It obviously is but I’m having trouble finding good sources to argue this point. Especially statements of intent seem hard to find.
It obviously is but I’m having trouble finding good sources to argue this point. Especially statements of intent seem hard to find.
The problem is international law is a contradiction https://criticalresist.substack.com/p/the-limits-of-international-law
I think it creates a much stronger argument if we decide to abandon international law because it has clearly not lived up to what it should be, and instead speak from humanitarian reasoning.
I realized I don’t actually know too many people that actually care about international law. It’s an appeal to authority which is already a fallacy, but the situations I see play out IRL is people that support Israel will say it’s not genocide and people that support Palestine will say it is.
Personally I’ve chosen to remove myself from the trap that is international law; it’s impossible to explain why this bombing campaign is genocide simply through it. Liberal law can only judge individual acts, it can’t judge context or abstract (non tangible) acts. To explain why this bombing is genocide, we have to go back to the roots of Israel and what it was founded on.