A Dutch court has ruled there was a "clear risk" F-35 planes would be involved in Israel breaking international humanitarian law

Dutch court F-35 ban: a “clear risk of serious violations of humanitarian law” by Israel

The Appeals Court in the Hague sided with a group of human rights organisations that argued the parts contributed to violations of law by Israel in its war with Hamas. The court’s ruling

The court therefore orders the State to put an end to the further export of F-35 parts to Israel within seven

There is a clear risk that serious violations of humanitarian law of war are committed in the Gaza Strip with Israel’s F-35 fighter planes.

That ruling “strengthen[ed] our confidence in a positive ruling in our case”, said PAX Netherlands, one of the rights groups involved in the appeal.

“This positive ruling by the judge is very good news. Especially for the civilians in Gaza,” said Michiel Servaes, head of Oxfam Novib, another group involved in the appeal.

  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
    57·
    9 months ago

    Thanks. Sad to hear that the Judge didn’t use harsher words

    But israel is factually committing Genocide. And the Netherlands is complicit in Genocide. So the title is still true. The word “may” should even be removed.

    When it came to Uyghurs or Ukrainians everyone is allowed to use the word Genocide. But when israel does it we suddenly become really sensitive about language.

    • Humanius@lemmy.worldEnglish
      44·
      9 months ago

      You claim that Israel is “factually” committing genocide, but there are legitimate reasons why people are hesitant to outright call what is going on in Gaza a genocide.

      On Wikipedia the definition of genocide is as follows:

      In 1948, the United Nations Genocide Convention defined genocide as any of five “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”. These five acts were: killing members of the group, causing them serious bodily or mental harm, imposing living conditions intended to destroy the group, preventing births, and forcibly transferring children out of the group. Victims are targeted because of their real or perceived membership of a group, not randomly.

      Key part in this definition that people generally get hung up on in the case of the Gaza, is the “intent to destroy”.

      Very few people are arguing that Israel is not extremely heavy-handed with their actions in Gaza, to the point that they have likely committed war crimes against the civilians of Gaza. However it is insanely difficult to prove that there is an “intent to destroy” in full, or in part, the Palestinian people in Gaza as a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.

      There are plausible explanations as to why the current operation might not meet that definition.

      Maybe it is a genocide… Maybe the Israeli army is merely very heavy-handedly eradicating a terrorist group, with a high civilian death toll as a side-effect… The latter is almost definitely a war crime, but it is not necessarily a genocide. We simply do not have the full picture yet.

      I think editorializing actual statements made by the court to make them sound like they support the case for genocide, only serves to muddy the discussion. And I take pretty big issue with that.

      Edit: Small disclaimer… I’m talking in this case about what is currently going on in Gaza.
      What is going on in the West-Bank with the settlers is a different matter.

      That situation I consider to be ethnic displacement, at the very least, committed by the settlers with the full support of the Israeli government.

      • reddit_sux@lemmy.world
        42·
        9 months ago

        Except that Israeli government is asking for an extermination of Palestinians and there are plans for using flattened Gazan land.

        I and ICJ calls it genocide.

        • Humanius@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          9 months ago

          The ICJ has not said that Israel is definitively committing genocide

          https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/key-takeaways-world-court-decision-israei-genocide-case-2024-01-26/

          The [ICJ] ordered Israel to refrain from any acts that could fall under the Genocide Convention and to ensure its troops commit no genocidal acts in Gaza.
          “At least some of the acts and omissions alleged by South Africa to have been committed by Israel in Gaza appear to be capable of falling within the provisions of the (Genocide) Convention,” the judges said.

          The ICJ has said that there is a possibility that some of the allegations that South-Africa has brought forward might fall under the definition genocide.
          That is not a definitive statement. That is saying that further investigation is justified.

          I have also not seen the Israeli government openly calling for genocide or the extermination of the Palestinian people. However, I have seen plenty of instances of the Israeli government calling for the elimination of Hamas.
          It could be that “Hamas” is a veiled placeholder for “Palestinians”, but it could also very well be that they are specifically talking about the terrorist group.

          My problem is not the suggestion that it might be genocide. I’m not even entirely convinced that it isn’t. My problem is people claiming that it is definitely, factually, genocide, while referencing statements by courts that have never been made.

      • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldOP
        54·
        9 months ago

        You’re right this means the Uyghurs and Ukrainians are nog getting genocided. Great argument.

        But the Palestinians still are since Netanyahu and his cabinet is calling for the extermination of all Palestinians on live TV in 4K. They’re as passionate and open about their genocide as Hitler was.

      • bartolomeo@suppo.fi
        32·
        9 months ago

        However it is insanely difficult to prove that there is an “intent to destroy”

        Not in this case, Israel has made it very easy actually:

        there had been “reiteration and repetition of genocidal speech throughout every sphere of state in Israel” such that “the evidence of genocidal intent is not only chilling, it is also overwhelming and incontrovertible”.

        Israel has claimed that “from the river to the sea” is literally a call for genocide and then Netanyahu said that Israel “must have security control over the entire territory west of the Jordan River" and has stated he opposes a Palestinian homeland, which is genocidal intent according to their own opinion. I think anyone casting doubt on the accusation of genocide (aside from Zionists) are genocide apologists or have wet cardboard for brains. That includes people who swallow hasbara hook, line, and sinker.