Thread

ICC judge on what U.S. sanctions mean for her and global courts

229 points · 173 comments · rbanffy

msdz · 1790961668 · focus · HN ↗
Regardless of what one personally thinks about the ICC, this isn’t a good look for neither the US nor Europe.
For the U.S., because sanctioning an “unpleasant”, but in essence harmless individual (geopolitically speaking) is ridiculous. Falling victim to de-banking alone can really ruin one’s life.
And for the EU, because it once again showcases the dependence on U.S. systems for just about anything tech-related in everyday life and work.
1. nostrademons · 1790963177 · focus · HN ↗
  It undermines the idea of the U.S. as a neutral arbiter for law, order, and free commerce. That may always have been a fiction, but it's a very useful fiction because it underpins U.S. soft power. It's much easier to get consent for being the world hegemon when you act like a benevolent, disinterested hegemon. Once you start becoming a participant - and overriding other institutions that are ostensibly providing neutral, impartial justice just because their decisions are inconvenient for you - you are essentially placing yourself below them and undermining your own legitimacy.
  Neutrality and objectivity may be a fiction, but it's one of the most useful fictions that have been invented in the last 500 years.
  1. jfengel · 1790963945 · focus · HN ↗
    America has apparently decided that the fiction is no longer useful. At least not to us.
    I can't say I'm happy about that, but it's a fact now. We cannot put that genie back in the bottle. Even a change of leadership soon will not alter the realization that it can change back on a moment's notice.
    So... we will find out.
    laimewhisps · 1790964089 · focus · HN ↗
    I think we will come to realize that liberalism died in Gaza. It exposed all of the hypocrisy that had always been there, it was just hidden under a mask of propaganda. Exposure to the raw events on social media allowed people to see the difference between what was happening and what we were being told. The mask came off and it's not going back on.
    mschuster91 · 1790967261 · focus · HN ↗
    [dead]
    slowin · 1790967990 · focus · HN ↗
    The Right to resist is a well-known cornerstone of liberalism, and yes Israel has been chipping away at it since its formation and Nakba.
    <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_resist" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_resist
    Sabinus · 1790979959 · focus · HN ↗
    The right to resist is not the right to commit deliberate civilian massacres.
    If October 7 had been directed against the West Bank settlers then we could get behind it, but instead it was just Hamas expressing their genocidal intent.
    laimewhisps · 1790981063 · focus · HN ↗
    Occupying forces are not civilians, that being said October 7th was primarily directed at the IDF. That Israel has mandatory conscription and deliberately inhabits stolen Palestinian land doesn't make the victims civilian. That's not even touching on the large number of people in Israel killed by the IDF under the Hannibal Directive. Deaths incorrectly attributed to Hamas:
    <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal_Directive#Claimed_use_of_the_Hannibal_Directive_on_7_October_2023" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal_Directive#Claimed_use...
    Cyph0n · 1790981650 · focus · HN ↗
    Firstly, you are aware that Gaza is & was under full blockade, right? And that there is no way to reach the West Bank from Gaza?
    Secondly, I can assure you that you would NOT have gotten behind anything Hamas did. You (not you specifically, just generally) wouldn’t have supported them because you’re conditioned to not support them. You are also more susceptible to propaganda than you think you are, and trust me, the media machine would have been in full gear regardless of what operation Hamas pulled off.
    It is easy to talk about theoreticals, but if you’re missing the ongoing reality, why do you think that you would handle the theoretical scenario any differently? Same idea applies to fiction. People jump to oppose the Empire, but had they been living in the Star Wars universe, odds are that Imperial propaganda would have been extremely effective.
    There is a recent saying on liberals, but I think it applies more broadly: “A liberal is someone who opposes every war except the current war, and supports all civil rights movements except the one that's going on right now.”

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.