“Complicity” is too mild a word for the US involvement in this genocide - they’re in it up to their eyeballs! Not that genocide is anything new to this godforsaken capitalist hellscape of a country.
Complicity is defined as “the state of being an accomplice; partnership or involvement in wrongdoing.” Pretty much says up to eyeballs in it. Agree that the U.S. and its settler colonialist ancestors have been pretty much engaged in genocide since 1607 when the colony at Jamestown was founded. No surprise it facilitates Israel’s Genocide.
Genocide should be among the most powerful and damning of words possible, but to the extent reckless claims are made upon it and its use politicized by self-interested actors, that power risks being perverted and denuded.
Schabas is far from the "world's leading scholar" on the issue, and in fact is one of those who's contributed to confusion surrounding it as a legal principle. (See his prevarications regarding Myanmar and the Rohingya, or regarding what happened in Srebrenica.)
Frankly, when it comes to issues as complicated and explosive as that of the relationship between Palestinians and Israelis I expect a high adherence to fact checking and precision. Uncritically republishing this press release, as well as the press release itself, fails that test.
I have also been accessing other material such as the letter by Craig Mokhiber in which he resigned as Director of the New York Office of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. It reads in part:
“As a human rights lawyer with more than three decades of experience in the field, I know well that the concept of genocide has often been subject to political abuse. But the current wholesale slaughter of the Palestinian people, rooted in an ethno-nationalist settler colonial ideology, in continuation of decades of their systematic persecution and purging, based entirely upon their status as Arabs, and coupled with explicit statements of intent by leaders in the Israeli government and military, leaves no room for doubt or debate. In Gaza, civilian homes, schools, churches, mosques, and medical institutions are wantonly attacked as thousands of civilians are massacred. In the West Bank, including occupied Jerusalem, homes are seized and reassigned based entirely on race, and violent settler pogroms are accompanied by Israeli military units. Across the land, Apartheid rules. This is a text-book case of genocide. The European, ethno-nationalist, settler colonial project in Palestine has entered its final phase, toward the expedited destruction of the last remnants of indigenous Palestinian life in Palestine. What’s more, the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and much of Europe, are wholly complicit in the horrific assault. Not only are these governments refusing to meet their treaty obligations “to ensure respect” for the Geneva Conventions, but they are in fact actively arming the assault, providing economic and intelligence support, and giving political and diplomatic cover for Israel’s atrocities. “
Mokhiber and others cite the 1948 UN Genocide Convention, which states,
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
There is a prima facia case Israel is violating at least a, b an c.
I think we will continue to disagree. Mokhiber also called for the end of the Israeli state, and entirely ignored the October 7th massacre in his statement.
I believe that there is a lot of wrong being committed on both sides of this conflict, and as a result a lot of innocent people are suffering. I also don't think that view excludes the need for people to be able to live peacefully, with dignity, regardless of who they might be, so long as that doesn't infringe on the right of others to do so as well.
I don't think ascribing genocide to Israel's actions, or more specifically here the actions of the United State's government, is either correct or that it will contribute to a solution.
(Also, the intent part of the above citation is integral, and all of clauses are caught by it. The groups caught by the Act do not include political groups, which Hamas is. So that's only prima facia if the rest of the Act is ignored.
To the extent Israel targets Hamas, even where there is collateral damage, this will be a very difficult case to make in a court of law. Hamas has said that they are perfectly fine with Palestinians being that collateral damage, in fact they've acknowledged that's a part of their strategy, so if it's harm that is being suffered by Palestinian civilians that is the concern, then yes, Israel has responsibilities, but Hamas certainly does, too.)
Yes, it certainly does, I fully agree with that. We are talking about whether that constitutes genocide, however.
As I said, a big part of that claim will rest on whether the targeting of Palestinian civilians is intentional, as a matter of government policy, and whether that intention is due to their group affiliation. (Gaza Palestinian isn't a group that is distinct from West Bank Palestinian, nor of Israel Palestinian, the later two of which aren't being similarly targeted or caught up in violence, though they also have respective concerns to varying degrees.)
The quotes in the linked article are reprehensible. But, government officials don't equal government policy, and case law in this area associates intent with the existence of a government or organizational plan or policy. The quotes don't get there.
To reiterate, my concerns remain with how easily people are using the term "genocide", and that by doing so they risk watering down its power, and consequently its effectiveness in holding those who commit it to account.
Gallant calling out “human animals” when announcing the cut-off of food, water and electricity seems pretty damned close to government policy. He is talking about and targeting a whole population here. Meanwhile, the UN Convention covers a group in part as well as whole.
I hope this action succeeds. This genocide has to stop, and I've seen numerous experts say that what Israel is doing to Gaza is indeed genocide.
“Complicity” is too mild a word for the US involvement in this genocide - they’re in it up to their eyeballs! Not that genocide is anything new to this godforsaken capitalist hellscape of a country.
Complicity is defined as “the state of being an accomplice; partnership or involvement in wrongdoing.” Pretty much says up to eyeballs in it. Agree that the U.S. and its settler colonialist ancestors have been pretty much engaged in genocide since 1607 when the colony at Jamestown was founded. No surprise it facilitates Israel’s Genocide.
Genocide should be among the most powerful and damning of words possible, but to the extent reckless claims are made upon it and its use politicized by self-interested actors, that power risks being perverted and denuded.
Schabas is far from the "world's leading scholar" on the issue, and in fact is one of those who's contributed to confusion surrounding it as a legal principle. (See his prevarications regarding Myanmar and the Rohingya, or regarding what happened in Srebrenica.)
Frankly, when it comes to issues as complicated and explosive as that of the relationship between Palestinians and Israelis I expect a high adherence to fact checking and precision. Uncritically republishing this press release, as well as the press release itself, fails that test.
I have also been accessing other material such as the letter by Craig Mokhiber in which he resigned as Director of the New York Office of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. It reads in part:
“As a human rights lawyer with more than three decades of experience in the field, I know well that the concept of genocide has often been subject to political abuse. But the current wholesale slaughter of the Palestinian people, rooted in an ethno-nationalist settler colonial ideology, in continuation of decades of their systematic persecution and purging, based entirely upon their status as Arabs, and coupled with explicit statements of intent by leaders in the Israeli government and military, leaves no room for doubt or debate. In Gaza, civilian homes, schools, churches, mosques, and medical institutions are wantonly attacked as thousands of civilians are massacred. In the West Bank, including occupied Jerusalem, homes are seized and reassigned based entirely on race, and violent settler pogroms are accompanied by Israeli military units. Across the land, Apartheid rules. This is a text-book case of genocide. The European, ethno-nationalist, settler colonial project in Palestine has entered its final phase, toward the expedited destruction of the last remnants of indigenous Palestinian life in Palestine. What’s more, the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and much of Europe, are wholly complicit in the horrific assault. Not only are these governments refusing to meet their treaty obligations “to ensure respect” for the Geneva Conventions, but they are in fact actively arming the assault, providing economic and intelligence support, and giving political and diplomatic cover for Israel’s atrocities. “
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24103463-craig-mokhiber-resignation-letter
Mokhiber and others cite the 1948 UN Genocide Convention, which states,
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
There is a prima facia case Israel is violating at least a, b an c.
https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention%20on%20the%20Prevention%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Genocide.pdf
I would not have republished this press release if I had not critically examined this issue myself.
I think we will continue to disagree. Mokhiber also called for the end of the Israeli state, and entirely ignored the October 7th massacre in his statement.
I believe that there is a lot of wrong being committed on both sides of this conflict, and as a result a lot of innocent people are suffering. I also don't think that view excludes the need for people to be able to live peacefully, with dignity, regardless of who they might be, so long as that doesn't infringe on the right of others to do so as well.
I don't think ascribing genocide to Israel's actions, or more specifically here the actions of the United State's government, is either correct or that it will contribute to a solution.
(Also, the intent part of the above citation is integral, and all of clauses are caught by it. The groups caught by the Act do not include political groups, which Hamas is. So that's only prima facia if the rest of the Act is ignored.
To the extent Israel targets Hamas, even where there is collateral damage, this will be a very difficult case to make in a court of law. Hamas has said that they are perfectly fine with Palestinians being that collateral damage, in fact they've acknowledged that's a part of their strategy, so if it's harm that is being suffered by Palestinian civilians that is the concern, then yes, Israel has responsibilities, but Hamas certainly does, too.)
The intent to which he refers is by Israeli government officials. And statements go far beyond Hamas to an entire population. See here.https://normanfinkelstein.substack.com/p/fighting-amalek-in-gaza-what-israelis?r=36q38&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&fbclid=IwAR3nnPCtEaPNSymRfzZzCbhnsGBaMHQRsJQuKxP7VEM7SpilwyosGtp_tpU In terms of acts against groups, shutting off vital services to an entire civilian population fits (c) in the above. By no means do I absolve Hamas of responsibility. But to argue that bombing whole neighborhoods and killing well over 11,000 people is mere collateral damage stretches credulity.
Yes, it certainly does, I fully agree with that. We are talking about whether that constitutes genocide, however.
As I said, a big part of that claim will rest on whether the targeting of Palestinian civilians is intentional, as a matter of government policy, and whether that intention is due to their group affiliation. (Gaza Palestinian isn't a group that is distinct from West Bank Palestinian, nor of Israel Palestinian, the later two of which aren't being similarly targeted or caught up in violence, though they also have respective concerns to varying degrees.)
The quotes in the linked article are reprehensible. But, government officials don't equal government policy, and case law in this area associates intent with the existence of a government or organizational plan or policy. The quotes don't get there.
To reiterate, my concerns remain with how easily people are using the term "genocide", and that by doing so they risk watering down its power, and consequently its effectiveness in holding those who commit it to account.
Gallant calling out “human animals” when announcing the cut-off of food, water and electricity seems pretty damned close to government policy. He is talking about and targeting a whole population here. Meanwhile, the UN Convention covers a group in part as well as whole.
Should have objected at brought a lawsuit after 2001 since which the U.S. has killed nearly a million people around the world:
https://www.brown.edu/news/2021-09-01/costsofwar