Have a look at the first 7 members of the ICJ if you thought that South Africa's case had a chance - eviltoast

(good to know in advance)

source

  • DamarcusArt@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    10 months ago

    When the west is collapsing and being held accountable for past crimes, they will try to deny them, try to insist they worked for “world peace” but their every vote at the UN is proof of the opposite.

    • soumerd_retardataire@lemmygrad.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Somalia needs some support with Somaliland, and https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Biden-Approves-Redeployment-of-US-Troops-to-Somalia-20220517-0003.html

      Jamaica doesn’t give any certainty either : https://globalvoices.org/2023/10/30/jamaicans-express-disappointment-over-their-countrys-no-show-un-gaza-vote/

      And i don’t think Brazil would want to expose themselves as much as South Africa did(, nor China for that matter), more to lose than to gain, that’s justice. Bolivia probably only supported the case because Luis Arce has forbidden Evo Morales from being reelected and is trying to show that ~‘he’s not a traitor to the movement’ despite that.
      Let’s say that they have a chance if you want though, it doesn’t matter because that’s not what would make a change, do they only have the option of a full-scale war with unknown consequences to do what’s right ? We’re just supposed to watch and then it’ll be as if nothing ever happened, ok.

      • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        It does matter, because a success will collapse the so-called “rules based international order” propaganda that the US uses to justify imperialism. Obviously it won’t stop the genocide and it won’t stop US imperialism, but it raises and heightens the contradictions.

        • soumerd_retardataire@lemmygrad.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          The u.s.a. was already condemned in the case of Nicaragua and nothing changed and nobody knows that, in the very improbable offchance that Israel was condemned, they would just act like Russia when the International Court of Justice ordered them to leave Ukraine.
          Let’s say that our medias talk about this improbable success and, even more improbable, support the ICJ and condemn Israel, everyone would just forget a month later. Sure, there’s nothing to lose by trying, but not much to gain either, it’s not the beginning of an effective solution, it’ll be the exact same shit as before.
          And the ICJ wouldn’t even need to be considered the bad guy, the contradiction wouldn’t raise an eyebrow, but let’s say i’m wrong, have an hope in this if you want.

          edit : That’s an exaggeration, those who hate Israel won’t forget such judgment and would remind us when they got the chance, that’s the difference i’m seeing, so you’re right to say that it’s not nothing to be able to label them officially as genocidal, it’d add a new argument/insult of choice.

          That’s ~two every three years :

          • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            10 months ago

            Nicaragua v US was almost 40 years ago, back when the US empire was at the height of its strength. Also, Israel’s genocide is ongoing, whereas Nicaragua v US happened several years after the Contra scandal. There are some clear differences here that you should acknowledge before you dismiss this as a nothing burger EDIT oh actually your edit addressed that nvm >.>

            I’m not saying this is The Thing that will end the genocide or end the US empire. I’m saying it’s one more straw for the camel’s back.