and his tragic end, he remained between life and death in the intensive care unit for 8 years, as well as Stalin’s hideous end told by his daughter. It was so bas as it was a Bad Karma or moral consequence Whoever did not learn a lesson from those before him became him-self a new lesson!
The answer is likely no and rightly so. Setting aside that the charges against him are absurd and counterfactual, Israel is not a signatory of the rome statute or a member of the ICC, and "Palestine" doesn't have a defined territory in which the ICC has jurisdiction. The court has overstepped their authority and put their credibility in question.
True
Palestine is recognized as a non-member observer state by the UN, which underpins the jurisdiction argument. Trying to imply that they aren't eligible for this because they are really just a Bantustan of Israel isn't exactly a great defense of Israel's non-violation of international law here. In what ways do you think it is counterfactual regarding Netanyahu.
@@beepoboopo546 Palestine isn't a country and fails the basic definition. They have no government and no defined territory. The PA who signed up to the UN didn't even have control of Gaza when they applied and haven't for decades. The ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel.
@@beepoboopo546 I'm not allowed to speak the truth on here apparently so I won't bother addressing the ICCs absurd nonsense. The Jurisdiction issue and the lack of standing to even bring an indictment is enough.
I thought Palestine was given its defined shape around the same time Israel was. You know, Jerusalem divided into 4 quarters etc
International Clown Court
you can't ask 'will he face charges' without first questioning the legitimacy of the accusation..................................THERE IS NO LEGITIMATE CASE FOR HIM TO ANSWER..............................the prosecutor is MUSLIM I have every reason to suspect he is NOT neutral his faith is guiding his judgement simple as that.....................therefore its all bull!!
I can certainly ask if he will face the Court without questioning the allegations. The ICC is an internationally mandated legal institution. The prosecutor has investigated and presented his findings to the judges who have said they believe there is enough evidence to issue a warrant. You may certainly feel that he shouldn’t face charges. But, equally, you haven’t reviewed the evidence.
@@JamesKerLindsay DEFINITION Genocide is the intentional destruction of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, in whole or in part.....................it is nonsense, Israel is engaged in a war there are always casualties, I would argue Israel has gone OUT OF ITS WAY to minimise loss of life.....................if PM's actions truly merited this accusation there would be a million or more dead, wounded, starved to death or crippled.........THERE IS NOTHING LIKE THAT..................LOOK TO UKRAINE & THE ACTIONS OF RUSSIA IF ICC WANT TO PROSECUTE GENOCIDE.............. NOT ISRAEL!
Here before Zionist bots
Please leave and take your worthless comment with you.
The arrest warrant is an absolute disgrace.
Yes, to Benni.
Is this the first time that the icc has issued a warrant for a leader on the defending side of a conflict? (I recognize that my question disregards the opinion of those who think that Hamas had a right to commit the attack of Oct 7th)
Yes, the ICC arrest warrant was a proper decision. He will get a fair trial and, if guilty, will be found guilty, and will be exonerated if not guilty. But no doubt he knows his own record of decisions so well, that he will lack the courage to answer for his deeds and policies.
That Israel and the US claim this damages the reputation of the ICC is irrelevant, not only have they never done anything to strengthen the reputation of the court, not only do they only care for International Law when the suspects are not their own nationals, the US even has issued a formal Act of Congress (The "The Hague Invasion Act") allowing the president of the US to order American troops to extricate any US citizens held at the court by force. That would present an interesting NATO Art.5 case
Not just US citizens but also officials of NATO countries and allied nations including Israel and South Korea.
If the Americans try that: we Dutch have a few good subs, some decent stealthy F-35’s courtesy of the USA, and while our army is tiny it is decently trained.
We won’t win, but we will not just stand aside.
What about Syria? The crimes alleged against Netanyahu may be true, but there is a strong suspicion of selective prosecution that reduces the impact and the trust that an objective juror, if one could exist, could have in judging the case.
The ICC also issued arrest warrants for Hamas too, don't claim this is selective because you're being silly
@Serocco yeah, but are their sponsor states gonna turn them over? No. There's no real system for holding these people accountable other than sponsors or the states themselves pledging to turn over the people in question. That very rarely happens.
@@zazapachuliaisbetterthanjo6254 The law never matters to the powerful.
It's not selective on the ICC's part. The ability to bring international leaders to trial is simply very difficult. It's really as simple as that.
In what justice system is there ever a perfect prosecution of everyone that could be prosecuted?
Israel is the Serbia of our time
you've misspelled germany
he is not a war criminal
Then he should stand trial and prove it, more women and children have been killed than in any other modern conflict, it's not exactly out of nowhere
They dont value human life
Tell that to the palestinians
@@anthonymanderson7671 sure i would tell them, hamas is using u for human shields , done elect terrorists, reform islam, so many things
Your coverage seems biased against Israel.
Why? I just presented the facts as they stand. Netanyahu has been accused of war crimes. I explained those charges. I’m not here to prosecute or defend him. But this is not actually a video about Israel, as such. It’s a video about war crimes trials and how the latest indictments present some very real questions about how and when international law is applied. Europe and the West talk about upholding international law. But many feel it is only selectively applied. This will reinforce that point. It is a sad fact of modern discourse that anyone talking about Israel-Palestine has to be painted as favouring one side or the other. I support the right of Israel to exist. I also support the right of the Palestinians to have their own state. And I stand against human rights abuses, no matter which side commits them.
Following the British Mandate of Palestine, did not the Arabs get their own state and call it Jordan? Were not the remaining Arabs offered a state in 1947, but they refused it? Are not the stated aims of groups like Hamas and Hezbollah to drive the Israeli completely out of the land? Why should the Arabs have another state in Palestine? The way you talk about the ICC warrant suggests you think that in theory Israel may defend itself, but in practice it may not because people may die.@JamesKerLindsay
@@iansmith2129 Sorry, but none of this has anything to do with the topic. I am happy to discuss them. And have done so in other videos. But this is about the war crimes indictments. Let’s focus on that.
@JamesKerLindsay we'll have to agree to differ on that one. Personally I think the history is very pertinent to whether the indictment is right or wrong. I think the history points to a political rather than judicial motive for the indictment.
Oy vey shut it down!
Thanks you prof Lindsay but i think it is take long to arrest him maybe when is retirement arrest him etc
In a perfect world should have
In our universe mostly unlikely
With today's information explosion I would have liked to think it is much more easy to travel towards a just world than ever before.
Imperfection or perfection lies in the human beings involved, future will show imperfection had its consequences too if history has not shown that yet to many types of people.
My personal view is , objective of any persecution and rule of law must be very clear, its bit eye for an eye, its not revenge but its creation and maintenance of a just world.
If it is believed thats not possible then all hell will break loose around the world, history will be dug up to generate mountains of excuses and there will be no arguments of un-justification to lean upon.
Should’ve mentioned the Akayesu Case @ICTR (first case where rape as a weapon of war was recognized and prosecuted)
There are always many things to be mentioned. But one thing you discover when writing scripts is that every mention then means you have to find your way back to the main path of the story. It’s not as easy as it seems.
He won't, because arresting Netanyahu would be seen as anti Semitic and we can't allow that in modern times can't we?
Yes. Issuing the warrant is the right thing to do because the court has jurisdiction in Palestine and because Netanyahu is clearly orchestrating and carrying out a genocide. Beyond this, the arrest warrant is simply the moral and correct thing to issue and act upon because crimes against humanity must always be punished. All this, and he will not be arrested, and he will get away with all of it because so many governments long to demonstrate their joyous collaboration in this genocide and their own abilities to carry out such atrocities.
@@mesamies123 just some more leftist virtue signalling drivel. No it’s not clear that Netanyahu is orchestrating a genocide. Not clear at all, weekend international lawyer. The icc’s arrest warrant is nothing but a political stunt against Israel itself in a desperate attempt to save the hamxs from destruction. Further than that Israel has a long trusted record of presiding over war criminals in its on country and I argue it’s much more sensible that if Netanyahu should be judged ..*IF*, there actually enough evidence besides pathetic straw grasping at tweets and media comments to justify bringing this to a court, then he should be judged under a tribune that uses facts and logic rather than political bias like the kangaroo court that is the ICC.
And finally I’ll say, I don’t have to but it worth pointing out, that you saying world leaders who would refuse to respect this sham are genocide supporters - it just sounds like Whiny cope to me. You, like every leftist out there, always live in some echo chamber of seething anti establishment hate, you always live in a reality of your own making and when your expectations come in collision with how normal, sensible people think and behave you throw a childish tantrum and rather blame everybody else around you for being “evil” instead of, god forbid, do some introspection and self critique. Stay that way, by all means. You get the attention and sense of narcissistic validation you seek and we get a perfect example of how *NOT* to think. Not to mention a good laugh as well..
No
War crimes? Vae victis! Dont you know that only the side that lost did war crimes?
You can’t compare Putin to Netanyahu
Putin is Russian in Russia
And Netanyahu who is originally Mileikowsky ( his father’s original family name) is Polish in Palestine
One is defending his country, the other is occupying other countries and committing gen o cide
Congratulations on such an... interesting take.