The International Court came into being by virtue of the Rome Treaty in 2002.. To date, 110 states have signed on and a further 38 states have signed but not ratified it. The U.S. and Israel are among those who have yet to ratify the treaty.The same year, Richard Goldstone delivered a speech at a Toronto synagogue arguing that it was in the interests of Israel and the U.S. that they sign on.
It was asked if Israel should sign on as she would never get a fair hearing. Goldstone vehemently disagreed.
It was asked if Israel should sign on as she would never get a fair hearing. Goldstone vehemently disagreed.
Fast forward: In the days before to Operation Cast Lead, during a period when the Gazans were committing war crimes daily by firing rockets indiscriminately at Israeli civilians, Dr. Abraham Bell in his article on International Law and Gaza set out the basic principles and subtitled his article The Assault on Israel’s Right of Self Defense.
But what do these principles and rules he set out mean in practice? Did Israel have no choice but to invade or could it just have used artillery and bombs, even unintelligent inexpensive bombs? Bruce Tucker Smith, JD, LL.M. (International Law), Lt Col USAFR (ret). who is currently a US military Judge, summarized his opinion as follows: “In short…Israel’s defense forces are entitled to use whatever means is at her disposal to search out and destroy terrorist operatives.
Nothing in international law precludes a vigorous, intense and effective military campaign to destroy terrorist operations. That means, Israel may use air and ground-artillery resources -as she will-against those Hamas operatives (I hesitate to us the word “military” - since Hamas is NOT a recognized military force.) which are used to inflict casualties upon Israel.
“That means Israel may use her army in large or small measure to attack any place or person that attacks Israel. That means Israel can bombard Hamas targets as militarily necessary to render it impotent against a subsequent wave of Israeli soldiers.
Although politically preferable, nothing in international law absolutely requires Israel to use “smart” munitions in its operations against Hamas.
Although politically preferable, nothing in international law absolutely requires Israel to use “smart” munitions in its operations against Hamas.
Posts
