U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres arrived at the BRICS summit in the Russian city of Kazan on Oct. 22, despite criticism from Ukraine, Voice of America reported.

The BRICS group, a bloc of countries that includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates, is convening in Kazan for a three-day summit from Oct. 22-24. According to Moscow, 36 world leaders are participating in the conference.

Guterres is expected to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin on the sidelines of the event on Oct. 24, according to Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov.

Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry criticized the U.N. secretary general’s visit.

MBFC
Archive

  • @DarthJon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -21 month ago

    Have you heard of the Geneva Conventions? How can you accuse Israel of waging war that is disproportionate and then turn around and say it’s a vague term and international laws of war don’t exist?

    • @CanadaPlus
      link
      English
      1
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Vague insofar as it’s totally left to courts and individuals to interpret what the exact threshold of disproportional is. That’s why there’s a cottage industry in dissecting the ethics of every individual thing the US did in it’s recent wars. Damage and casualties are extremely lopsided here, though, even if you argue the lopsidedness is justified somehow.

      I was trying to include the nuances to be fair to you, but apparently that was just confusing.

      Have you heard of the Geneva Conventions?

      The main mention is Article 57, called Precautions in Attack, and it has this nice little section:

      1. No provision of this Article may be construed as authorizing any attacks against the civilian population, civilians or civilian objects.

      From a Westpoint academy article I just stumbled on, on proportionality:

      The rule of proportionality requires that the anticipated incidental loss of human life and damage to civilian objects should not be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage expected from the destruction of a military objective.

      The military objective here being a few Hamas fighters sprinkled around, and civilians and civilian objects being all of Gaza. I’m now pretty certain there isn’t a loophole based on what you’re doing or thinking at the time, like you seem to be suggesting.

      • @DarthJon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -21 month ago

        You can’t cherry-pick one statement out of Article 57 and ignore everything else. Read the entire section. The whole point is to prohibit intentional attacks on civilians but to provide justification for attacks that harm civilians. Even attacks directly on civilians are justified under international law if those civilians are directly involved in hostilities. Here’s a brief article that summarizes these concepts: https://hhi.harvard.edu/files/humanitarianinitiative/files/conduct_of_military_operations_in_urban_areas.pdf?m=1615497739

        • @CanadaPlus
          link
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          I did read the entire thing - it’s not long. Yes, you can unintentionally harm civilians, proportionately.

          It’s not intrinsic to urban warfare to do it this way, either. Compare any of the American operations of this millennium.

          • @DarthJon@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -11 month ago

            US operations have killed a lot of civilians. But there is no theater of war quite like Gaza, which is what makes the numbers that much more impressive.

            • @CanadaPlus
              link
              English
              11 month ago

              Gaza is denser than a typical Arab area (gee, I wonder why) but the construction and customs are pretty much the same. Nothing about it morally, legally or tactically justifies flattening it any more than Fallujah or Kandahar.

              • @DarthJon@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -11 month ago

                The entire area is a giant terrorist base. There are 500km of tunnels underneath Gaza used to transport weapons and conduct terror attacks. Hamas was integrated into the civilian infrastructure.

                The impact on civilians is devastating but this is the only way to end the cycle of violence. Groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda still exist but they have no power because they have no territory. Israel has now done the same to Hamas.

                • @CanadaPlus
                  link
                  English
                  1
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda still exist but they have no power because they have no territory. Israel has now done the same to Hamas.

                  They’re less of a threat, that’s true, but they’re far from gone.

                  Okay, so you’re done then? We can have a two-state solution with the PLO in charge in Palestine, and they can rebuild and control their own non-Israeli borders? That’s what I think should happen next, as does the broader international community.

                  • @DarthJon@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    030 days ago

                    Israel isn’t done yet. Hezbollah is almost done, but there is still the head of the octopus: the Iranian regime. As long as they are in power and are working towards nukes, Israel will not be able to live in peace.

                    A two state solution is a long term goal. Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 was the first test of a 2SS and look how that turned out. The Palestinian people have a role to play in this too, by making a commitment to pursue peaceful coexistence. Otherwise we will go through all this again in another 15 years.