[[link removed]]

ISRAEL, RUSSIA, AND INTERNATIONAL LAW  
[[link removed]]


 

Lawrence S. Wittner
June 4, 2024
Froeign Policy in Focus
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ National impunity is not inevitable, at least if people and
governments of the world are willing to take the necessary actions. _

, Shutterstock

 

International law―the recognized rules of behavior among nations
based on customary practices and treaties, among them the United
Nations Charter [[link removed]] and
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
[[link removed]]―has
been agreed upon by large and small nations alike. To implement this
law, the nations of the world have established a UN Security Council
(to maintain international peace and security) and a variety of
international courts, including the UN’s International Court of
Justice [[link removed]] (which adjudicates disputes
between nations and gives advisory opinions on international legal
issues) and the International Criminal Court
[[link removed]] (which prosecutes individuals for crimes
of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of
aggression).

Yet nations continue to defy international law.

In the ongoing Gaza crisis, the Israeli government has failed to
uphold international law by rebuffing the calls of international
organizations to end its massive slaughter of Palestinian civilians.
The U.S. government has facilitated this behavior by vetoing three UN
Security Council resolutions
[[link removed].] calling
for a ceasefire, while the Israeli government has ignored an
International Court of Justice ruling
[[link removed]] that
it should head off genocide in Gaza by ensuring sufficient
humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian population. The Israeli
government has also refused to honor an order by the International
Court of Justice
[[link removed]] to
halt its offensive in Rafah and denounced the International Criminal
Court’s request
[[link removed]] for arrest warrants
for its top officials.

Russia’s military assault upon Ukraine provides another example of
flouting international law. Given the UN Charter’s prohibition
[[link removed]] of the “use
of force against the territorial integrity or political independence
of any state,” when Russian military forces seized and annexed
Crimea and commenced military operations to gobble up eastern Ukraine
in early 2014, the issue came before the UN Security Council, where
condemnation of Russia’s action was promptly vetoed by Russia
[[link removed]].
Similarly, in February 2022, when the Russian government commenced a
full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russia again vetoed Security Council
action [[link removed]]. That March,
the International Court of Justice
[[link removed]],
by an overwhelming vote, ordered Russia to halt its invasion of
Ukraine—but, as usual, to no avail.

Unfortunately, these violations of international law are not unusual
for, over many decades, numerous nations have ignored the recognized
rules of international conduct.

What is lacking is not international law but, rather, its consistent
and universal enforcement. For decades, the five permanent members of
the UN Security Council (the United States, Russia, China, Britain,
and France) have repeatedly used their veto power
[[link removed]] in that entity to
block UN action to maintain international peace and security.
Furthermore, nearly two-thirds of the world’s nations
[[link removed].] do
not accept the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of
Justice, while  more than a third of the world’s nations
[[link removed]] (including
some of the largest, such as Russia, the United States, China, and
India) have resisted becoming parties to the International Criminal
Court.

Despite such obstacles, these organizations have sometimes played very
useful roles in resolving international disputes. The UN Security
Council [[link removed]] has
dispatched numerous peacekeeping missions around the world―including
60 alone in the years since the dissolution of the Soviet Union―that
have helped defuse crises in conflict-ridden regions.

For its part, the International Court of Justice
[[link removed].] (ICJ)
paved the way for the Central American Peace Accords during the 1980s
through its ruling in _Nicaragua v United States_, while its ruling
in the _Nuclear Tests case_ helped bring an end to nuclear weapons
testing in the Pacific. In addition, the ICJ’s ruling in _Chad v
Libya _resolved a territorial dispute between these two nations and
ended their military conflict.

Although the International Criminal Court has only been in operation
since 2002, it has thus far convicted ten individuals
[[link removed]] of
heinous crimes, issued or requested warrants for the arrest of
prominent figures charged with war crimes (including Vladimir Putin
[[link removed]], Benjamin
Netanyahu, and the leaders of Hamas
[[link removed]]),
and conducted or begun investigations of yet other notorious
individuals.

But, of course, as demonstrated by the persistence of wars of
aggression and massive violations of human rights, enforcing
international law remains a major problem in the contemporary world.

Therefore, if the world is to move beyond national impunity―if it is
finally to scrap the long and disgraceful tradition among nations of
might makes right―it is necessary to empower the world’s major
international organizations to enforce the international law that
nations have agreed to respect.

This strengthening of global governance is certainly possible.

Although provisions in the UN Charter make outright abolition of the
UN Security Council veto very difficult, other means are available for
reducing the veto’s baneful effects. In many cases ―including
those of the Ukraine and Gaza conflicts―simply invoking Article
27(3) of the UN Charter
[[link removed]] would
be sufficient, for it states that a party to a dispute before the
Security Council shall abstain from voting in connection with that
dispute. Furthermore, 124 UN nations
[[link removed]] have
already endorsed a proposal for renunciation of the veto when taking
action against genocide, crimes against humanity, and mass atrocities.
Moreover, the UN General Assembly has occasionally
employed “Uniting for Peace” resolutions
[[link removed]] to
take action when the Security Council has failed to do so.

Improving the effectiveness of the international judicial system has
also generated attention in recent years. The LAW Not War campaign
[[link removed].],
championed by organizations dedicated to improving global governance,
advocates strengthening the International Court of Justice,
principally by increasing the number of nations accepting the
compulsory jurisdiction of the Court. Similarly, the Coalition for
the International Criminal Court
[[link removed]],
representing numerous organizations, calls on all nations to ratify
the Court’s founding statute and, thereby, “expand the Court’s
reach and reduce the impunity gap.”

National impunity is not inevitable, at least if people and
governments of the world are willing to take the necessary actions.
Are they? Or will they continue talking of a “rules-based
international order
[[link removed]]”
while they avoid enforcing the rules?

_Lawrence S. Wittner (__https://www.lawrenceswittner.com/_
[[link removed]]_) is Professor of History Emeritus
at SUNY/Albany and the author of __Confronting the Bomb_
[[link removed]]_ (Stanford
University Press)._

* Russia
[[link removed]]
* Israel
[[link removed]]
* War Crimes; International Law; Resistance;
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit xxxxxx.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 




[link removed]

To unsubscribe, click the following link:
[link removed]