Lawyers’ jaw-jaw from the safety of the Hague had not made a jot of difference to the course of the war in Ukraine. What has helped is the practical military support of Britain under a Conservative government.
Hard-nosed politicians and commanders, and their legal departments, might be able to mount coherent defences of the IDF. But that won’t necessarily help them in the propaganda battle.
Such initiatives are surely a deserving recipient of more of the UK’s overseas aid than China, which reportedly received £51.7 million last year.
Proposals that define Convention rights in ways other than the Court determines send the wrong message.
We have a legal duty to intervene if chemical weapons are used, and that is a duty we must not fail.
Ministers should do nothing to make a coup less likely as the country’s elites come to terms with the consequences of war.
So the only question that remains, given this new compromise plan, is: what’s the Government’s objection now?
Defensive actions taken by the IDF have resulted in fatalities. Only when absolutely necessary and legally permitted, has force been used.
This fetishisation of process above reality may not be intentional sabotage, but it is a dereliction of the Government’s most basic duty to safeguard the national interest.