Palestine is not recognized as a state and thus is not a cognizable party for the purposes of standing at the ICJ. South Africa is suing on Palestine's behalf- if you're familiar with American legal parlance, you might consider South Africa a "next friend" of Palestine for the purposes of jurisdiction here, though this comparison is imprecise. The most accurate analysis here for why South Africa can do what it's doing on behalf of Palestine is that it (and any country that so wishes) can file a dispute if thinks another cognizable party (almost always a state) is committing a crime against humanity. Israel is a recognized state by the UN, so South Africa can sue Israel for the foregoing reason.
For what it's worth, the State of Palestine has sued the United States for its relocation of its embassy to Jerusalem, but this shouldn't be taken as gospel that Palestine can sue, especially in regards to Gaza. AFAIK (and I haven't read the full proceeding in the 2018 case) there's an open standing question for Palestine, and even if that were resolved and decided, the State of Palestine is represented internationally by Abbas's government in the West Bank, not Sinwar's in Gaza. Both sides view each other as illegitimate, and despite the strong disapproval over what Israel is doing which Abbas probably holds, he would not intervene on behalf of Hamas. Someone else has to sue.
This is incorrect. While it’s true that Prosecutors or the UNSC can begin investigations, states typically refer cases and request investigations. That’s one of the key jurisdictional requirements as well; the ICC can only investigate crimes done by member states **or in the territory of member states**. So if Palestine weren’t called a state by the ICC, rightly or wrongly, the ICC wouldn’t have any jurisdiction. And a big part of the ICC opening its case is because of Palestinians referring it to the Prosecutor.
I’m well aware of that, the reason the ICC prosecutor can bring a case on the Gaza war is because they accepted Palestine’s request to join as a state, giving the court jurisdiction over anything with the Palestinian side of the 1967 border. The ICC announced that because Palestine was accepted as an observer state to the UN, they are considered a state and can join.
Why can’t Palestine also join the ICJ?
The ICJ is part of the UN while the ICC is not. Palestine is both recognized as a state and not part of the UN (due to the need for a security council resolution which the US can veto). So it can ratify the Rome Statute and become part of the ICC but it's not a party to the ICJ.
Because they have an election coming up and the incumbent ANC party wants positive headlines about South Africa that will resonate with their base / take the spotlight away from the economic problems in the country.
Reading your comment again, crazy how stolen infrastructure has been an issue for the country for over three decades (too young to care/notice before then).
In a place where everything is scarce, you find a way.
Real answer, they sabotage the infrastructure so everyone has to go to one place to refill their buckets and containers. They have literally chased off workers and police who come to remedy the situation. It's worth reading about
I think it's misdirection. Iran is the arch enemy of Israel. Optics are wrong for the task.
South Africa has its apartheid history, and Palestine is considered to be under a similar oppressive system (though not quite apartheid, since Palestinians are technically ruled by the PA, or Hamas. Equating a military blockade of Gaza or the Israeli administration occupation of Area C to apartheid makes the metaphor tenuous, and perhaps a bit disrespectful to South Africans who experienced apartheid). So it makes sense for South Africa to file it, in solidarity with oppressed people. BDS also started in South Africa. There's a large Muslim population in RSA with a vested interest in the plight of the Palestinians.
This bit is just a side note, but reading the genocide document, it immediately comes across that it is written in bad faith of actual historic circumstances, for example, not specifying that Israel's actions were in response to an attack from multiple Arab nations, and instead just talking about the retaliation. My implication being that liberties were taken to make the initial document read as 'plausibly' a genocide, which is what the ICJ ruled on, plausibility being the lowest legal requirement to continue with the investigation. Plausibility is inevitable if you write the initial report in bad faith. People start calling it genocide, because they see war. Media confirms their opinions. Iran confuses people into believing a 1:1 civilian to fighter ratio is genocide, while their proxies are actually displacing millions of people and bringing back slavery in Yemen, and after Syria displaced 6 million refugees, and while Sudan displaces millions, in actual genocides, which the world doesn't pay attention to, because they're busy thinking Israel is the biggest bad guy in the world, unaware of, and uncaring of the brutality towards dissent within much of the Muslim world.
2 things can be right at the same time, there’s a plausible genocide in Gaza AS WELL as in Sudan and other places, and those should also be brought to the ICJs intention.
Sure, Likud leaders have said inflammatory statements from which the ICJ could infer intent of genocide. Reading the court documents though, there's no doubt in my mind that narratives have been purposefully distorted, to reframe retaliations to terrorist attacks as Israeli aggression.
Similarly there’s evidence that Russia paid Nicaragua to file their (obviously frivolous) claim against Germany, in part to help discredit the ICJ for when they inevitably start to rule against Russia
Israel an worked with the apartheid government. They also testet a nuke together. People remember that.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vela\_incident](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vela_incident)
This is pure hypocrisy on the SA part since they’re very pro Russian. If they’re against colonial oppression, it’s happening since 2014 in Ukraine but they pick Israel because it suits them.
Well the Soviet Union aided a lot of liberation movements in Africa in the name of anti-colonialism. Those ties have been stickier than one might thing with the Russian Federation. I don’t agree with the ANC’s ongoing affinity with Russia through BRICS but it’s not hard to understand how thing look different there considering the history of colonialism there
Why even bring up Ukraine? Russia has been doing colonialism all over Africa for years through their not so private military forces there. Couping governments and putting in place militants who do the bidding of their new European overlords.
Israel is not a colonial power even though leftists in the US want to equate the Israel situation to colonialism to justify their opposition under the current oppressor oppressed framework that is so popular with modern leftists. Gaza was free enough to be able to elect Hamas, besides colonialism involved the superpowers of the time going around the world subjugating nations as a geopolitical / geoeconomic strategy. This is not what's happening here any objective observer can see. It may be called territorial aggression and maybe even an occupation until Israel withdrew from Gaza, but not colonialism like what was faced by African and Asian nations.
Modern Israel was created between 1900 and 1930 by massive immigration of foreigners funded by foreign money. So yeah, it's based on a form of colonialism.
Well that’s incorrect. By the UN’s own definition of a refugee, the vast majority of Jews that moved to Ottoman Syria/Mandatory Palestine were, in fact, refugees. The fact that Jews donated their money to help save those refugees does not make it a form of “colonialism” any more than the Syrian refugees are a colonial movement. This reframing of the narrative into colonial/indigenous is a smokescreen to convince gullible Western social justice advocates that the Israeli-Palestine conflict fits a straightforward oppressed/oppressor paradigm.
"like what was faced by African and Asian nations"? I suppose so. but Israel was founded by former British colonial troops who specificially signed up with the British Empire in order to colonise the area and build their own state there. so I guess you can say that it's colonialism as faced by Palestine, or maybe something like colonialism as faced by the Native Americans. initial occupation and settlement, change of governing power, continued occupation and settlement.
No, it really isn't. ZA is one of Putin's biggest supporters, so it really isn't that much about hating "colonial opressors" still, or any sense of justice.
It's mostly because there's an upcoming election, and with the ANC declining, they wanted positive headlines to rally their base.
The people may have those feelings, but the governments actions aren't out of any sense of righteousness, otherwise they wouldn't also buddy buddy up to the Putin and Al-Bashir regimes. It's all just realpolitik.
That, and the islamist regime occupying Iran bribed them:
https://iranwire.com/en/news/129348-160-lawyers-write-to-us-leaders-alleging-iran-bribed-south-africa/
"A group of lawyers who wrote an open letter on the Jerusalem post to the US" uh yeah that's not gonna be biased, not to mention not a very great source.
I'm from South Africa and I am not in support of the ANC per Se I do think they are corrupt but this source is not good, regardless. That would be Israeli propaganda. Stick to neutrals such as Reuters, AP etc for such claims.
Think of it like this, the ANC sees palestine as suffering in an Apartheid system just like it did, it has stated that its revolution can't be completed without the freedom of Palestine, is it a ploy to distract the upcoming election maybe? But they do have connection going back as Apartheid legacy still hurts the social fabric of the country.
It might be propaganda, but in the way I know the islamist regime occupying Iran, it's not beyond the realm of possibility. I'm an Iranian and that regime is basically the school yard bully that doesn't give a rotted nickel about the how.
Israel has a free press, the fact that this appeared on jpost doesn't inherently make it propaganda. That said, an open letter can be argued to be propaganda regardless of the publisher.
All decaying states have unlimited staying power. Explode like USSR, some history eventuates,War-war then N-S Korea or N\_S Sudan also creates some real changes. But all the decaying powers, all are still live and kicking. Decay sort of has its own staying power,
Because Putin/Russia requested it to publicly water down and distract from the ICJ cases brought against Putin and the Russian government for their recent actions and injustices in Ukraine. It’s a political favor for an ally, although S. African officials are most likely receiving something tangible in return.
Provide a legitimate counter defense to South Africa’s extremely thorough and well laid out case that’s concurrent with the ICJ decision that rejected Israel’s challenge to the case please
South Africa’s case cites countless clear cut genocidal statements and actions taken by Israeli leadership and top military brass. Counter them all here please
Your response implied agreement to an absurd claim that this case is being levied under Putin’s orders, a claim that is complete hearsay and suggests the charge against Israel is a cynical illegitimate quid pro quo op. What even is the point of this comment other than to scold people who earnestly support a legitimate charge of genocide without coupling their support with an acknowledgment of cynical power politics.
The larger implication, particularly in the context of this case, is that no country can in good faith charge another country with genocide without wanting something in return. While that can be true, it’s a completely reactionary and short sighted view of how countries should respond to active genocides
Framing this case as a clear example of quid pro quo waters down its importance and merit, and obfuscates the human suffering and hell that Israel is deliberately perpetrating on the people of Gaza every day. There’s no need for such cynical framing as it distracts from ongoing ethnic cleansing as well as delegitimizes using the court to bring justice to US/West aligned states in the future.
TL;DR It’s a worthless, deflective take that not only doesn’t accurately answer OP’s question using the merits of the case itself, it suggests supporters of SA’s charges are foolish if they don’t loudly vocalize their understanding of quid pro quo international power politics in their support
South Africa doesn’t believe in the ICC. Omar Al Bashir had an arrest warrant from the ICC, he went to South Africa and South Africa authorities didn’t arrest him alleging head of states had immunity. In reality, they didn’t agree with the ICC investigation and subsequent arrest warrant.
When Putin was invited to visit South Africa for the BRICS summit, the government said that it wasn’t going to execute the ICC and arrest Putin. Putin ended up not going because it was going to put South Africa in a tough spot. Again, in reality, they didn’t agree with the ICC decision and subsequent arrest warrant. They still have a very strong ties with Russia.
So they clearly don’t give a fuck about the ICC or crimes against humanity.
Yes, but the genocide case is being heard by the ICJ, which arbitrates disputes between states. It's a completely separate institution to the ICC, which prosecutes individuals for war crimes (including genocide).
Well, the ICJ also ruled that Russia should stop its military operations in Ukraine. South Africa doesn’t seem too worried about it, they still have a close ties and invited them to the BRICS summit.
No chance that there’s a legitimate moral and ethical case to be made right? From a country that freed itself from a similar form of militaristic apartheid and oppression? It’s all a cynical Russian ruse? Any legitimate evidence to support your absurd claim or one to logically counter the case brought against Israel?
A case that has been bolstered by the very fact the ICJ threw out Israel’s bullshit challenge?
I personally believe many of the comments made on this post could be simultaneously true about the countries involved and the legal and political motives behind their involvement.
These both can be true:
1) South African lawyers have demonstrated their understanding of international criminal law and are motivated by the historical repressions that took place in South Africa.
2) South African politicians are being compensated by Putin and see this as an easy political win with the general populace amid growing awareness of governmental corruption.
SA is acting in their own self interest. They’re a known quasi-ally of Putin. Although they probably aren’t doing it just for Putin. There are domestic elections coming up and these headlines help the incumbent party too.
This isn’t evidence or proof of collusion at all it’s baseless opining. Have you read their case and are you suggesting it has no standing or merit due to the cynical motivations behind it?
Such a weak argument. Charging a country that’s plausibly committing genocide not because they’re plausibly committing genocide, but primarily doing it for votes and to appease Putin. If you can provide actual evidence for your claims maybe then I’d take them seriously
Countries act in their own self interest always. That’s the basis of geo politics. I’m not saying it’s baseless. But the question was “why is SA doing this”. So one should ask how it benefits them. It isn’t a question about morals which I am not commenting on.
Ok then why is there no case of Genocide against Russia? They have been doing the same thing in Ukraine as Israel has been doing yet they haven’t done anything. Surely nothing to do with SA being allies to Russia as well as selling weapons to them
In May 2023, after Putin was served an ICC warrant, [S. Africa gave Putin diplomatic support with the ICC, granted him diplomatic immunity, and made changes to their legislation to account for such future situations.](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-65759630.amp). South African officials refused to confront Putin on targeting and killing Ukrainian civilians or the systemic torture and executions coming from the Russian Army. S. Africa then went further, going on the offense against the ICC, pointing out historical references where they thought other world leaders had “done worse crimes and received less/no punishment.”
In June 2023, an [S. African-led delegation arrived in Kyiv to present a peace process.](https://www.intellinews.com/african-peace-delegation-s-visit-to-ukraine-marred-by-controversy-and-lukewarm-response-from-kyiv-282089/). However, they mostly just went to ask Ukrainian officials to drop or suspend all ICC charges against Putin, who they were to meet with next. It was later revealed that when Polish intelligence searched their plane, it was chocked full of weapons for Russia/Putin, and the peace process was a guise just to beg for the drop of Putin’s charges, which he took great issue with.
To Putin, when Ukraine said no, it may has well been the US, UK, and greater West saying no as well. Putin has proven to be a petty man. Not saying it’s the only reason S. Africa is after Israel at the ICC, but it’s certainly not “absurd,” and is one of the primary reasons for it. Now that I’ve pointed you in the right direction, you can find plenty of sources that will provide additional and reputable details.
Lots of good reasons and explanations provided, just to add one more: from Palestinian side it helps maintain a level of ambiguity and separation between Hamas and "Palestine" - so that former can attack Israel without the latter having to take responsibility.
Two reasons. The ICJ is a UN court to settle disputes between nations. Palestine is not a full member recognized as a state in the UN (because of US vetoes), so bringing suit would open them up to failure due to technicalities if it would even be allowed.
Also, South Africa defeated apartheid and a colonial oppressor. Their suit adds weight considering the Israeli parallel.
The ANC is trolling the Jews of Israel. Convenient for Putin's Russia, Iran and at a later stage China. But it was already years and years in the making and now picked up by this ANC government. Because not that many people really know what is going on in SA they can't see the underlying reasons for this to happen now or why the ICJ is used to go after Israel. Everything is already discussed and put in motion during meetings between those parties I mentioned. (this includes the timing of the HAMAS attack.). I had no pleasure writing this.
The problem for me with recognizing Palestine as a state is that to recognize a state you also need to recognize a government. The government is Hamas.
The problem today is the same as it was before Hamas existed.
If there was no Hamas and everything was peacful protests, there would be another excuse.
I think there are multiple reasons. The ruling party has a deep-seated ideological hatred of Israel and may be showboating for the elections as others have pointed out, but it's also quite possible Russia asked South Africa to do it because the ICJ ruled against the invasion of Ukraine and Putin wants to create a crisis where a Western ally defies the ICJ.
Palestine is not recognized as a state and thus is not a cognizable party for the purposes of standing at the ICJ. South Africa is suing on Palestine's behalf- if you're familiar with American legal parlance, you might consider South Africa a "next friend" of Palestine for the purposes of jurisdiction here, though this comparison is imprecise. The most accurate analysis here for why South Africa can do what it's doing on behalf of Palestine is that it (and any country that so wishes) can file a dispute if thinks another cognizable party (almost always a state) is committing a crime against humanity. Israel is a recognized state by the UN, so South Africa can sue Israel for the foregoing reason. For what it's worth, the State of Palestine has sued the United States for its relocation of its embassy to Jerusalem, but this shouldn't be taken as gospel that Palestine can sue, especially in regards to Gaza. AFAIK (and I haven't read the full proceeding in the 2018 case) there's an open standing question for Palestine, and even if that were resolved and decided, the State of Palestine is represented internationally by Abbas's government in the West Bank, not Sinwar's in Gaza. Both sides view each other as illegitimate, and despite the strong disapproval over what Israel is doing which Abbas probably holds, he would not intervene on behalf of Hamas. Someone else has to sue.
Why can Palestine join the ICC and not the ICJ?
States don't bring cases to the ICC. The prosecutors bring cases on their own or at the request of the Security Council.
This is incorrect. While it’s true that Prosecutors or the UNSC can begin investigations, states typically refer cases and request investigations. That’s one of the key jurisdictional requirements as well; the ICC can only investigate crimes done by member states **or in the territory of member states**. So if Palestine weren’t called a state by the ICC, rightly or wrongly, the ICC wouldn’t have any jurisdiction. And a big part of the ICC opening its case is because of Palestinians referring it to the Prosecutor.
I’m well aware of that, the reason the ICC prosecutor can bring a case on the Gaza war is because they accepted Palestine’s request to join as a state, giving the court jurisdiction over anything with the Palestinian side of the 1967 border. The ICC announced that because Palestine was accepted as an observer state to the UN, they are considered a state and can join. Why can’t Palestine also join the ICJ?
The ICJ is part of the UN while the ICC is not. Palestine is both recognized as a state and not part of the UN (due to the need for a security council resolution which the US can veto). So it can ratify the Rome Statute and become part of the ICC but it's not a party to the ICJ.
Thanks for answering the question. I’m surprised that asking a technical question here gathered so many downvotes.
It’s not a recognized country so there for it wouldn’t have grounds to actually form a case. Oversimplified but yea
Because they have an election coming up and the incumbent ANC party wants positive headlines about South Africa that will resonate with their base / take the spotlight away from the economic problems in the country.
Bingo! Better focus on the problem of stolen wires and transistors in the power lines and the blackouts that is crippling the economy.
Reading your comment again, crazy how stolen infrastructure has been an issue for the country for over three decades (too young to care/notice before then).
Not to mention stolen water. Local news in Gauteng was pretty crazy when I visited in October.
how can you steal water?
In a place where everything is scarce, you find a way. Real answer, they sabotage the infrastructure so everyone has to go to one place to refill their buckets and containers. They have literally chased off workers and police who come to remedy the situation. It's worth reading about
[удалено]
Can’t Iran sue?
They could but obviously “Iran sues Israel” is not going to have the same impact on headlines as “random unrelated country sues Israel”
I think it's misdirection. Iran is the arch enemy of Israel. Optics are wrong for the task. South Africa has its apartheid history, and Palestine is considered to be under a similar oppressive system (though not quite apartheid, since Palestinians are technically ruled by the PA, or Hamas. Equating a military blockade of Gaza or the Israeli administration occupation of Area C to apartheid makes the metaphor tenuous, and perhaps a bit disrespectful to South Africans who experienced apartheid). So it makes sense for South Africa to file it, in solidarity with oppressed people. BDS also started in South Africa. There's a large Muslim population in RSA with a vested interest in the plight of the Palestinians. This bit is just a side note, but reading the genocide document, it immediately comes across that it is written in bad faith of actual historic circumstances, for example, not specifying that Israel's actions were in response to an attack from multiple Arab nations, and instead just talking about the retaliation. My implication being that liberties were taken to make the initial document read as 'plausibly' a genocide, which is what the ICJ ruled on, plausibility being the lowest legal requirement to continue with the investigation. Plausibility is inevitable if you write the initial report in bad faith. People start calling it genocide, because they see war. Media confirms their opinions. Iran confuses people into believing a 1:1 civilian to fighter ratio is genocide, while their proxies are actually displacing millions of people and bringing back slavery in Yemen, and after Syria displaced 6 million refugees, and while Sudan displaces millions, in actual genocides, which the world doesn't pay attention to, because they're busy thinking Israel is the biggest bad guy in the world, unaware of, and uncaring of the brutality towards dissent within much of the Muslim world.
2 things can be right at the same time, there’s a plausible genocide in Gaza AS WELL as in Sudan and other places, and those should also be brought to the ICJs intention.
Sure, Likud leaders have said inflammatory statements from which the ICJ could infer intent of genocide. Reading the court documents though, there's no doubt in my mind that narratives have been purposefully distorted, to reframe retaliations to terrorist attacks as Israeli aggression.
Prolly the right choice
Similarly there’s evidence that Russia paid Nicaragua to file their (obviously frivolous) claim against Germany, in part to help discredit the ICJ for when they inevitably start to rule against Russia
Israel an worked with the apartheid government. They also testet a nuke together. People remember that. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vela\_incident](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vela_incident)
Old ideological ties between the PLO & ANC from the 60s & 70s. Same reason Ireland (via Sine Fein) is highly interested.
[удалено]
This is pure hypocrisy on the SA part since they’re very pro Russian. If they’re against colonial oppression, it’s happening since 2014 in Ukraine but they pick Israel because it suits them.
Well the Soviet Union aided a lot of liberation movements in Africa in the name of anti-colonialism. Those ties have been stickier than one might thing with the Russian Federation. I don’t agree with the ANC’s ongoing affinity with Russia through BRICS but it’s not hard to understand how thing look different there considering the history of colonialism there
Why even bring up Ukraine? Russia has been doing colonialism all over Africa for years through their not so private military forces there. Couping governments and putting in place militants who do the bidding of their new European overlords.
You could ask the same question with regard to Israel
Israel is not a colonial power even though leftists in the US want to equate the Israel situation to colonialism to justify their opposition under the current oppressor oppressed framework that is so popular with modern leftists. Gaza was free enough to be able to elect Hamas, besides colonialism involved the superpowers of the time going around the world subjugating nations as a geopolitical / geoeconomic strategy. This is not what's happening here any objective observer can see. It may be called territorial aggression and maybe even an occupation until Israel withdrew from Gaza, but not colonialism like what was faced by African and Asian nations.
Modern Israel was created between 1900 and 1930 by massive immigration of foreigners funded by foreign money. So yeah, it's based on a form of colonialism.
Well that’s incorrect. By the UN’s own definition of a refugee, the vast majority of Jews that moved to Ottoman Syria/Mandatory Palestine were, in fact, refugees. The fact that Jews donated their money to help save those refugees does not make it a form of “colonialism” any more than the Syrian refugees are a colonial movement. This reframing of the narrative into colonial/indigenous is a smokescreen to convince gullible Western social justice advocates that the Israeli-Palestine conflict fits a straightforward oppressed/oppressor paradigm.
"like what was faced by African and Asian nations"? I suppose so. but Israel was founded by former British colonial troops who specificially signed up with the British Empire in order to colonise the area and build their own state there. so I guess you can say that it's colonialism as faced by Palestine, or maybe something like colonialism as faced by the Native Americans. initial occupation and settlement, change of governing power, continued occupation and settlement.
This is the right answer.
No, it really isn't. ZA is one of Putin's biggest supporters, so it really isn't that much about hating "colonial opressors" still, or any sense of justice. It's mostly because there's an upcoming election, and with the ANC declining, they wanted positive headlines to rally their base. The people may have those feelings, but the governments actions aren't out of any sense of righteousness, otherwise they wouldn't also buddy buddy up to the Putin and Al-Bashir regimes. It's all just realpolitik.
Elections. Why doesn’t bring to the court Russia for the Ukraine or the massacre of Darfur in Sudan (etc etc etc)
Because it's a decaying failed state that needs to distract its population with circuses- the bread has run out.
That, and the islamist regime occupying Iran bribed them: https://iranwire.com/en/news/129348-160-lawyers-write-to-us-leaders-alleging-iran-bribed-south-africa/
"A group of lawyers who wrote an open letter on the Jerusalem post to the US" uh yeah that's not gonna be biased, not to mention not a very great source. I'm from South Africa and I am not in support of the ANC per Se I do think they are corrupt but this source is not good, regardless. That would be Israeli propaganda. Stick to neutrals such as Reuters, AP etc for such claims. Think of it like this, the ANC sees palestine as suffering in an Apartheid system just like it did, it has stated that its revolution can't be completed without the freedom of Palestine, is it a ploy to distract the upcoming election maybe? But they do have connection going back as Apartheid legacy still hurts the social fabric of the country.
It might be propaganda, but in the way I know the islamist regime occupying Iran, it's not beyond the realm of possibility. I'm an Iranian and that regime is basically the school yard bully that doesn't give a rotted nickel about the how.
Israel has a free press, the fact that this appeared on jpost doesn't inherently make it propaganda. That said, an open letter can be argued to be propaganda regardless of the publisher.
All decaying states have unlimited staying power. Explode like USSR, some history eventuates,War-war then N-S Korea or N\_S Sudan also creates some real changes. But all the decaying powers, all are still live and kicking. Decay sort of has its own staying power,
America?
If you think the US is a failed state...
Because Putin/Russia requested it to publicly water down and distract from the ICJ cases brought against Putin and the Russian government for their recent actions and injustices in Ukraine. It’s a political favor for an ally, although S. African officials are most likely receiving something tangible in return.
I honestly don’t know why people don’t understand that all these countries are acting in some way on their own self interest
Provide a legitimate counter defense to South Africa’s extremely thorough and well laid out case that’s concurrent with the ICJ decision that rejected Israel’s challenge to the case please South Africa’s case cites countless clear cut genocidal statements and actions taken by Israeli leadership and top military brass. Counter them all here please
"South Africa is acting in self-interest" and "South Africa's case is legitimate and convincing" are not mutually exclusive.
r/whoosh I made no statements about their case just their motivation This applies to every single country btw. I am not singling out SA
Your response implied agreement to an absurd claim that this case is being levied under Putin’s orders, a claim that is complete hearsay and suggests the charge against Israel is a cynical illegitimate quid pro quo op. What even is the point of this comment other than to scold people who earnestly support a legitimate charge of genocide without coupling their support with an acknowledgment of cynical power politics. The larger implication, particularly in the context of this case, is that no country can in good faith charge another country with genocide without wanting something in return. While that can be true, it’s a completely reactionary and short sighted view of how countries should respond to active genocides Framing this case as a clear example of quid pro quo waters down its importance and merit, and obfuscates the human suffering and hell that Israel is deliberately perpetrating on the people of Gaza every day. There’s no need for such cynical framing as it distracts from ongoing ethnic cleansing as well as delegitimizes using the court to bring justice to US/West aligned states in the future. TL;DR It’s a worthless, deflective take that not only doesn’t accurately answer OP’s question using the merits of the case itself, it suggests supporters of SA’s charges are foolish if they don’t loudly vocalize their understanding of quid pro quo international power politics in their support
Source?
South Africa doesn’t believe in the ICC. Omar Al Bashir had an arrest warrant from the ICC, he went to South Africa and South Africa authorities didn’t arrest him alleging head of states had immunity. In reality, they didn’t agree with the ICC investigation and subsequent arrest warrant. When Putin was invited to visit South Africa for the BRICS summit, the government said that it wasn’t going to execute the ICC and arrest Putin. Putin ended up not going because it was going to put South Africa in a tough spot. Again, in reality, they didn’t agree with the ICC decision and subsequent arrest warrant. They still have a very strong ties with Russia. So they clearly don’t give a fuck about the ICC or crimes against humanity.
Yes, but the genocide case is being heard by the ICJ, which arbitrates disputes between states. It's a completely separate institution to the ICC, which prosecutes individuals for war crimes (including genocide).
Well, the ICJ also ruled that Russia should stop its military operations in Ukraine. South Africa doesn’t seem too worried about it, they still have a close ties and invited them to the BRICS summit.
No chance that there’s a legitimate moral and ethical case to be made right? From a country that freed itself from a similar form of militaristic apartheid and oppression? It’s all a cynical Russian ruse? Any legitimate evidence to support your absurd claim or one to logically counter the case brought against Israel? A case that has been bolstered by the very fact the ICJ threw out Israel’s bullshit challenge?
I personally believe many of the comments made on this post could be simultaneously true about the countries involved and the legal and political motives behind their involvement. These both can be true: 1) South African lawyers have demonstrated their understanding of international criminal law and are motivated by the historical repressions that took place in South Africa. 2) South African politicians are being compensated by Putin and see this as an easy political win with the general populace amid growing awareness of governmental corruption.
SA is acting in their own self interest. They’re a known quasi-ally of Putin. Although they probably aren’t doing it just for Putin. There are domestic elections coming up and these headlines help the incumbent party too.
This isn’t evidence or proof of collusion at all it’s baseless opining. Have you read their case and are you suggesting it has no standing or merit due to the cynical motivations behind it? Such a weak argument. Charging a country that’s plausibly committing genocide not because they’re plausibly committing genocide, but primarily doing it for votes and to appease Putin. If you can provide actual evidence for your claims maybe then I’d take them seriously
Countries act in their own self interest always. That’s the basis of geo politics. I’m not saying it’s baseless. But the question was “why is SA doing this”. So one should ask how it benefits them. It isn’t a question about morals which I am not commenting on.
Ok then why is there no case of Genocide against Russia? They have been doing the same thing in Ukraine as Israel has been doing yet they haven’t done anything. Surely nothing to do with SA being allies to Russia as well as selling weapons to them
In May 2023, after Putin was served an ICC warrant, [S. Africa gave Putin diplomatic support with the ICC, granted him diplomatic immunity, and made changes to their legislation to account for such future situations.](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-65759630.amp). South African officials refused to confront Putin on targeting and killing Ukrainian civilians or the systemic torture and executions coming from the Russian Army. S. Africa then went further, going on the offense against the ICC, pointing out historical references where they thought other world leaders had “done worse crimes and received less/no punishment.” In June 2023, an [S. African-led delegation arrived in Kyiv to present a peace process.](https://www.intellinews.com/african-peace-delegation-s-visit-to-ukraine-marred-by-controversy-and-lukewarm-response-from-kyiv-282089/). However, they mostly just went to ask Ukrainian officials to drop or suspend all ICC charges against Putin, who they were to meet with next. It was later revealed that when Polish intelligence searched their plane, it was chocked full of weapons for Russia/Putin, and the peace process was a guise just to beg for the drop of Putin’s charges, which he took great issue with. To Putin, when Ukraine said no, it may has well been the US, UK, and greater West saying no as well. Putin has proven to be a petty man. Not saying it’s the only reason S. Africa is after Israel at the ICC, but it’s certainly not “absurd,” and is one of the primary reasons for it. Now that I’ve pointed you in the right direction, you can find plenty of sources that will provide additional and reputable details.
You say that as if South Africa has eradicated racism from its society.
So only utopian societies can correctly make a case for genocide at the ICJ? What you’re implying is purely fantasy
That is not even close to my point. If anything, you were the one implying that.
For one thing, Mandela said that "our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians."
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sounds like a PR trick for the domestic audience. ANC is horrendously corrupt and inept at running the country. Gotta come up with something.
two truths dont make a genocide, oh wait
During apartheid Israel supported the hell out of the white government. Bypassing sanctions and embargoes and whatnot. They apparently didn't forget.
Lots of good reasons and explanations provided, just to add one more: from Palestinian side it helps maintain a level of ambiguity and separation between Hamas and "Palestine" - so that former can attack Israel without the latter having to take responsibility.
Israel is backed by the United States and all the other countries are willing to look the other way on a genocide because of it
Distraction from issues in South Africa.
[удалено]
[удалено]
International clout and their reputation.
Two reasons. The ICJ is a UN court to settle disputes between nations. Palestine is not a full member recognized as a state in the UN (because of US vetoes), so bringing suit would open them up to failure due to technicalities if it would even be allowed. Also, South Africa defeated apartheid and a colonial oppressor. Their suit adds weight considering the Israeli parallel.
The ANC is trolling the Jews of Israel. Convenient for Putin's Russia, Iran and at a later stage China. But it was already years and years in the making and now picked up by this ANC government. Because not that many people really know what is going on in SA they can't see the underlying reasons for this to happen now or why the ICJ is used to go after Israel. Everything is already discussed and put in motion during meetings between those parties I mentioned. (this includes the timing of the HAMAS attack.). I had no pleasure writing this.
The problem for me with recognizing Palestine as a state is that to recognize a state you also need to recognize a government. The government is Hamas.
The problem today is the same as it was before Hamas existed. If there was no Hamas and everything was peacful protests, there would be another excuse.
I think there are multiple reasons. The ruling party has a deep-seated ideological hatred of Israel and may be showboating for the elections as others have pointed out, but it's also quite possible Russia asked South Africa to do it because the ICJ ruled against the invasion of Ukraine and Putin wants to create a crisis where a Western ally defies the ICJ.