Turkey's wakeup call for Israel

[grassfed]

Turkey’s decision to exclude Israel from an annual military drill ought to come as warning bell to the Israeli people. Although diplomatic relations between the two countries have at times experienced periods of strain, Israel’s relationship with Turkey’s military, which is highly secular and generally supportive of Israel, has remained strong. The apparent disruption of the two countries’ strategic military cooperation is therefore a sign that something is going terribly awry.

What’s even more unusual about the move is that it coincides with Turkey and neighboring Armenia’s push to resolve their own longstanding feud. Leaders in both countries are taking major risks and facing off strong opposition at home for the sake of peace and stability in their region. Turkey’s peace drive in its neighborhood makes it all the more unexpected for the country to suddenly decide to curtail its relations with Israel.

Initial media reports suggest that the decision came as a result of Turkey’s outrage over Israel’s bombardment of Gaza. But it is more likely that the move stems from a more general sense of frustration over Israel’s intransigent attitude toward the Palestinian-Israeli peace process.

The main obstacle to restarting those peace talks remains Israel’s refusal to halt its illegal expansion of Jewish settlements on occupied Palestinian territory. For the Palestinians, there is no point in negotiating a deal that would see the creation of Palestine if their future state is going to be riddled with Israeli colonies.

more http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&article_id=107414&categ_id=17

[IndianaGreen]

1. +1 rec

The main obstacle to restarting those peace talks remains Israel’s refusal to halt its illegal expansion of Jewish settlements on occupied Palestinian territory. For the Palestinians, there is no point in negotiating a deal that would see the creation of Palestine if their future state is going to be riddled with Israeli colonies.

Bingo!

[azurnoir]

2. The "alarm clock" has been ringing for a while now

but in true denial mode Israel will either ignore Turkey or charge that it has now become an "Islamist" country but it should be kept in mind that Turkey was the first Muslim majority country to recognize Israel on March 29 1949 and that Turkey is a NATO member country

[henank]

3. I wonder how happy the US was

about this state of affairs. The USAF withdrew from the exercise after Turkey cancelled Israel's participation, leaving Turkey with nothing to do but cancel the whole exercise.

I also don't think it's anything to do with Turkey's "outrage" at Israel's "intransigence". Nothing has changed this year from other years if you disregard OCL (as has been suggested by the OP). It has more to do with Turkey becoming closer to the "ultra-Orthodox Islamics" (for lack of any other way to describe them) than anything else.

[azurnoir]

4. The drill was postponed by NATO

not canceled by the USAF, Press TV is having a heyday over this but I hope Turkey sticks to its "guns" and NATO comes to its senses on this the message sent to the Muslim world by this move would cause immeasurable damage but I am oh so sure that would suit you and some others here just fine as peace were where Muslims are concerned is not all too high on the agenda

[IndianaGreen]

5. NATO, another organization that has long outlived its usefulness

It is now what it always was: an agent of American imperialism.

[proteus_lives]

24. Or as a defense against Soviet Imperialism.

Perhaps it's not needed now but it has served a very important purpose.

[IndianaGreen]

30. The Cold War turned out to be a big fraud!

It turned out that everything the USSR did was always in response to something we did.

The Warsaw Pact came after NATO, not before.

[proteus_lives]

32. Really?

I don't mean to interrupt your love-affair with failed states and ideologies but...

The Berlin Blockade.

Mao and NK attacking South Korea.

The Prague Spring.

The Hungarian Revolution of 1956.

Putting missiles in Cuba.

Yep, nothing but flowers and happiness from the communist states.

[IndianaGreen]

36. Truman backed the fascist pro-Nazi side in the Greece civil war

The 1953 CIA toppling of Iran's Mohammed Mossadegh, which put the Shah in power, gave us Ayatollah Khomeini, and culminated with Ahmadinejad.

The 1954 CIA toppling of the Arbenz government in Guatemala.

US over the top overreaction to missiles in Cuba, a sovereign nation, totally disproportionate to our missiles that surrounded the Soviet Union.

Korea? Stalin didn't even know what Kim Il Sung was up to, and was surprised by North Korea's invasion. As to Mao Zedong, he warned us repeatedly about coming too close to the Chinese border.

The Hungarian Revolution was led by reformists communists as was the so-called Prague Spring.

Berlin blockade. It wasn't as simplistic as that, and it was related to the West's decision to reconstitute a German state under Western control without consulting the Russians.

[proteus_lives]

43. And you seem proud of Soviet aggression.

You think the Soviets never toppled governments to suit their needs and policies?

Overreaction? They know we would respond. The Soviets gambled and nearly cost us the world. It was escalation and aggression.

Korea? After a year Sung begged for permission to end the war but Mao and Stalin refused and the killing continue. They wanted to grind up the UN forces and gain more political power and they didn't give a damn how many Chinese and North Korean peasants died to achieve those goals.

Prague and Hungary were led by reformers who where liberals who wanted democracy. Liberalism? Democracy? No room for that in a communist bloc. They had to be crushed so the Russian communist hegemony was assured. Soviet troops managed to stamp down democracy. Much the Chinese would in 1989.

The blockade? The Russians didn't respond with diplomacy. They responded with threats, intimidation and violence. Then they blockaded the city and claimed we couldn't anything about it. Then we humiliated the Soviets. At the height of the air-lift, there was a supply plane over Berlin every 30 seconds. Something the Soviets couldn't do on their best day. Their aggressive policies failed.

[IndianaGreen]

52. The Soviets had the fundies defeated in Afghanistan, until the US intervened

What did America get out of that? We got bin Laden (our boy then), Al Qaeda, Taliban, and 9-11.

I hope you are proud of the things you support!

[proteus_lives]

58. Nice side-step.

When you can't defend the actions of your beloved dictators, move on.

Oh I agree the Afghanistan situation spiraled out of control. But the fundies were never America's intention. Pushing back the Soviets was. I lol at your use of the word fundies. Because you're implying that the Soviets behaved better? Do I really need to list Soviet atrocities in the region?

Genocide,mass murder, no voting, state famines, horrible pollution, censorship, closed borders, paranoia, secret police, gulags, food lines, anti-semitism, "people's republics" where the leadership of the party lived like emperors while people starved to death in the streets..........I hope you are proud of the things you support!

[pelsar]

54. your actually defending the USSR?

how many gulags do you need to understand that the USSR was nothing more than a religious dictatorship dressed up as 'the people"....

of course those people in the gulags were non believers......

[IndianaGreen]

56. I am merely stating that the Cold War was a fraud perpetrated on a gullible public

much as Emmanuel Goldstein is being used today in the US and in other countries to keep people in co-dependency of their governments.

[Kurska]

6. Comes to it's sense by what? Excluding a friend of NATO from NATO drills to appease who?

Treating Israel with the slightest dignity and respect (not suddenly removing them from a military drill they had been accepted to and asked to participate in) is a insult to the Arab world?

It seems to me like being kind at all to Israel or the Israeli people is viewed by some people as a insult to the Arab world.

[azurnoir]

7. What a revealing comment

so Muslim world equates to Arabs for you? But I digress taking Israels who is not a NATO member interests over that of a NATO member who also just happens to be a only Muslim majority NATO member it does send a very negative message to the Muslim world which now extends beyond just the ME

[Kurska]

9. Hmm, good point, wrong term there, I apologize.

There Jewish Arabs, Christian Arabs and Muslim arabs, conflating Arab with Muslim is wrong and frankly pretty rude on my part.

Back to the matter at hand, it isn't the "Interest" of the NATO member that is in jeapordy, NATO members are expected to act in a manner that presents a positive image of NATO to NATO allies that happen not to be in NATO. Turkey suddenly kicking someone out of a NATO exercises doesn't bold well for NATO's image in the world at large.

How confident should non-NATO members now be that they won't suddenly be removed from NATO exercises at the last minute, or is that something that is only okay when it is Israel being kicked out?

[azurnoir]

38. But that is the point nonNato members

why should nonmembers be allowed to dictate who NATO includes, really it just doesn't matter no matter what nonmember we are speaking of

[shaayecanaan]

8. It seems the Turks are patching things up with their old enemies...

including Armenia and Russia, and therefore have less reason to rely on their allies of convenience - the US, but particularly Israel.

Maybe things will return to normal next year. If not, I suspect that the US will simply go along with it and agree for Israel to be excluded (after all, the prospect of America actually fighting a war alongside Israel is pretty much nil anyway). There are plenty of NATO exercises that don't involve Israel in any event.

[Kurska]

10. Going along with Turkey on this would be a PR disaster for the Obama Administration.

Israel still enjoys overwhelming support in the United States and Obama went very far out of his way to try and show that he wasn't going to sour relations between America and Israel. If Obama decides to allow Israel to be excluded next year the Republicans would blast him with the double whammy of appearing to be bossed around by Turkey and not standing up for Israel.

[grassfed]

11. the rest of the article

It is difficult to comprehend why Israel continues to be foolish enough to sacrifice the opportunity for peace just to cling to its futile settlement-expansion project. The settlements are a direct violation of Israel’s “road map” obligations, as well as international law, and thereby cultivate an image of Israel as an outlaw among nations. They also serve to as fodder for extremists who say that Israel has no desire whatsoever to achieve a comprehensive peace agreement. The settlers themselves may believe that they are championing the project of Greater Israel, but their dreams of building an empire in the 21st century are at best delusional and at worst criminal.

It is instructive to consider the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s official reaction to the accord that was signed over the weekend between Turkey and Armenia: “The agreement proves yet again that open and fearless negotiation is the only way to overcome differences and past events and to open a new page that looks forward to the future.” The Palestinians and Israelis can prove the same if Israel seizes the opportunity for talks.

[oberliner]

12. Please note that this is an editorial from The Lebanon Daily Star

Bear that in mind.

[grassfed]

13. what's wrong with the Star?

The Daily Star is a pan-Middle East English language newspaper edited in Beirut. It was founded in 1952 to serve the growing number of expatriates brought by the oil industry. First circulating in Lebanon, and then expanding throughout the region, it not only relayed news about foreign workers' home countries, but also served to keep them informed about the region. By the 1960s it was the leading English language newspaper in the Middle East.

[IndianaGreen]

14. If it isn't on the JPost or Ynet, it didn't happen

[oberliner]

18. Ugh

That was kind of a silly comment.

[oberliner]

17. There's nothing wrong with it

I was just pointing out that this is an editorial credited to the editorial staff of the Lebanon Daily Star.

They have a POV that would be different from say The New York Times or Ha'aretz or Ma'an News or Al Jazeera.

[Kurska]

20. If I really must say it the Daily star is as far in Palestinian corner as Jpost is in the Israeli.

I wouldn't completely trust either.

[shaayecanaan]

15. Bear what in mind, exactly?

Does being Lebanese detract from one's credibility?

[grassfed]

16. Those scary Lebanese, like Vicki (Mrs Ted) Kennedy, Ralph Nader, Helen Thomas...

and thousands more, surrounding us, thinking bad things.

forgot the :sarcasm: emoticon, can't be too careful around here.

[oberliner]

19. There is nothing scary about Lebanese

Or about Israelis or Palestinians or any other nationality.

If this was an op-ed in an Israeli newspaper or a Palestinian one or a Turkish one or an American or an Iranian one it would be worth bearing that in mind as well.

[grassfed]

22. like when "Middle East Experts" clog the Sunday tv panels

and the hosts make a point of mentioning their pro-Israel resumes?

:sarcasm:

[oberliner]

23. That's true in the US but not in the rest of the world

On Al Jazeera, for instance, which is very widely watched outside the US, the Middle East experts have anything but "pro-Israel" resumes.

[grassfed]

26. and that matters because?

The US enables the cluster bombs. Al Jazeera just shows the corpses.

[oberliner]

21. That the POV is that of the editorial board of the Lebanon Daily Star

It has nothing to do with credibility as this is an opinion piece.

If this was an Israeli or American or Palestinian op-ed piece that would also be relevant I would suggest.

[grassfed]

25. Lebanon is an educated, Western, secular (with ancient Christian roots) Mediterranean society

but for the million or so impoverished and traumatized refugees dumped on their doorstep.

I can see why the editorial board of The Star might be prone to evil thoughts.

[Kurska]

27. So you're saying editorial bias is okay if it is because of national history?

That is a interesting comment.

[grassfed]

29. The poster suspects them of bias... I have not seen bias in The Star.

I was postulating why the poster would be expecting it... But thankfully The Star is not infected like the NYT or Wash Post.

[oberliner]

35. Maybe you have not seen bias in The Star because you share their bias?

Just as I don't see bias in the New York Times because I probably share theirs to a large extent myself.

[grassfed]

40. how could someone not see NYT bias re ME?

[Kurska]

44. Congrats, you now know how I feel about the Daily Star.

I can see the bias in both Jpost and the daily star. I'd say NYT is more neutral then either, but has a slant toward Israel.

[grassfed]

59. rabid Daily Star bias

Obama's prize could help peace

The award of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Barack Obama is a testament to the world’s recognition of an inspirational leader who has overseen a seismic change in US foreign policy, from unilateral action to multilateral diplomacy. Many critics have suggested that to bestow this accolade on Obama so early in his tenure is premature. But Obama’s nine months in office have created – in the words of the Nobel Committee – an atmosphere in which “dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts.”

This new approach to international relations has seen progress in many protracted disputes, which for the previous eight years had stagnated in the face of a reactionary Bush administration. Obama’s recognition that the world’s largest nuclear power should take the first step toward disarmament has opened the debate for negotiations on non-proliferation worldwide, no small feat for a new president. By refusing to isolate Iran and instead urge dialogue with its leaders, the country has moved from being a pariah of the international community to an associate at the negotiating table. Relations between the US and Russia were significantly improved after Obama took the decision to cancel proposed missile defense shields in the Czech Republic and Poland, a continuing source of animosity between the two powers.

This being said, the decision to award the prize may seem paradoxical to many in the Middle East who have seen little progress on the major issue of the Israel-Palestine conflict, and after a considerable increase in the number of troops in Afghanistan. While Obama has indeed made progress on nuclear disarmament and improved relations between big powers, actual conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq and in Palestine continue to claim the most lives.

The Nobel Committee has taken a bold move by handing the award to an influential political leader still in office. In a change of course from previous years where the prize was more often than not given to retired politicians or those with limited political power, Chairman Thorbjoern Jagland stated it was the committee’s intention to “contribute a little bit to enhance what he is trying to do.”

Despite efforts by Republicans in the US to deride the significance of the award by linking it to Obama’s “star power,” the accolade is likely to embolden the US president as a peace negotiator. This could in turn lead to progress in the areas where Obama has been less successful, with Israel, Afghanistan and throughout the region. The timing of the award, premature though it may be, has revealed the hope the Nobel Committee and indeed the world holds, that Obama can make a lasting impact where others have failed.

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=17&article_id=107351

[oberliner]

61. How about this one?

Syria: A pariah or a patron?

Syria’s return to the international fold after years of isolation gathered momentum this week with Saudi King Abdullah’s landmark visit to Damascus. But the Syrian regime is far from being out of the woods just yet when it comes to shedding its pariah status. The country still faces multiple allegations of sponsoring terrorism, particularly in neighboring Iraq.

But this image of Syria as a country that is working around the clock to destabilize Iraq is rather unfair, especially in view of the sacrifices that the Syrians have made to accommodate scores of Iraqi refugees. Since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, Syria has taken in well over a million Iraqi refugees, which is more than any other country. Most of them arrived at the peak of internal violence in Iraq in 2006 and 2007. That means that Syria’s own population, which stands at roughly 20 million, surged by an additional 5 percent in just two years as a result of the refugee influx.


http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=17&article_id=107263

[grassfed]

63. thanks for sharing this important piece, here's the rest

This huge flood of new arrivals into Syria has put extraordinary pressure on the country’s limited resources. The prices of real estate, food, electricity, kerosene and other commodities have skyrocketed, while the country’s school rooms, clinics and hospitals are strained as a result of overcrowding.

These new pressures are compounded by Syria’s own problems. Unemployment in Syria stands at 9 percent, and despite some development in recent years, poverty remains widespread. The country’s worst drought in decades has forced tens of thousands of Syrian families to leave their farms and head to cities to search for work. The Syrian government has been struggling to manage these and many other problems while simultaneously contending with the refugee crisis.

Of course, Damascus has faced criticism for not doing enough to protect a vulnerable refugee population But Syria and neighboring Jordan are still going above and beyond all other countries in their response to the displacement of millions of people.

Oil-rich Iraq, on the other hand, has done relatively little to assist its citizens, while the well-off United States, which arguably bears the greatest responsibility for creating the crisis, refuses to open its doors to large numbers of refugees. Even the wealthy European members of the “coalition of the willing” that backed the US-led invasion have largely turned a blind eye to the plight of displaced Iraqis.

Surely these countries can start shouldering more responsibility. Assistance need not be strictly monetary, and in fact creative solutions – such as building micro-credit institutions for refugees or creating employment opportunities in their host countries – could have a far greater impact in the long term. Until other nations step up to the plate, much of the burden of providing for the castaways of Iraq will fall on the country that was itself cast away by the international community.
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=10&categ_id=17&article_id=107263

[oberliner]

65. Couldn't they just click on the link and read it there?

That was why I had included the link.

Clearly, their perspective on Syria is quite different from what one might find in an editorial in an American newspaper, for instance.

The piece does appear to omit a few critical details about the Syrian government, among them that it is undemocratic.

[shaayecanaan]

28. Right...

I'll make sure to remind readers whenever somebody posts something from Haaretz or the NYT that they are in fact reading an Israeli or American source.

In any event, why the punters here would need to be on their guard when reading an Lebanese newspaper is beyond me.

[oberliner]

33. If its an Op-Ed piece from the entire editorial board of Haaretz or the NYT then please do

It's very uncommon that an article is posted here without any byline as this one is.

There is no need to "be on your guard" when reading a Lebanese newspaper.

There is really nothing odd about pointing out the author of an op-ed piece, be it Thomas Friedman or the editorial board of the Lebanon Daily Star.

[Violet_Crumble]

41. The word *editorial* is right there on the webpage...

And the 'bear that in mind' in yr post does come across as 'be on your guard'. If it had just been a matter of innocently pointing out that this article was an editorial, even though that was very clear to anyone who read the article, all that was needed was a comment saying that it was an editorial. The 'bear that in mind' was just odd...

[LeftishBrit]

53. We should be on our guard when reading any source

It is certainly relevant to know that Haaretz is Israeli and the NYT is American; if these are not regularly pointed out, it's because it's assumed that people will know their national origins automatically. I have frequently pointed out on GD that certain papers are British (there tends to be a default assumption there that all sources are American unless proved otherwise, and this can result in misleading conclusions).

[grassfed]

31. what is your take on Lebanese/Turkey relations?

The fall of the Ottoman Empire, French colonialism and Lebanese independence, Lebanese Christian, Druze, Shia and Shiite confessional govt subverted by the arrival of a million Palestinian Muslims (and some Christians) expelled from their southern neighbor?

[oberliner]

34. I don't know a lot about it

Can you recommend a good book?

[grassfed]

39. Leila Abu-Saba

Sorry for my tone. It's late and my frustration with ME issues flared up. I was implying that it's not to be assumed that a Lebanese editor would have a pro Turkey bias. I can't tell if your were humoring me but there are many books, lots of new writers, Kamal Salibi is probably a good place to start.

Leila Abu-Saba, a wonderful Lebanese-American writer based in the SF Bay Area died this week:
http://mondoweiss.net/2009/10/goodbye-to-leila-abu-saba.html

A big loss.

[oberliner]

45. I will check out those authors you mentioned

I take your point that a Lebanese editor would not necessarily have a pro-Turkey bias.

I would argue, however, that it would not be unusual for them to have a pro-Palestinian bias with respect to to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

[Alamuti Lotus]

68. "Please note that the author is Jewish"

"Bear that in mind."


Yes Alex, I will have "Mirrored adaptions of statements which would never be considered appropriate by the very same person, thus exposing their fairly boring hypocritical approach" for $100.

Daily Double? Hot damn, what luck..

[oberliner]

69. That gets pointed out all the time

Especially as a way of "proving" that the writer could not possibly be anti-semitic since he/she is Jewish.

However, in this case, I just pointed out that the piece was an editorial from the Lebanon Daily Star which I thought was worth bearing in mind.

I would say a mirrored statement would be to note that the piece is an editorial from The Jerusalem Post or Ha'aretz or Ma'an News or The New York Times.

No comment was made or implied about the religion or ethnicity of the author (I would note that no author for the piece was indicated anywhere).

[azurnoir]

37. But it would not be Obama it would be NATO

just like Obama paid Peter by objecting to Goldstone and allowed Paul {Libya} to do the dirty work, see that's how international politics work

[Kurska]

42. Ha really? You really think the media in America would turn a blind eye to that kind of juicy story?

You don't think republicans and critics of this administration wouldn't sink their teeth into such a event and shove it into obama's face every time he tries to say he is a friend of Israel?

Get back to me when goldstone advances out of the security council, either Obama gives the go ahead for a veto or you're going to see a political maelstrom not seen since Bush Senior tried to tie military assistance to Israel to Israel ending settlements.

Libya calling up the council on it isn't something obama can control, people know that, but preventing it is something Obama can do and if he doesn't there will be hell to pay.

[azurnoir]

46. sounds like a threat to me hmmmm

do Israels bidding or else?

[Kurska]

48. Or you know the bidding of the American people and Congress who overwhelming support Israel and

expect the president to do the same.

Let me put it this way, if Obama does what you suggest he do, it won't be Israeli votes he'll be losing in the next election.

[azurnoir]

51. Again quite revealing supporting the occupation

is supporting Israel? OCL changed the American outlook upon Israel as does Israels extended middle finger to a very popular President

[azurnoir]

47. You also forget that Libya not the US heads the UNSC at the moment

but your previous comment could be worth its weight in gold for those that believe that there are politicians in the US who put Israels interests ahead of the those of the US

[Kurska]

49. You are aware america has veto powers in the UNSC right? n/t

[azurnoir]

50. so does Libya

eta the UNSC current stand on Goldstone is this we will not hold a special session right now to discuss Goldstone but we will move our ME session up to October 14 (thats tomorrow) and if it is introduced as a topic we will not stop discussion

[oberliner]

55. No they don't

Only the US, UK, Russia, China, and France have veto power.

[azurnoir]

57. so you agree that the US will bow to Israel's or proIsraeli lobby pressure

even though that pressure is not in the best interest of the US?

eta are you so sure one of the permanent members will not weto?

[oberliner]

60. No I don't agree with that

I was just correcting the erroneous information about who has veto power in the UN Security Council.

Only the five countries I mentioned have that power.

Libya does not.

[azurnoir]

62. Fair enough and you were right

there is some question that all 5 members would not veto however, the one I had in mind was China

Gaza report gathers support ahead of UN vote

The PLO envoy in Geneva has secured the support of 16 countries for a motion in the UN Human Rights Council (HRC) in support of the Goldstone report on Israel’s winter war on Gaza, an attorney familiar with the negotiations said on Tuesday.

The HRC confirmed in a statement released on Tuesday that it will hold a Special Session on the "human rights situation in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and East Jerusalem" on Thursday. The meeting is expected to continue until Friday.

In a statement the HRC said the meeting “comes at the request of Palestine. The request is co-sponsored by the following 18 Member States of the Human Rights Council, namely Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, Indonesia, Jordan, Mauritius, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Senegal.”

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=231899

it is I suppose possible that China would go one way in the UNSC and another in the UNHRC

[oberliner]

64. It only takes one veto

The others could abstain.

[azurnoir]

66. If the veto is Americas it does indicate

an imbalance of power somewhere in the system

[azurnoir]

67. a veto in the UNSC is not really the end though is it?

from Ha'aretz

Libya holds two key positions in the UN which make it easier for the country to initiate a session on the report - it is a member of the Security Council, and one of its representatives is currently serving as the president of the General Assembly. Libya has the authority to convene the UN Security Council to vote on the Goldstone report in the name of the Muslim nations or the Arab League.

If the Security Council session on the Goldstone report, should one take place, ends without a resolution or an American veto, Libya could convene the General Assembly, whose vote cannot be vetoed.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x289428

If the UNSC veto's I believe Libya will convene the General Council funny how that works out

[oberliner]

70. Only the Security Council can refer a case to the ICC

The General Assembly does not have that authority.

[Violet_Crumble]

71. While the General Assembly can't, there are others who can...

The Security Council isn't the only way that an investigation can be initiated. State parties to the statute can do it, as can the prosecutor...

http://www.icc-cpi.int/NetApp/App/MCMSTemplates/Index.aspx?NRMODE=Published&NRNODEGUID={D788E44D-E292-46A1-89CC-D03637A52766}&NRORIGINALURL=/Menus/ICC/About+the+Court/Frequently+asked+Questions/&NRCACHEHINT=Guest#id_4


For the record, the veto power of the five permanent members of the Security Council is one of the major problems I see with the UN and it's an issue where there does need to be some serious reform...

[azurnoir]

72. still it really doesn't matter does it

the ICC doesn't have jurisdiction in Israel and as I have said before all a conviction would do is limit vacation plans for the convicted, just the fact that the General Assembly voted for that is enough

eta the UNSC also has the power to sanction and while some will claim the US would veto that as it has always done right now the US also wants sanctions against Iran I could see a deal being made between the 5 permanent members, it could all depend on which is more important to the US limiting Iran's nuclear ability or protecting Israel the key here is China and perhaps Russia