Israel is not committing genocide in Gaza, government concludes

14 comments

1. The UK does not consider Israel’s actions in Gaza to be genocide, David Lammy has said in a significant shift in position on the issue.

   Until last week the UK government had maintained that the question of whether Israel had committed genocide was a matter for the courts and not for national governments to determine.

   However, in a letter to the chair of the international development committee last week Lammy said that an assessment carried out by the Foreign Office had concluded that Israel’s actions did not constitute genocide

2. This has been obvious for a while.

3. Even if it does not fit a textbook definition of genocide that does not make Israels actions right. Even the fact that it is in doubt if it is genocide or not should have anyone who cares about justice sound alarm.

4. That doesn’t disprove that a lot of their actions are simply wrong

5. While all other human rights organizations have concluded otherwise. Like who are you fooling? Lol

6. That headline next to that photo is a candidate for the Onion.

7. False headline. His exact words were “The government has not concluded that Israel is acting with that intent.” Which it hasn’t. The government has not concluded that it is and it has not concluded that it isnt. This is exactly what he said before, which was, “This government is not an international court. We have not — and could not — arbitrate on whether or not Israel has breached international humanitarian law.”

   I expect we’ll see some clarification soon from the government explaining what it means that they haven’t concluded anything yet. No matter what the papers may try to pretend, the decision about genocide is not a matter for the foreign office, it’s for the courts. A government department can’t just declare something isn’t genocide. It has no authority to do that.

8. So a minister who previously said just a few months ago that [executive] government can’t make a determination of genocide (that it’s a matter for the courts) sends out a memo on his way out that actually his branch of government can make that determination, so it’s actually totally fine to keep selling weapons used in that conflict, in a way that doesn’t elaborate on how they came about that determination other than just listing the definition and saying ‘nu-uh, doesn’t apply’?

   Consider me skeptical.

9. Long and short of it. They say they dont believe intent has been establised as meant in the genocide convention. But it stinks of a political decision.

10. Yeah

    We know.

    Who said it though? Is this an official government statement and conclusion? Sorry its just paywalled

11. Genocide, ethnic cleansing, mass murder

    Just pick a word, no amount of PR work will be able to undo what has been done at this point.

    How about a plaque? “World certified non-genocidal state”, looks great at the airport.

12. The British foreign minister is asking the wrong guy…

13. Then wtaf is it? The UK may think genocide is when they can white knight in and pretend it’s not what most of England’s wealth came from besides coal and steel industry, but that doesn’t change reality. No wonder the Irish have always felt incredibly progressive compared to the UK, when Ireland’s government aren’t even all that progressive tbh

14. Hold it.. hold it.. Hold it still.. wait.. NOW. Now it’s a genocide!

Comments are closed.