War crimes charges to be brought against Israel?

Palestinian Authority seeking war crimes charges to be brought against Israel?

Is the West next in line for war crimes against ISIL and terrorists (such as in Pakistan)?


Palestinian Authority submits documents to UN to join International Criminal Court
http://rt.com/news/219439-palestine-icc-un-join/ - January 02, 2015 [extracts]

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas signed the Rome Statute, the founding treaty to join the International Criminal Court, on Tuesday, a day after the UNSC failed to adopt the Arab coalition’s bid for the creation of a Palestinian state.

The ICC has already recognized Palestine’s “observer” status at the UN General Assembly, and the dispatch of the signed documents marks the final step in the process of consolidating its membership in the court.

On Thursday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke out against the move saying that: “It is the Palestinian Authority – which is in a unity government with Hamas, an avowed terrorist organization that, like ISIS, perpetrates war crimes – that needs to be concerned about the International Criminal Court in the Hague.”

In response to the move, a senior State Department official has warned that attempts by the Palestinians to deliver to the UN documents on joining the International Criminal Court might affect the US aid its receiving.

UN security council rejects Palestinian statehood bid
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/30/un-security-council-rejects-palestinian-statehood-bid - Associated Press - 30 December 2014
The resolution failed to get the minimum nine “yes” votes required for adoption by the 15-member council.

The resolution received eight “yes” votes, two “no” votes — one from the United States and the other from Australia — and five abstentions. Until shortly before the vote, council diplomats had expected the resolution to get nine “yes” votes. But Nigeria, which had been expected to vote “yes,” abstained.
LVL 24
Who is Participating?
Point 1 : Agreed.

Point 2. No. casting stones is akin to taking the law into one's own hands.

Extra point. I'm all in favor of the Palestinians joining the ICC. It would make then liable for prosecution for things they might have or might not have done.
Point 1: Israel is not a member of ICC and as such the Court has no jurisdiction over it.

Point 2: Let those who are without sin be the first to cast a stone.
SunBowAuthor Commented:
The whole thing seems to remain too ambiguous to me, generality, fine print, loop holes. Their attempt to be in UN failed, while any nation can bring charges, prosecutor can on own, differing forms of agreement, definition, while it seems to remain that the veto power from Security Council can offer protection/shield.

I'd more care they pursue that more obvious, such as the targeting of school children, and ISIL.

My best guess is that we three agree that the answer(s) to question are "no" for different reasons (less discussed in detail).

Rather lengthy, now found this:
Article 16 of the Rome Statute allows the Security Council to prevent the Court from investigating or prosecuting a case

The ICC is intended to exercise its jurisdiction when certain conditions are met, such as when national courts are unwilling or unable to prosecute criminals or when the United Nations Security Council or individual states refer investigations to the Court. The ICC began functioning on 1 July 2002.

Article 8 defines war crimes depending on whether an armed conflict is either international (which generally means it is fought between states) or non-international (which generally means that it is fought between non-state actors, such as rebel groups,...most serious crimes, however, are those that constitute either grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, which only apply to international conflicts, and serious violations of article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions of 1949, which apply to non-international conflicts...

Samples from map (eyesight needs help to list all):

Signatory that has not ratified (yellow):
America (US)

Non-state party, non-signatory (red)
North Korea
Saudi Arabia

State Party (green)
South Africa
South America
South Korea

State party for which it has not entered into force (blue)
Free Tool: SSL Checker

Scans your site and returns information about your SSL implementation and certificate. Helpful for debugging and validating your SSL configuration.

One of a set of tools we are providing to everyone as a way of saying thank you for being a part of the community.

We are all playing games. We should either come up with one set of rules for everyone, or just give up on this Franskenstien we call the UN and ICC.
SunBowAuthor Commented:
Closed - cleaning up after all had a couple weeks to comment, we've other questions to attend to.

Conclusion seems to be unanimous, that nothing much will come of it for widening the ICC prosecutions per questions above. Much ado about nothing

The 'extra point' could be ... stepping stone towards improved peace negotiations, if not improved agreements. (lead to choice for best answer)
SunBowAuthor Commented:
> one set of rules for everyone,

Definitely. Among gripes with those promoting 'fixed' tax, (ex libertarians), they ever come up with exceptions and loopholes, 'simplified taxes' that are plainly not simple.

Why await an (ineffective) UN, decisions, debates, drafts, dragging issues on and on, posturing, when something can be done now.

Among the backing/admiration in US of Israel is the lasting ideal for making of Entebbe raid, (July 3–4, 1976), rescue by an Israeli commando squad

- and I was also trying to line up another for the big boys who pay off accountants rather than taxes, (fines of but a billion or two - pocket change? No crime?

> Franskenstien

HaHa - almost missed that, lightening my grey day
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.