they seek a declaration from the court that defendants are violating their duty under customary international law
Here’s the nasty little secret about “international law” that people don’t seem to understand. The most powerful countries don’t have to abide by it. There are no mechanisms for enforcement. There aren’t world police who have international jurisdiction, there aren’t world courts that have international subpoena power. So the countries at the top can enforce it when it’s in their interest, and ignore it when it’s not. Them the rules of an anarchical system, “rules for thee not for me”
The goal is to expose and to try every avenue available. Which should be the logic thing to do in face of a genocide.
Maybe something comes out of it. Probably not. But in the latter case at least it is evident, that there is no moral high ground with the US and its allies. It is evident that working with these terror states creates complicity in the most heinous crimes and other countries can be held accountable for it.
It can create an understanding for future generations that neoliberalism like it is endorsed by both US parties or so called “social democrats” or “greens” in countries like Germany is nothing but fascism with extra steps.
💯💯💯 If this process weren’t going on, others would come out of the woodwork going “if Biden is committing war crimes why isn’t the international community calling him out for it?”
Maybe not the same people who are doubting this, but it would happen. When genocide is happening it’s good to do what we can rather than send thoughts and prayers.
Sometimes I do think Lemmy forgets that structured social pressure among leadership is a thing.
Like no, BDS isn’t going to suddenly cripple the Israeli economy, nor is Biden going to suddenly get arrested for war crimes.
But that doesn’t make these actions meaningless. Best case it compounds with other action over time into concrete progress, and worst case it at least provides conviction and encouragement to leaders trying to do the right thing.
What’s the end goal here?
Here’s the nasty little secret about “international law” that people don’t seem to understand. The most powerful countries don’t have to abide by it. There are no mechanisms for enforcement. There aren’t world police who have international jurisdiction, there aren’t world courts that have international subpoena power. So the countries at the top can enforce it when it’s in their interest, and ignore it when it’s not. Them the rules of an anarchical system, “rules for thee not for me”
The goal is to expose and to try every avenue available. Which should be the logic thing to do in face of a genocide.
Maybe something comes out of it. Probably not. But in the latter case at least it is evident, that there is no moral high ground with the US and its allies. It is evident that working with these terror states creates complicity in the most heinous crimes and other countries can be held accountable for it.
It can create an understanding for future generations that neoliberalism like it is endorsed by both US parties or so called “social democrats” or “greens” in countries like Germany is nothing but fascism with extra steps.
💯💯💯 If this process weren’t going on, others would come out of the woodwork going “if Biden is committing war crimes why isn’t the international community calling him out for it?”
Maybe not the same people who are doubting this, but it would happen. When genocide is happening it’s good to do what we can rather than send thoughts and prayers.
Hopefully get that Genocidal Geriatric behind bars for the rest of his miserable life.
But mostly dispel the illusion that the Democrats care about Justice no matter how hard they try to act on the Hunter Biden stuff.
Sometimes I do think Lemmy forgets that structured social pressure among leadership is a thing.
Like no, BDS isn’t going to suddenly cripple the Israeli economy, nor is Biden going to suddenly get arrested for war crimes.
But that doesn’t make these actions meaningless. Best case it compounds with other action over time into concrete progress, and worst case it at least provides conviction and encouragement to leaders trying to do the right thing.