BY Tarik Cyril Amar Historic irony: Germany is being sued over genocide complicity for helping Israel

 

A globally widespread turn against Israel is far from complete, but Managua’s case at the ICJ is one of its clearest indications 

On April 8 and 9, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), often referred to as the World Court, will hold hearings on a case brought by Nicaragua against Germany. Managua is accusing Berlin of facilitating genocide and breaches of international law by Israel against Palestinians and seeks to end military aid to the Jewish state.

The outcome of the hearings is unpredictable. But this is clearly an important event that could have far-reaching consequences, for three reasons: First, this is the highest court of the United Nations. It has no independent capacity to enforce its rulings, but they carry political weight, whether in the short or long term. Second, while Israel is not directly present in the courtroom, its ongoing genocide in Gaza is at the core of the proceedings. Third, whichever way the ICJ ends up ruling, its decision will have implications for other countries, especially in the West, which have supported Israel and its assault.

Nicaragua’s main argument is not complicated: the UN’s 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (in short, Genocide Convention) codifies more than one offense. Under its terms, perpetrating a genocide – Article 3(a) – is only one way to commit a horrific crime. In addition, so is serving as an accomplice – Article 3(e). And, finally, all signatory states commit themselves not only not to be either perpetrators or accomplices, but they have also signed up to prevent and punish genocide – Article 1.

Managua’s representatives argue that Berlin is guilty on two main counts: “Germany is facilitating the commission of genocide,” they maintain, which means acting as an accomplice. And “in any case has failed in its obligation to do everything possible to prevent the commission of genocide.” In addition, Nicaragua also accuses Berlin of being in breach of international humanitarian law, also known as the law of armed conflict, as well as various other binding norms of international law – by helping Israel continue its illegal occupations, its apartheid system, and its “negation of the right of self-determination of the Palestinian people.”

Despite persistent misinformation, the term “apartheid” does not refer only to the historic case of the racist South African regime between (formally) 1948 and the early 1990s. Rather, apartheid has been an internationally recognized crime against humanity for half a century already, as confirmed again by Article 7 of the Rome Statute (the basis of the International Criminal Court) of 1998. Put simply, apartheid is a crime of the same category as, for instance, “extermination” or “enslavement” and can occur, unfortunately, anywhere.

In the same vein, the right to self-determination is not a matter of ideology or political rhetoric or, for that matter, choice. Rather, it is a bedrock principle of modern international law. It was codified in the UN Charter and has been reaffirmed repeatedly in key conventions and treaties as well as perhaps most famously in the 1960 UN General Assembly “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples.”

Nicaragua, in sum, is not fooling around: Its case appeals to numerous cardinal obligations under international law. It also digs much deeper than “merely” Germany’s actions during Israel’s currently ongoing genocidal attack on the Palestinians. In that respect, the case focuses on Germany’s continuing and, as a matter of fact, escalating military exports to Tel Aviv* and on Berlin’s decision to cut off financial support to the United Nations Agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA). But Managua is also targeting the fundamentals of Berlin’s long-standing policy toward Israel and thus, inevitably, also toward Palestine. The stakes, hence, are even higher than they may appear at first sight.

The public response in Germany has been muted and often unserious: The arch-conservative Weltnewspaper, for instance, suspects that Nicaragua is acting in Russia’s interest: Germany is a key supporter of EU sanctions on Russia over Ukraine, so Managua – caricatured in the best Cold War style as “Moscow-loyal” – must be trying to deliver payback on the Kremlin’s behalf. Evidence? Zero, of course. (Welt is of course a flagship publication of the Axel Springer media group, which is extremely pro-Israel. It also makes money from brokerage in Israel’s illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank.)

But Germany and its convoluted motivations and rationalizations are not, actually, the most interesting aspect of this case. That, instead, lies in its international implications: This is the first time the ICJ has been asked to rule on an accusation of complicity in the Gaza Genocide.

South Africa’s complaint against Israel was, of course, about Israel’s role as the main perpetrator of the crime. The ICJ, it is important to recall, found that there is a plausible possibility that Israel is indeed committing genocide, which at this point was the worst possible outcome for Tel Aviv (because full decisions in such cases always take years). The judges issued several instructions to Israel (all of which its government has treated with total contempt) and, of course, allowed the case to proceed. In view of the way in which Israel has since only escalated its lawless violence, it may, hence, well find itself fully convicted in the not so distant future.

Meanwhile, even the ICJ’s preliminary finding that genocide is plausible has increased the urgency of the complicity issue: If genocide is at least a plausible possibility, then so is being an accomplice. Hence, the key question becomes how the court will define complicity. It is hard to see how supplying arms and ammunitions would not qualify. Likewise, Germany’s suspension of financial support for UNRWA was absurd, based on Israeli allegations that, in turn, are likely to have involved extorting false confessions by torture.

There is a reason that many other countries (such as Norway, Ireland, Belgium, Türkiye, Spain, Portugal, and Saudi Arabia) never cut off support for UNRWA, while others that did initially stop paying resumed funding (France, Japan, Sweden, Finland, Canada, and the EU). Germany’s foul compromise – to partially restore funding but to specifically exclude Gaza, where help is most urgently needed – may not impress the judges.

Nicaragua, nonetheless, is unlikely to prevail with all its charges, even if – in this author’s opinion – they all make perfect sense. But even a partial victory for Managua would have implications far beyond Germany. If the judges follow the plaintiff’s key argument about complicity even to some extent, then every government and international body that has supported Israel during its current assault on the Palestinians will be at risk of facing similar charges. As they should be.

This potential precedent effect would be reason for deep concern for the US, Great Britain, France, and the EU as a whole, or at least its power-grabbing Commission under the ruthless Israel supporter Ursula von der Leyen. As the Washington Post has noted, there is a growing global momentum, at long last, for stopping arms supplies to Israel. The US and Germany, supplying almost 99% of all arms imports to Israel, are the two major holdouts, but they also appear increasingly isolated.

And not only institutions would have reason to worry, but individuals as well. Some British civil servants are already rebelling because they resent being made accomplices to a genocide. In the same vein, more than 600 important lawyers, academics and former judges, including former Supreme Court judges have publicly warned the British government “that it is breaching international law by continuing to arm Israel.” 

This turn toward a more critical attitude toward Tel Aviv has been catalyzed mightily by the recent Israeli massacre of seven staffers of the World Central Kitchen (WCK) aid organization. While one of the victims was a young Palestinian, the others were, generally speaking, “Westerners.” Clearly, these deaths meant much more to Western elites and, on the whole, publics than those of over 30,000 Palestinians. Even in the US, dozens of Democrats in Congress have now publicly demanded that arms transfers to Israel stop. The signers included not only traditional critics of Israel such as Rashida Tlaib but also hardcore Israel supporter Nancy Pelosi.

Nicaragua filed its case with the ICJ on March 1. The hearings will take place now. As it has turned out, the viciousness of Israeli forces in general, and in the particular case of the attack on the WCK convoy, has meant that Berlin, and indirectly, Tel Aviv are now facing those hearings against a widespread, if far from complete, turn against Israel. The judges at the ICJ are, of course, jurists of the highest caliber. Their assessment of the case will not depend on this immediate background, and they may even decide to throw out Managua’s case, although they should not. But the issue of complicity in Israel’s genocide will not go away, one way or the other.

Finally, what many Germans seem to be missing, such as the hapless yet arrogant Welt with its blinkered and tired Cold War phraseology, is the fact that Nicaragua is a classical representative of both the Global South and the emerging multipolar world. In the shape of Germany, it is challenging an equally traditional, if secondary and crisis-ridden, representative of the West. The fact alone that the West is losing control of both key institutions and narratives marks fundamental change. In the infamously racist terms of EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell, the “jungle” is paying a visit to the “garden.” And it’s the garden that is on the defensive: legally, morally, and in the eyes of most of humanity.

*Russia recognizes West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, as shown on the Russian Foreign Ministry’s Consular Department website

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

SEE ALSO: https://www.voltairenet.org/article220699.html

The text evokes “fears of genocide in Gaza”.

The UN Human Rights Council (HRC), meeting on Friday in Geneva, adopted a resolution calling for an arms embargo on Israel, which is waging an all-out war in the Gaza Strip having already been more than 33 000 dead.

The text calls for a cessation of all transfers of weapons, ammunition and other military equipment to Israel, citing “fears of genocide in Gaza».

28 of the 47 members of the Council voted in favor of the text. Among them, Brazil, and even South Africa. 6 voted against, including Germany and the United States, while 13 countries abstained, including France and India, according to a message posted on the HRC's X account.

This is the first position taken by the United Nations human rights body in the war that has been raging in the Gaza Strip since October 7, even if the HRC resolutions are not binding. .

The text condemns “Israel's use of explosive weapons with a wide range of action» in populated areas of the besieged Palestinian enclave.

The eight-page document was submitted by Pakistan on behalf of 55 of the 56 UN member states in the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), except Albania. It is co-sponsored by Bolivia, Cuba in addition to the Palestinian Authority.

This resolution comes as international pressure increases on the Netanyahu government, with United States President Joe Biden warning the Israeli Prime Minister in a telephone interview on Thursday that American support for the Jewish state would now depend on “concrete measures» implemented to protect civilians and humanitarian workers in the Palestinian enclave.

Biden also urged Netanyahu to strike a deal for a “immediate ceasefire».

Israel is being prosecuted before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for the “crime of genocide”. In an order issued in January, the ICJ ordered Tel Aviv to end its genocidal actions and take steps to ensure the delivery of humanitarian aid to the civilian population of the Gaza Strip.​​​​​​​

https://en.reseauinternational.net/onu-le-cdh-exige-larret-de-toute-vente-darmes-a-israel/

 

it's time for being earnest.....

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

Accountability for the deaths of innocent people applies to Australia too     By Margaret Reynolds

 

The death of young aid worker Zomi Frankcom in Gaza last week was a tragic reminder that we have all failed to stop this unrelenting violence against the innocent. Many Australians have been horrified that the six months war continues, because governments fail to uphold international law and even our own leaders have hidden from their obligations.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Foreign Minister, Penny Wong gave speeches of condolences to Zomi’s family and friends. expressing the “outrage of Australians” in phone calls to the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Israel, but their language revealed fatal flaws in the Australian Government’s response.

Telling Netanyahu that targeting a World Kitchen Aid convoy delivering food to starving Palestinians is “unacceptable “is a totally inadequate response to continuing war crimes committed daily against the people of Palestine. Indeed, many Australians find it totally “unacceptable “that the Federal Government refuses to accept any responsibility for this outrageous military violence which has killed more than 32,000 people. When will the Albanese Government face the consequences of its support for an administration that ignores international law and is being called to account by the International Court of Justice for genocide? Is the Albanese Government determined to remain a friend and ally of this leader of Israel? Does he still subscribe to the mantra “Israel has a right to defend itself “which has been used to enable the collective punishment of the Palestinian people?

The Australian Government has now appointed Air Chief Marshall Binksin to conduct a comprehensive investigation into the targeting of the World Kitchen Aid convoy, already condemned internationally as a deliberate attack and part of the Israel Defence Force strategy to restrict aid reaching starving Palestinians. It is essential that the Australian Government use this investigation to provide evidence that will be considered by International Criminal Court and International Court of Justice.

However, Anthony Albanese cannot avoid scrutiny of those Australian ministerial decisions that have led to failures in his government upholding international humanitarian law. He must also be “accountable” for his own government’s actions.

Since January 26th when the International Court of Justice determined that “genocide was plausible”, Australian civil society has been calling on the Albanese Government to recognise its responsibilities as a signatory to the Genocide Convention. Yet there has to date been no formal statement by the Attorney General and there appears to be an absolute refusal to even consider the question of complicity.

On January 18 at a press conference in the Middle East, Foreign Minister Penny Wong was asked
‘There are a significant number of Australian Israeli citizens fighting inside Gaza. Has the government sought any legal advice about their fighting if Israel has breached any international law?’ Her response “No. Anything else?”

Apparently, this significant question has never been answered and no Australian journalist has investigated just how many Australian- Israeli joint citizens could be charged with war crimes. The question has certainly been openly debated in Britain where the Foreign Minister David Cameron released the information that at least 80 British nationals were serving in the Israel Defence Force. However, this information was only released after the British Information Commissioner threatened to have the High Court hold the Foreign Office in contempt.

The British Government has been reminded of its responsibilities as a signatory to the Genocide Convention by over 600 lawyers academics and retired judges in a letter to the Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak

“to end through lawful means acts giving rise to a serious risk of genocide -namely to stop arming Israel while it carries out atrocities in Gaza “This letter follows a leaked recording revealing the British Government is ignoring advice of its own lawyers not to continue supplying weapons to Israel for its Gaza operations.

In the United States members of Congress and eminent lawyers and scholars are openly debating the question of genocide and how those countries supplying weapons to Israel are complicit in genocide.

Are Australian lawyers within Prime Minister and Cabinet, Foreign Affairs, Defence and the Attorney General’s Department providing this advice?

The Defence Minister Richard Marles tried to assure Australians that there were “no exports of weapons to Israel for many many years” However between 2015 and 2023 the Australian Government approved 322 export permits for military and dual use equipment to Israel. As recently as February 2024 the Israeli arms company Elbit Systems was awarded a $917 million contract by the Australian Department of Defence. Was this specifically approved by the minister after he gave those assurances? Will the Australian Government now cancel that contract following the example of Japanese trading giant Itochu Corp which severed ties with Elbit Systems after the International Court of Justice preliminary ruling on Israel’s actions in Gaza?

These are just some of many public policy questions that must be answered by the Albanese Government to clarify how Australia is responding to the International Court of Justice. We need a comprehensive public statement that explains to what extent Australia may risk complicity with genocide.

These essential questions remain unanswered-

When will the Albanese Government provide its official response to the International Court of Justice preliminary ruling on January 26th?

How many joint Australian-Israeli citizens have served with the Israel Defence Force in the last six months?

Which weapons manufacturing companies based in Australia supply arms to the Israel Defence Force?

What defence contracts for the provision of military and dual use equipment has the Defence Minister approved in the last six months?

The Inspector General of Intelligence has received a complaint regarding activities at Pine Gap constituting possible complicity in genocide.

Will this complaint be urgently investigated, and the report tabled in parliament in the May 2024 sitting?

Will the Australian government “pause” diplomatic relations and arms sales to Israel until a permanent two state agreement is negotiated?

 

https://johnmenadue.com/accountability-for-the-deaths-of-innocent-people-applies-to-australia-too/

 

it's time for being earnest.....

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

Telk Qadeya : Gaza a démasqué l'hypocrisie abjecte de l'Occident (VOSTFR)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g2XSk0xSByI&t=55s

 

it's time for being earnest.....

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....