In the current South African lawsuit against Israel.
1,000
3.00So, it's true that a consensus of these sorts of humanitarian NGOs has said that Israel is committing genocide, but all of them are asking the ICJ to broaden the definition of genocide.
Where is the dolus specialis? The proof that Israel has the special intent to destroy the Palestinian people?
How has the ICJ acted in the past? It didn't even order Israel to stop the Rafah offensive, even though these same NGOs wanted it. I think it's quite unlikely for the ICJ to rule that Israel is committing genocide. So yeah, I think this market is fairly priced.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ireland-to-formally-intervene-in-south-africas-genocide-case-against-israel-at-the-icj-after-government-approval/a1250142635.html
"By legally intervening in South Africa’s case, Ireland will be asking the ICJ to broaden its interpretation of what constitutes the commission of genocide by a State"
@AVS Seems Ireland wants to make sure Israel isn't trying to use a loophole technicality (similar to how some criminals get away with crimes in courts) to avoid the genocide label. Regardless if it happens or not, it's sad to see how some dehumanize themselves by struggling to acknowledge what's happening as horrible. Even if the definition change doesn't go through and the ICJ determines it is a genocide, those with such views will use their usual revisionist history to pretend the definition changed and Israel is the victim in all of this.
Based on Amensty International's video on why their organization is already labelling it a genocide, it makes it pretty clear that Israel is already likely to lose: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8_18UuiAm4
@Ammar If that was intended as a response to me, I fully acknowledge that what's happening is horrible.
@Ammar "Some criminals use technicalities to get away with crimes in court" is a weird analogy when in this case the "technicality" is "not actually committing the crime".
@Shump To clarify this is about if the state of Israel committed genocide, right? This is different than just some "genocidal acts" happening in Gaza, yes?
I would not be terribly surprised if there is an instance of some insane Kahanist soldier shooting a random crowd of Palestinians, and that would be a "genocidal act", but I am also sure that there is no dolus specialis on the part of the Israeli state.
The ICJ already ruled that Israel should make sure that there are no genocidal acts in Gaza.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/12/04/israel-gaza-palestinians-amnesty-genocide-report/
Amnesty International released a report regarding whether a genocide has occurred
@GammaLaser I don't think this should affect our market probability. The ICJ will make its own judgment and not follow Amnesty. It's rather well known that Amnesty has a particular position on this issue, for instance they also called the "right of return" a human right according to international law, but that's wrong as the UNGA 194 is non-binding and any other law about the "right of return" doesn't apply retroactively. They are not international lawyers. I'm not updating here.
@GammaLaser it shows that they're not a neutral (or reasonable) party about this and shouldn't be taken seriously.
(If you read the report, there's also a bunch of places where they flat out say "okay this doesn't meet the legal definition but we don't like that and we're changing the definition").
@ShakedKoplewitz when you say “they’re not a neutral or reasonable party about ‘this’”, you are conflating right of return with question the market is asking
@GammaLaser "string theory is probably correct, Joe says so so it should settle as yes"
"But Joe's a flat earther, he's clearly not a serious physicist"
"Why are you conflating the shape of the earth with questions about string theory, they're two different things".
Do you have a source saying that the consensus among human rights lawyers is that it's a genocide?
Both the historians you mention are have long held strong anti-Israel views. Because whether or not this is a genocide depends on Israel's intent a lot of smart people who happen to be anti-zionist understandably come to the view that it's a genocide. However, this is different from from proving this intent in court.
@GammaLaser leftist academics diverging from mainstream opinion is hardly unprecedented - these types of people also spent decades supporting Stalin and pol pot.
@GammaLaser Well when you talk about "international human rights lawyers", there is the NGO crowd (Amnesty International, HRW) and then there are the ICJ representatives.
@CainanKeyles because it was always a ridiculous allegation and at this point even south Africa has admitted they can't back it with evidence (they asked for "time to gather more", which was denied).
@CainanKeyles in the public „genocide“ often gets thrown together with all kind of other warcrimes. It is possible that warcrimes were committed, but genocide has specific definition that is clearly not met.
@Philip3773733 yeah I'd be really surprised if 1) no war crimes were found, and somewhat surprised if 2) this was deemed genocide
@CainanKeyles Because the Gaza death rate keeps dropping: https://data.techforpalestine.org/
@Shai are you saying if the death rate drops in a genocide it stops being a genocide?
I don't know what the ICJ will decide, but a drop in death rate after so much harm has already been done doesn't seem like a good reason. Specially when the international response likely played a role in Israel reducing their murderous campaign.
The main factor that will matter to the court in this case is whether Israel has the clear intent of eliminating the targeted group (Dolus Specialis).
The fact that the numbers are dropping as Israel has gained more control could provide evidence to Israel's case that its intent is to eliminate Hamas (unprotected group) and not the people of Gaza. In previous cases of genocides, as the army gained more control, the numbers have increased (which is what you would expect if the intent is there).