Should the City of New York arrest Benjamin Netanyahu when he visits the United Nations in September?

#EvanPoll #poll #netanyahu #un

@evan yes, but only if anything he does has violated NY law.

@evan this is a question extremely hard to answer. So many pros and cons, all of them with potential of escalation. Personally I don't have enough knowledge, so can't judge, even I'd love to be able to say "yes".

@evan no one will arrest him

@evan He does have immunity if he is visiting for United Nations work.

@evan It would be nice if you could. I've voted "no, but"; only because they'll nuke you if you do.

@evan If I'm not mistaken, a head of state enjoys immunity under international law.

@bone187 @evan
Under international law, he's a criminal and has an arrest warrant.

@BroGle That's not the question, though.

@jargoggles @evan you’re absolutely right. I had actually forgotten that at that moment.

@evan Yes, but you will need a party to the ICC waiting out in international waters, when you put him in a boat and tow him out there...

@bone187 @jargoggles @evan he still has diplomatic immunity.

@betamatt @bone187 @jargoggles this is the chat they're having in New York City Hall right now.

@evan Depends. Under what charges?

@evan Arrest him and free Maduro

@evan @bone187 @jargoggles do you think this is a real exercise or just wishcasting for a part of his base? Mamdani must understand he has no authority here.

The number of people saying “yes” to your poll is concerning to me. People shouldn’t be eager to disregard well-established law, though I understand the desire to live out the fantasy for a moment.

@betamatt @bone187 @jargoggles when the established law lets war criminals walk free, I think people are ready to discard the established law.

@drahardja

https://www.icc-cpi.int/defendant/netanyahu

@evan Sadly, the US is not a party to the ICC.

Also, foreign diplomats have immunity when visiting the US. I’m not even sure NY can arrest him on *state* charges, much less ICC ones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_International_Criminal_Court

@drahardja What is more important than stopping an ongoing genocide?

@evan We have to stop it with methods that have a chance of working.

@drahardja jailing a genocider would work great.

@shinydan so, you think Israel would launch an ICBM with a nuclear payload at New York City to free Benjamin Netanyahu?

@evan Yes but . . . Mamdami has it right. It would feel right but it is not within the authority of a city government. Since the US chooses lawlessness for their own advantage, it won't happen.

@evan @betamatt @bone187 @jargoggles Has the UN requested the city hold him pending a custodial transfer?

@kgw could be a trick

@betamatt @bone187 @evan
Diplomatic immunity from international crimes?

@betamatt @evan @bone187 @jargoggles 100% agreed: the USA should uphold the well-established law of the ICC.

@evan In the cold light of day that is silly. Sorry, I was having a bad night.

@drahardja Get NYC to sign on to the ICC in a hurry. I don't suppose a city can sign international treaties, but we can dream 😁 @evan

@evan I'm with "Yes, but…" because it would be the right thing to do with any person that has an ICC arrest warrant, but unfortunately that means nothing in the US.

@evan My heart says "yes", but I don't feel like I actually know what the geopolitical implications of that would be, so it's a "yes, but" from me.

@evan "Yes, but..." as in "Yes, but I don't know what I'm talking about."

@drahardja @evan and this would, because, in order to disagree with Mamdani, various authorities would have to justify the fact that they are upholding genocide.

@jargoggles @bone187 @evan yes, of course.

@dbs @evan @bone187 @jargoggles the US isn’t party to the ICC treaty. (Maybe your point is that we should be.) Even if we were, we’d have to let him go.

@prism @evan @bone187 @jargoggles The ICC wants him, the UN doesn’t have anything to do with it. The UN is the one requiring the grant of immunity.

@betamatt @evan @bone187 @jargoggles Yeah I think I am a "yes but," the but being NYC lacks the authority, unless they want to decide they are the only jurasdiction in the US that recognizes the ICC (which I'm not against, but doesn't seem to be a policy priority of the Mamdani admin)

@evan yes AND

@evan It can't.

@betamatt @bone187 @evan
So your argument is that international law is meaningless.

@Floppy this guy gets it

@llanciawn not with *that* attitude, no

@evan @betamatt @bone187 @jargoggles i wouldn't go as far, though i voted yes, if a criminal walks free because the police violated civil rights to catch them, i think there is a case to make that not letting a police state develop in the name of catching criminal, is worth having some free criminals, now, where is the distinction in that case? the facts that he already has an international arrest warrant, and his rights are special to a privileged class of people, does count, it's not exactly a police state thing.

@evan it's disgraceful that the USA is not party to the ICC, so I don't think the NYPD has the authority to arrest him unless he commits a crime on NYC soil that falls within the remit of the NYPD, and no prosecution can take place for the war crimes, nor is extradition likely as there's no way Rubio or Trump will sign off on that.
So should they? Ethically yes, legally no.

@evan It's not a question of attitude, it's a question of authority: did you not listen to the Mayor?

@evan

Even if New York cannot arrest him, Netanyahu should live under the threat that wherever he goes outside Israel, he most likely will be stopped by police, asked questions, and run the risk of jail time.

There is no out-of-jail card for people who order genocide.

Accountability might take a while, but reckoning will come.

@evan Israel belligerently disregards International Law all the time. Here's how ridiculous the argument sounds when those who disagree with the majority that is Yes, cynically says "but you can't do that." Know that y'all are saying, "you can't free the slaves." Yes, we can and we will, as they had freed themselves, so too will we do what is morally right and just, especially when we are acting in accordance with International Law.

So, this was a timely poll. Mayor Zohran Mamdani of New York just shared a video yesterday in which he excoriated Netanyahu, branded him as the architect of a genocide, but admitted reluctantly that he didn't have legal authority to arrest the Israeli prime minister:

https://youtu.be/8ZuV5L0QL04?si=GFwaVqFVraPNWQD7

My answer is still yes, unconditionally. Here's my thinking:

If the legal framework of the US allows the architect of a genocide to travel through the US with impunity -- to flaunt his immunity to arrest -- then that framework has to change.

One good way to change it is to just arrest him and hold him. Extradite him if possible; let him rot in prison if not.

The USA cannot be the safe haven for war criminals, even if our federal government fails to participate in the ICC.

This would be incredibly provocative, nationally and internationally. It would trigger a constitutional crisis. It would probably endanger the rest of Mamdani's agenda as mayor, at the very least.

So it comes down to what's more important: stopping a genocide, or the principle of diplomatic immunity? Stopping a genocide, or getting assistance from New York State to fund a free buses program? Stopping a genocide, or the principle that the federal government sets foreign policy? Stopping a genocide, or staying mayor?

It's hard to remember how shocking and unprecedented the arrest of Augusto Pinochet in London in 1998 was. A Spanish magistrate charged Pinochet for human rights violations, and the UK government arrested and extradited him. Pinochet was responsible for 2,279 extrajudicial deaths and 30K torture incidents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment_and_arrest_of_Augusto_Pinochet

Human rights abusers and genocide practitioners should be terrified of arrest every time they travel. They should be ashamed. They should hide in fear. They should have no safe haven on this planet.

Genocide is a jus cogens -- a peremptory norm. There is a requirement on all parties to stop and prosecute the crime that overrides any national, international or treaty obligation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peremptory_norm

So, I still say yes. Every level of US government has an obligation to stop Netanyahu in whatever way possible. They cannot fall back on excuses about jurisdiction or this and that level of immunity. It is not a choice; it is a requirement.

@evan I should think being wanted for war crimes supersedes diplomatic immunity. That is a special category of awful.

@evan
Hm.
"So it comes down to what's more important: stopping a genocide, or..."

Now I wonder, would arresting Netanyahu really stop (or work towards stopping) that genocide? I'm doubtful.

(He should still be arrested and tried, together with his accomplices, and locked away!)

@evan @Susan_calvin A very different time, when the BBC and its World Tonight programme were instrumental in exposing Pinochet’s presence to an international, and particularly Spanish, audience, catalysing his arrest.

How very unlike the modern BBC.

@evan While I hear you, I don’t think Mamdani wants to sacrifice himself when he can still accomplish so much as mayor. If he did arrest Netanyahu, it would end his political career on the spot.

@evan
It's worth bearing in mind that the UK and Pinochet had been best buddies during the Falklands war, and he was never actually extradited. Monstrous dictators with powerful friends rarely see justice.

@gnaddrig I don't know if it's a sure thing; it's better than doing nothing.

@aburtch probably. Again, is stopping a genocide more important than universal childcare.

@evan
Absolutely, I agree. And even if the arrest doesn't actually stop the killing and dedtroying, bringing the architect (or project manager?) of a genocidal killing orgy to justice would be a good thing.

@evan

Sorry, friend. I would love to imagine this or any other action stopping the genocide. But it won't. If Mayor Mamdani arrests Netanyahu, then Smotritch and Ben Givr will find a way to take over the rest of the government, cancel elections, and accelllerate the barbarism and the genocide.

Netanyahu exists to save Netanyahu.

They have used him up. They will be glad to see his back so they can unleash even more hell on Palestinians, Muslim and Christian alike.

@evan I think extradition would be quite difficult without support at the federal level; unless it's done covertly, maybe?

@monnier yeah, probably!

@evan OTOH, other countries over which the monster will have to fly could/should intercept it.

@monnier I mean, if you were going to send someone out of the US, New York is a good place to do it.

I think another option for the Mamdani administration is non-cooperation. A visit by a foreign government official to a city requires a lot of coordination. The administration could stonewall across the board. No permission to land at the city's two airports (JFK and LaGuardia). No police escort for the motorcade. Police will not clear streets if there are protesters. No security coordination, no use of city property. You are not welcome here.

It does not put Netanyahu in prison where he belongs, but it might impede his free travel through the city.

@evan Great idea. But I guess Trump will let the national guard march into the city then to protect his war crime buddy.

@p6 @evan

@spraoi @evan so, we need to ask Hungarians!

@p6 @evan

Well, I would suppose that it's hard to put just taxation and services in place if you've been murdered by a particularly ruthless national intelligence service.

But what do I know?