The Palestinians' decision to join the ICC deserves support

[bemildred]

The Israel exception to Western governments' human rights principles has been starkly on display in the reaction to the Palestinian Authority's decision to join the International Criminal Court. In Washington, Ottawa, Paris and London, as well as Tel Aviv, the response has ranged from discouraging to condemnatory. The Palestinian move has been seen as “counterproductive,” “deeply troubl[ing],” “a concerning and dangerous development” that could make a “return to negotiations impossible.” Before accepting these howls of protest, we should ask why, exactly, the Palestinian move is supposed to be bad.

Given the outcry, one would think this move targets only Israel, but the ICC doesn't work that way. Rather, the court will be empowered to prosecute war crimes committed in or from Palestinian territory — that is, crimes committed by Israelis or Palestinians. The court's prosecutor is not dependent on formal complaints by ICC members but can now initiate cases on her own.

Many of the Western objections are based on the argument that having the Palestinians in the ICC will somehow undermine Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations — moribund as they have been. The U.S. State Department opined that it would “damage the atmosphere” for peace.

But the broad parameters for peace have been known for years. What has been lacking is the trust between the two sides to make the painful decisions necessary for a peace accord. Nothing undermines that trust more than impunity for the war crimes that Human Rights Watch has found continue to characterize the conflict, whether settlement expansion, Hamas rocket strikes or Israel's lax attitude toward civilian casualties in Gaza. By helping to deter these crimes, the ICC could discourage these major impediments to peace.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0115-roth-palestinians-icc-20150115-story.html#navtype=outfit

[Jefferson23]

1. All best wishes for Abbas to use this wisely and avoid defeat, and avoid Bantustanville.

[oberliner]

2. ...says Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch

Not surprised that he would take this position.

[shira]

3. Same Ken Roth who goes out of his way defending Hamas while blasting Israel....

Roth pretends NOT to know that taking hostages is a war crime, whether civilian or military.

B'tselem disagrees.

International humanitarian law absolutely prohibits taking and holding a person by force in order to compel the enemy to meet certain demands, while threatening to harm or kill the person if the demands are not met. Furthermore, hostage-taking is considered a war crime and all those involved bear individual criminal liability.

But it's not just B'tselem's opinion. Here's the ICC on hostage taking, about a 1/3 of the way down the page. More proof in last paragraph here.

==========================================

Here's more Ken Roth on twitter going out of his way to give Hamas every possible benefit of the doubt....

https://twitter.com/KenRoth/status/501809183264899072/photo/1

According to HRW, Israel's malicious intent always presumed. Always a war crime. Meanwhile Hamas' intent must at all times be proven beyond any reasonable, even unreasonable doubt.

Another example of this.