Then who orchestrated the attacks on only civilians? Hamas hurting civilians is nothing new. Both sides have been assholes long before this started. Everyone in the region would benefit from both parties being prosecuted.
Comment on Israel Gaza war: ICC prosecutor seeks arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Hamas leaders
NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 4 months agoI mean is there anything proving Hamas leaders intentionally planned any civilian deaths?
Ghost33313@kbin.social 4 months ago
NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 4 months ago
Then who orchestrated the attacks on only civilians?
They... didn't? That's exactly what I'm talking about. The attack had clear military objectives (taking hostages is morally grey but still not the kind of atrocity we're talking about). At least as far as I know everything you'll think of when you hear the words "Oct 7 Hamas atrocity" can be passed as, and probably is, spontaneous violence caused by the fact that Gazans hate Israelis' guts rather than any orders from the top brass.
eleventy_7@kbin.social 4 months ago
You're right that it is possible that Hamas didn't intend for the scale of civilian casualties that were seen on Oct. 7th, but even if that's true then they are still responsible for not keeping their people from commiting said spontaneous violence. As the leaders of a militant faction, like a regular military they are responsible for training their soldiers (or equivalent) and keeping them in line during operations.
I'm actually more on the Frantz fannon school of thought about the necessity of violence against oppressors to overthrow colonial regimes, so I'm more amenable to hamas' plight than most I think, but Oct. 7th is still pretty indefensible.
Having said all that, to make clear, I'm not defending Israel or their retributive genocide. Fuck them. But I don't think we should go easy on Hamas' war crimes either, so I don't think the ICC is really 'both-sides'-ing in this case.
NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 4 months ago
As the leaders of a militant faction, like a regular military they are responsible for training their soldiers (or equivalent) and keeping them in line during operations.
Does that responsibility fall on the top leaders or field commanders though? I can definitely see the argument that Hamas leadership is too easy on atrocities in general having legal ground, but how far up the ladder can you take that? Not trying to defend them or saying we should go easy on them here, don't get me wrong, but at least from an international law context I think Sinwar's hands are pretty clean?
BrikoX@lemmy.zip 4 months ago
They are money holders, and it was a well financed and coordinated attack. And they are in direct control even know as they try to negotiate ceasefire and hostage release.
NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 4 months ago
True enough, but there's only so much you can do once the soldiers are actual fighting if you're not on the field (especially when you don't particularly care either way). That said, I haven't seen anything since this "war" started that would serve as evidence to implicate, say, Sinwar in an international court of law. If he says "our plans didn't involve attacking civilians our soldiers didn't it out of their own accord" nobody can prove him wrong. Now I do think that's actually what happened (from a strategic perspective Hamas has too much to lose and too little to gain by killing civilians during a military attack), but even if that's not the case there's simply too little evidence to prove it.
BrikoX@lemmy.zip 4 months ago
Arrest warrant is not a sentence. If he’s brought to the court, he will have a chance to prove the lack of evidence. But even by proxy, leaders are responsible for the actions of their subordinates. Same way we attribute authorization given by leaders sitting in their “war rooms” to launch drone attacks or giving “go” to tactical teams to them and not individual actors.
NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social 4 months ago
Up to a point. If he says "I never gave that order" I don't think anyone can prive otherwise, is what I'm trying to say.