Prem Thakker's first day on the ground included the DNC’s panel on Palestinian human rights – but did it mean anything? Plus, a quick exchange with Josh Shapiro.

“What was very shocking was that while we were all in the room discussing and listening to people impacted by what’s happening in Gaza, we’re not certain that that message will get across to the people at the top of the party,” Khader added. “You look at the themes of the party’s convention – today, tomorrow, Wednesday, and Thursday – there’s nowhere where Palestinians are included in that narrative.”

While the platform condemned former President Donald Trump for refusing to “endorse the political aspirations of the Palestinian people,” it made no divergence from the status quo policy of vetoing UN Security Council resolutions this year that moved towards Palestinian statehood.

While the platform boasts of being opposed to settler violence, it makes no acknowledgment of the International Court of Justice finding the Israeli government’s occupation and illegal expansions of settlements constitute apartheid.

And to that end, while the platform condemns UN efforts that apparently “single out” Israel, and the Boycott, Divest, and Sanctions movement for the same – apparently ignoring the historical precedent of Americans also boycotting and pushing divestment against fossil fuel companies and apartheid South Africa.

    • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
      44·
      3 months ago

      If a state is committing an ongoing genocide, and another state routinely sends weapons to that state, they are militarily supporting that genocide. That is the reality on the ground, regardless of the rhetoric from the Biden Administration. Ending that unconditional military support is what is required to stop supporting that genocide and abide by International Law

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        34·
        3 months ago

        No, they aren’t. Because that same state is under attack from state sponsored terrorism.

        If they are choosing to misappropriate the support for improper purposes, that’s on them.

        Kind of like when we send humanitarian aid to a country where it is immediately and illegally siezed by the government. We’re not just going to stop sending aid.

        • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
          54·
          3 months ago

          Sending Israel military aid explicitly for uses that must abide by International Law, such as to protection from Iran for example, that is conditional military aid. The Biden Administration is not doing that, they know full well that the unconditional military aid sent to Israel is being used for the genocide of Palestinians in Gaza

          Saying that they support a ceasefire while simultaneously supplying unconditional military aid to a nation engaging in genocide, while it might provide some plausible deniability, is still a violation of international law and morally representable

          • jordanlund@lemmy.world
            43·
            3 months ago

            We have no constraints on Israel for international law or any other kind of law, in fact, we run interference for them when it comes to UN Resolutions through our veto power.

            The analogy I like using is that Israel is the bratty little kid on the playground who feels he can do anything “because my big brother will beat you up!”

            It will continue until someone breaks the little shits nose regardless of consequences.

            • Keeponstalin@lemmy.world
              34·
              3 months ago

              The transfer of weapons and ammunition to Israel may constitute serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian laws and risk State complicity in international crimes, possibly including genocide, UN experts said today, reiterating their demand to stop transfers immediately.

              “These companies, by sending weapons, parts, components, and ammunition to Israeli forces, risk being complicit in serious violations of international human rights and international humanitarian laws,” the experts said. This risk is heightened by the recent decision from the International Court of Justice ordering Israel to immediately halt its military offensive in Rafah, having recognised genocide as a plausible risk, as well as the request filed by the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court seeking arrest warrants for Israeli leaders on allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity. “In this context, continuing arms transfers to Israel may be seen as knowingly providing assistance for operations that contravene international human rights and international humanitarian laws and may result in profit from such assistance.”

      • jordanlund@lemmy.world
        86·
        3 months ago

        Show me where they support the use of weapons for genocide. It’s cool, I can wait.

        Oh, you can’t because they don’t.