3 ms·

> How could something be both? Palestine is either a separate state from Israel or it isn't. I don't think this is correct. Palestine's status is disputed. Leg

> How could something be both? Palestine is either a separate state from Israel or it isn't. I don't think this is correct. Palestine's status is disputed. Legal status isn't a physical property, it's a social one, so if many people think "A" is "B", then "A" is in some sense genuinely "B". Considering the conflict in both contexts avoids "Oops, the entire thing is nullified because it's technically Conflict Type 1, not Conflict Type 2."

catlikesshrimp 2y ago
"so if many people think A is B, then A is in some sense genuinely B." Rather, A is A for many people, and B is B for many people. Both groups aren't mutually exclusive ( GroupA ∩ GroupB ) != ∅
- bishbosh 2y ago
  I don't see how this relates. The point was about Palestine as a state. If enough people recognize Palestine as a separate state, this becomes an international issue. I believe this was the A is B claim digging made. What would be the analogous claim for your point? That some folks believe Palestine is it's own state, and some folks don't, and that the views are not mutually exclusive?
  - catlikesshrimp 2y ago
    Yes, that is my point. The same applies to Taiwan. Guatemala considers Taiwan a country, China does not. Some countries belong to both groups depending on the context.
- atoav 2y ago
  Yeah, but we are judging a thing that happened in time. So the sets will have some noise/overlap who will specify the conflict as A or B during which time of the conflict. The ICC likely judges about crimes that happened during multiple phases of the conflict, hence the conflict could have multiple types.
bawolff 2y ago
I agree its disputed, but i don't think it follows from that that it is both. Like hypothetically (i say hypothetically since this is not the situation at hand afaik) if there was one crime that only applied to non international armed conflicts and one that applied to international, i don't think it would be just to charge with both just because its a bit unclear which is the correct one. -- I also found in the legal report the following that partially explains the reasoning https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/2024-05/240520-panel-report-eng.pdf https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/2024-05/240520-p... : War crimes require a nexus to an armed conflict, and for some war crimes this conflict must be international.5 For this reason, it is necessary to assess the situation in Gaza and in Israel to determine whether an armed conflict exists and if so, its nature. 13. The Panel agrees with the Prosecutor’s conclusion that the conflicts in Israel and Gaza comprise an international armed conflict and a non-international armed conflict running in parallel. Hamas is a highly organized non-State armed group, and the hostilities between Hamas and Israel have been sufficiently intense to reach the threshold of a non-international armed conflict. The Panel’s assessment is that the non-international armed conflict between Israel and Hamas began, at the latest, on 7 October 2023, when Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups launched Operation al-Aqsa Flood against Israel and Israel launched its Operation Iron Swords in response. The Panel has also concluded that there is an international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine on the basis either that: a) Palestine is a State in accordance with criteria set out in international law, for which there is a sufficiently strong argument for the purpose of an application to the Court for an arrest warrant, and an international armed conflict arises if a State uses force against a non-state actor on the territory of another State without the latter’s consent; or b) Palestine and Israel are both High Contracting Parties to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, and that pursuant to the text of Common Article 2 of the Conventions, an armed conflict between two High Contracting Parties is international in character; or c) There is a belligerent occupation by Israel of at least some Palestinian territory. 14. The Panel’s assessment is that the international armed conflict began at the latest on 7 October 2023, when Israel first started responding to the Hamas attack on its territory by using force on the territory of Palestine without the latter’s consent.
atoav 2y ago
Also, it is not that hard to imagine conflicts that are technically both, e.g. a conflict that starts out as non-international and becomes international at a certain point.

catlikesshrimp 2y ago

"so if many people think A is B, then A is in some sense genuinely B." Rather, A is A for many people, and B is B for many people. Both groups aren't mutually exclusive ( GroupA ∩ GroupB ) != ∅

bishbosh 2y ago
I don't see how this relates. The point was about Palestine as a state. If enough people recognize Palestine as a separate state, this becomes an international issue. I believe this was the A is B claim digging made. What would be the analogous claim for your point? That some folks believe Palestine is it's own state, and some folks don't, and that the views are not mutually exclusive?
- catlikesshrimp 2y ago
  Yes, that is my point. The same applies to Taiwan. Guatemala considers Taiwan a country, China does not. Some countries belong to both groups depending on the context.
atoav 2y ago
Yeah, but we are judging a thing that happened in time. So the sets will have some noise/overlap who will specify the conflict as A or B during which time of the conflict. The ICC likely judges about crimes that happened during multiple phases of the conflict, hence the conflict could have multiple types.

bawolff 2y ago

I agree its disputed, but i don't think it follows from that that it is both. Like hypothetically (i say hypothetically since this is not the situation at hand afaik) if there was one crime that only applied to non international armed conflicts and one that applied to international, i don't think it would be just to charge with both just because its a bit unclear which is the correct one. -- I also found in the legal report the following that partially explains the reasoning https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/2024-05/240520-panel-report-eng.pdf https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/2024-05/240520-p... : War crimes require a nexus to an armed conflict, and for some war crimes this conflict must be international.5 For this reason, it is necessary to assess the situation in Gaza and in Israel to determine whether an armed conflict exists and if so, its nature. 13. The Panel agrees with the Prosecutor’s conclusion that the conflicts in Israel and Gaza comprise an international armed conflict and a non-international armed conflict running in parallel. Hamas is a highly organized non-State armed group, and the hostilities between Hamas and Israel have been sufficiently intense to reach the threshold of a non-international armed conflict. The Panel’s assessment is that the non-international armed conflict between Israel and Hamas began, at the latest, on 7 October 2023, when Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups launched Operation al-Aqsa Flood against Israel and Israel launched its Operation Iron Swords in response. The Panel has also concluded that there is an international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine on the basis either that: a) Palestine is a State in accordance with criteria set out in international law, for which there is a sufficiently strong argument for the purpose of an application to the Court for an arrest warrant, and an international armed conflict arises if a State uses force against a non-state actor on the territory of another State without the latter’s consent; or b) Palestine and Israel are both High Contracting Parties to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, and that pursuant to the text of Common Article 2 of the Conventions, an armed conflict between two High Contracting Parties is international in character; or c) There is a belligerent occupation by Israel of at least some Palestinian territory. 14. The Panel’s assessment is that the international armed conflict began at the latest on 7 October 2023, when Israel first started responding to the Hamas attack on its territory by using force on the territory of Palestine without the latter’s consent.

atoav 2y ago

Also, it is not that hard to imagine conflicts that are technically both, e.g. a conflict that starts out as non-international and becomes international at a certain point.