Gaza, Genocide and the Discursive Limits of International Law – EJIL: Talk! – Go Health Pro

Gaza, Genocide and the Discursive Limits of International Law – EJIL: Talk! – Go Health Pro

Image: Qassem, a Palestinian shepherd from Umm al Fugara, is being investigated by Israeli military police and army for land ownership, after a settler wrongfully accused him of assault. Philippe Pernot.

Whether within the lexicon of international law or the parlance of everyday conversation, invoking ‘genocide’ is pregnant with explosive and abrasive intent. Lawyers and activists alike employ the word’s singular expressive power to condemn and to galvanise. We have seen this in the case of Israel’s assault on the Gazan population over the last year. Initially, genocide was uttered in a number of circles in slightly faltering tones, but it is now used with increasing confidence and conviction in diverse circles even in the face of trenchant opposition. While practices of indescribable pain have become normalised, speakers of the law have tried to resist this trend through creative and abundant genocide anachronisms and neologisms. We understand ‘genocide anachronisms’ as adjacent terms and approaches that were either subsumed or overlooked in the drafting of the 1948 genocide definition. While these broad conceptualisations were capable of capturing the variegated elements of collective annihilation, we suggest that ‘genocide neologisms’ speaks to more recent efforts to reinvigorate the potentiality of genocide, whether as a non-legal scholarly mode of analysis or as an attempt at norm creation. Thus, when trying to characterise the carnage that is Gaza today, for many, it is no longer enough to speak of genocide. Instead, we can see a proliferation of killing (‘cide’) words to try to capture the variegated contours of genocide. Well-worn terms sit alongside newer variants, all jostling to articulate the nature of Israeli criminality. We identify these ‘cides’ as: spacioicide, domicide, ecocide, politicide, economicide, sociocide, scholasticide, memoricide, medicide, Gazacide and related terms such as ‘unchilding’, and Nakba.

Part of the reason for resorting to this cacophony of criminalisation is to undercut anxieties around the purported limitations and rigidities of genocide, especially in relation to intent and its focus on physical destruction. Rather than rejecting the law or the notion of genocide then, we understand these efforts as ways to build on traditional renderings of genocide and make these resonate with the situation in Gaza today. Such efforts perhaps speak to a widespread need by legal and non-legal scholars alike to have their respective fields be seen as relevant in the face of such suffering. It is striking that genocide and its related ‘cides’ often crowds out other paradigms, especially focused on the situation in Gaza as one of numerous crimes against humanity.

Read more

Best Practice for Workshopping Projected Edited Collections (Books, Symposia) in 10 Not So Easy Steps – EJIL: Talk! – Go Health Pro

Gaza, Genocide and the Discursive Limits of International Law – EJIL: Talk! – Go Health Pro

On my way out? It appears, you might be thinking, to be a very long and winding way, and I cannot even promise that this is the last instalment….  Still, for what it is worth, here is another of my ‘dos and don’ts’ advice on topics addressed to early career scholars on their way in, and in this case, most decidedly, the advice may profit advanced scholars and even those like me who are on their way out.

Eons ago I inveighed against edited books, or rather, unedited books (see vol. 27:3). When invited to contribute to such volumes, my advice was: proceed with caution, avoid if at all possible.

Here are a few snippets, which can be entitled ‘Worst Practice’:

Read more

Whose Legal Duty to Aid? – EJIL: Talk! – Go Health Pro

Gaza, Genocide and the Discursive Limits of International Law – EJIL: Talk! – Go Health Pro

On 4 November, Israel officially informed the United Nations of its decision to cut ties with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) following the passage of two bills opposing UNRWA’s activities on Israeli territory. The new laws also designate UNRWA as a terrorist organisation and strip its staff of legal immunity. As many commentators (e.g. Eirik Bjorge), including state officials, have criticised, those bills seriously threaten the operational viability of UNRWA in the occupied Palestinian territory.

Read more

Reflections on Palestine’s Intervention Request in South Africa v Israel – EJIL: Talk! – Go Health Pro

Gaza, Genocide and the Discursive Limits of International Law – EJIL: Talk! – Go Health Pro

In December 2023, South Africa instituted proceedings against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention). To date, ten third-party interventions have been submitted in the case. Eight states—Bolivia, Chile, Turkey, Spain, Mexico, Libya, Colombia, and the Maldives—have filed declarations of intervention under Article 63 of the ICJ Statute as state parties to the Genocide Convention. Nicaragua has requested permission to intervene under Article 62, asserting a legal interest which may be affected by the ICJ’s decision. Palestine, having acceded to the Genocide Convention in April 2014, has sought to intervene under both articles. As both Articles 62 and 63 provide for interventions by ‘states’, Palestine’s requests (particularly under Article 62), may raise the question of whether it qualifies as a ‘state’ for the purposes of the ICJ Statute—as an antecendent determination for the acceptance of its intervention requests.

Read more

CfP Netherlands Yearbook of International Law; Climate Change and Migration Webinar; EHRAC Animated Film; Business and Human Rights Workshop; AI Knut Ipsen Lecture – EJIL: Talk! – Go Health Pro

Gaza, Genocide and the Discursive Limits of International Law – EJIL: Talk! – Go Health Pro

1. Call for Papers: Netherlands Yearbook of International Law. The Netherlands Yearbook of International Law is inviting submissions for Volume 55 – ‘The manifold forms of contemporary international legal scholarship’. The volume editors invite contributions that address the interplay between substance and form in contemporary modes of international legal work, for example the recording of podcasts, the use of X or blogposts – which may in turn be juxtaposed with more ‘traditional’ outputs such as books or articles. The full call for papers can be found here. Authors may submit an abstract of no more than 400 words by 25 November 2024. Authors of selected abstracts will be informed by 8 December and will then be invited to send a first full draft of no more than 10,000 words including footnotes by 24 March 2025. All emails and files should be sent to nyil {at} asser(.)nl.

2. ICON-S Interest Group on Climate Change and Migration Webinar on The Australia-Tuvalu Falepili Union. ICON-S Interest Group on Climate Change and Migration are hosting a webinar “The Australia-Tuvalu Falepili Union: Balancing Climate Mobility, Sovereignty, and Cultural Preservation” The event will take place on Tuesday 19 November 2024 at 10am London/11am CET/9pm Sydney/11pm Wellington and offer a discussion examining the world’s first bilateral agreement on climate mobility. This webinar will explore the Falepili Union’s implications for international law, cultural preservation, and Pacific geopolitics. The event will be held via Zoom. Register here.

Read more

x