Login
You're viewing the mstdn.social public feed.
  • clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛clacke@libranet.de
    Jul 4, 2026, 2:49 PM

    Ukraine is obviously the defender, and Russia can end the war any time it wants by returning the illegally occupied regions of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson and Crimea.

    But when Ukraine strikes against Crimean power plants and transformer stations, is it committing war crimes? Russia was accused of war crimes when it did it to Ukraine. Is there a dual-use exception when a region is a staging area for attacks against your territory? If there is, that sounds like something Israel would claim as a legal defense for at least some of their actions in Gaza.

    💬 2🔄 0⭐ 0

Replies

  • pettterpettter@social.accum.se
    Jul 4, 2026, 2:52 PM

    @clacke No, Ukraine (and Hamas) both are committing war crimes by striking civilians and civilian infrastructure, but as you say those crimes are downstream of the supreme crime of aggression that both are subject to.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • clacke: exhausted pixie dream boy 🇸🇪🇭🇰💙💛clacke@libranet.de
    Jul 4, 2026, 3:15 PM

    @pettter So, Ukraine, Russia, Hamas and Israel have all committed war crimes and the only difference is that Russia and Hamas started it?

    I would add that even though I'm the one who made the comparison above, what Israel has done to the people of Gaza in retaliation of what Hamas did is enormous in scale compared to the original crime, and cannot be considered similar to what Ukraine is doing.

    💬 2🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • hypolitehypolite@friendica.mrpetovan.com
    Jul 4, 2026, 3:39 PM
    @clacke @pettter As usual with crimes, the suspects should be heard in a fair trial of their peers where they will be able to defend themselves. Homicide can be allowed in extreme self-defense cases, for example. At the scale of countries it becomes thorny, both to hold such a fair trial and to hold the defendant accountable of the outcome of the trial.
    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0
  • Janjnv@mastodon.social
    Jul 5, 2026, 9:07 AM

    @clacke I think what applies here is the principle of proportionality in International Humanitarian Law: “[…]damage to civilian objects […] must not be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.”
    Precise strikes on a power grid on illegally annexed territory used for launching attacks? Sucks for Russian tourists but defendable. Bombing a hospital with civilians since it allegedly acts as a military base? Seems pretty excessive.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0
  • 💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0