Hamas Leader Killed

[Shusha]

In that case…”collateral damage” and proportionality have no meaning. I could nuke a low level military target killing thousands and maiming millions and it would be acceptable.

That is an unnecessary exaggeration. The requirement for proportionality still exists. Its just not a precise, measured tit-for-tat list. (And honestly, it would be gross if it was). I wonder if proportionality assessments are available? Let me go check....

 

[Coyote]

That is an unnecessary exaggeration. The requirement for proportionality still exists. Its just not a precise, measured tit-for-tat list. (And honestly, it would be gross if it was). I wonder if proportionality assessments are available? Let me go check....

I don’t think it is an unnecessary exaggeration. I think the danger is that it can become that exaggeration based on the desire of whomever is in control of the situation.

 

[Shusha]

I don’t think it is an unnecessary exaggeration. I think the danger is that it can become that exaggeration based on the desire of whomever is in control of the situation.

I'd argue that the concern is in the other direction - that impossible standards are imposed on some, but not others.

 

[Coyote]

I'd argue that the concern is in the other direction - that impossible standards are imposed on some, but not others.

Totally disagree. I would argue that standards are inconsistent though.

 

[Shusha]

Totally disagree. I would argue that standards are inconsistent though.

Which is what I said, I think.

 

[Lisa558]

Which is what I said, I think.

And a further question would be “why are almost impossible standards applied to SOME groups, and excuses and leniency applied to others”?

 

[Coyote]

Which is what I said, I think.

Perhaps…I think Israel is given more latitude than other comparable nations.

 

[Shusha]

And a further question would be “why are almost impossible standards applied to SOME groups, and excuses and leniency applied to others”?

Sure. Easy enough to reply with what you are looking for and I don't think you are wrong. BUT there are other reasons. Two big ones: the inability to enforce non-state actors and the lack of interest / expectation of barbarity for some peoples or nations.

 

[Shusha]

Perhaps…I think Israel is given more latitude than other comparable nations.

Which shocks me, and I think relates to the same disparity of facts which has to be sorted first.

 

[Coyote]

Which shocks me, and I think relates to the same disparity of facts which has to be sorted first.

I disagree ( but that shouldn’t surprise you right?).

I compare Israel with other comparable countries: democracies with Western style views of ethics and human rights.

 

[Shusha]

I disagree ( but that shouldn’t surprise you right?).

I'd be disappointed if you didn't.

I compare Israel with other comparable countries: democracies with Western style views of ethics and human rights.

What, exactly, are you comparing?

 

[Lisa558]

I'd be disappointed if you didn't.

What, exactly, are you comparing?

I am wondering if there IS a country comparable to Israel. What democracy with Western style views of ethics and human rights is surrounded by countries sworn to its destruction, teaches their children to want to kill the citizens of that democracy, and has been a victim of a massacre such as the one committed on Oct 7?

 

[Coyote]

Sure. Easy enough to reply with what you are looking for and I don't think you are wrong. BUT there are other reasons. Two big ones: the inability to enforce non-state actors and the lack of interest / expectation of barbarity for some peoples or nations.

Excellent points.

I would like to address them.

First: should the same standards be applied to everyone?

In theory yes.

In reality we are dealing with apples and oranges.

In my opinion…if you are a country that is claiming to be a country that upholds certain standards and rights, and gain privileges, alliances or recognition based on that shared set of values, then you should be held to that standard.

I can use the US as an example with the war in Iraq, mass detentions,torture, Abu Ghraub, Guantanamo, civilian death rates…all of which provoked vociferous open debate and a lot of shame within the country. Debate and protest was not stifled. And this is important.

Unfortunately the brutal reality of it is that power matters in the international arena There are no international consequences for the US beyond a tattered image. Same applies to China. And…if you are a country with powerful international supporters, the same applies.

Countries like Russia fall way short, but then they also don’t (seriously) claim to be human rights oriented or democratic and are subject to sanctions and such for their behavior in war. More countries then not probably fall into this category. Others are too insignificant for a variety of reasons to merit world attention unfortunately.

It's not as much the expectation of barbarity than a lack of resources to address every instance and complex international dynamics. It isn’t fair or just.

For many countries, from a human rights perspective which would include war, I think the approach tends to be “baby steps”. You take what you can get and build on it. There is no real enforcement mechanism unless a powerful country opts to push for it.

 

[Coyote]

I am wondering if there IS a country comparable to Israel. What democracy with Western style views of ethics and human rights is surrounded by countries sworn to its destruction, teaches their children to want to kill the citizens of that democracy, and has been a victim of a massacre such as the one committed on Oct 7?

Bluntly…that is an exaggeration that has gone on for too long.

What countries have sworn to Israel’s destruction? What countries are teaching their children to kill Israeli’s? For some time now there has been a movement towards normalization with Israel. What countries border Israel? Egypt, Jordan,Syria and Lebanon. Of those countries Syria and likely Lebanon are failed states or in civil war. Egypt and Jordan, the two most powerful, both hold long term peace treaties and security agreements with Israel. In addition UAE, Morocco, Sudan and Bahrain have normalized relations with Israel. Time to stop squealing “everyone is out to get Israel” and using that as an excuse.

As horrible as the atrocity was for Israel, it is NOW no worse than the atrocity committed on Gaza that has seen almost 50,000 dead, an entire region leveled, and entire clans completely wiped out. That can no longer be an excuse.

Israel should be held to the same standards as any comparable democratic country.

What do Israeli schools teach about Palestinians?

 

[Shusha]

In my opinion…if you are a country that is claiming to be a country that upholds certain standards and rights, and gain privileges, alliances or recognition based on that shared set of values, then you should be held to that standard.

Yes. I agree. (My argument, of course, vis-a-vis Israel is that it is held to not only a higher, but an impossible standard).

That aside, what happens if we flip the script. Should non-state actors with de facto governmental powers or non-state actors without governmental powers be held to the same standard? If they are not to be held to the same standards, what remedies to States have when faced with belligerence?

Does your answer change if a non-state government or non-state non-government actor ASPIRES to statehood? As in, does being held to that standard become a condition of statehood?

 

[Lisa558]

Bluntly…that is an exaggeration that has gone on for too long.

What countries have sworn to Israel’s destruction? What countries are teaching their children to kill Israeli’s? For some time now there has been a movement towards normalization with Israel. What countries border Israel? Egypt, Jordan,Syria and Lebanon. Of those countries Syria and likely Lebanon are failed states or in civil war. Egypt and Jordan, the two most powerful, both hold long term peace treaties and security agreements with Israel. In addition UAE, Morocco, Sudan and Bahrain have normalized relations with Israel. Time to stop squealing “everyone is out to get Israel” and using that as an excuse.

As horrible as the atrocity was for Israel, it is NOW no worse than the atrocity committed on Gaza that has seen almost 50,000 dead, an entire region leveled, and entire clans completely wiped out. That can no longer be an excuse.

Israel should be held to the same standards as any comparable democratic country.

What do Israeli schools teach about Palestinians?

I’ll let Shusha respond, if she wishes.

 

[Coyote]

I’ll let Shusha respond, if she wishes.

Your prerogative.

 

[Coyote]

Yes. I agree. (My argument, of course, vis-a-vis Israel is that it is held to not only a higher, but an impossible standard).

I hold Israel to the same standard as my country.

That aside, what happens if we flip the script. Should non-state actors with de facto governmental powers or non-state actors without governmental powers be held to the same standard? If they are not to be held to the same standards, what remedies to States have when faced with belligerence?

That is really murky.

In part, at least, standards are determined through the treaties and agreements we sign on to. For example, how we treat prisoners of war, what constitutes lawful targets.

Non-state actors and “de facto” governmental powers are not signatories to any of these agreements. Non-state actors also lack the power and legitimacy of a state. They do not have any of the privileges or alliances that come with that. That is one reason I tend to apply same standards to countries within the same group, in this case western style democratic nations, because there ARE privileges that come with that recognition from fellow states.

From an ethical standpoint … the standards should be the same through out…and so should the priveledges.

Does your answer change if a non-state government or non-state non-government actor ASPIRES to statehood? As in, does being held to that standard become a condition of statehood?

That is an REALLY interesting question. What states have actually been held to that standard as a requirement for recognition as a state? I can’t think of any off hand.

I don’t think that should be a condition for statehood because that means those rights lie in someone else’s hands. There are numerous states who were founded through violence but transitioned into more or less peacable states. There are privileges, alliances and benefits that come with international recognition and it is at that point that I think this standard applies.

Here is another look: what if a would be nation aspires to statehood but in the process resorts to terrorist actions or violence to achieve that aim? What standard applies and should it be penalized?

 

[Shusha]

What countries have sworn to Israel’s destruction?

Fair. But, at the very least, the ruling government (oops formerly ruling government) of Gaza absolutely desires the destruction of Israel and holds considerable blurriness between Israelis and Jews. It is an existential threat which creates a significant complication with respect to peace. As opposed to border or secession conflicts. (And be clear what I mean by "existential threat". I do not mean that Gaza (or Hezbollah, or the Houthis, or Syria, or even Iran) have the immediate capacity to defeat Israel militarily. I mean the perpetual ideology of "we will martyr ourselves until we have recovered our land from those who conquered us.)

 

[Shusha]

I hold Israel to the same standard as my country.

I actually believe you. I think you do. I honestly think our disagreements about this conflict in particular, but also more broadly, are settling on the facts.