U.S. criticises Navi Pillay for attempting to broaden the definition of genocide

Othe United States again today criticized the lawyer Navi Pillay, laureate this year with the Nobel Peace Prize, for allegedly trying to extend the definition of genocide in the process initiated by the Gambia to Myanmar at the International Court of Justice (TIJ).

It is a question of the fact that the outcome of the proceedings could have important implications for the open procedure in the same court against Israel for the offensive in the Gaza Strip.

The TIJ will have to pronounce before the end of the year on the charges of genocide against Myanmar (formerly Burma) during the so-called “cleaning operation”, an expression used by Burmese authorities to designate the offensive launched by the Army against the Rohingya minority between 2006 and 2007, under the argument that it intended to eliminate the armed groups operating in the state of Rajine, the region of origin of the community.

The operation caused the exodus of hundreds of thousands of people, who eventually survived in refugee camps in Bangladesh, exposed to hunger and various forms of abuse, in particular women and girls, many of whom were forced into prostitution.

The Gambia lawyers argue, for example, that an attempt to starve a population may constitute genocide and that the existence of a minimum number of fatalities should not be a determining factor in classifying a crime as such.

In this sense, they maintain that the argument of an “anti-terrorist operation” cannot serve as justification for the practice of genocide.

Furthermore, since it will be the first time that an international court has pronounced itself on large-scale human rights violations in a case brought by “a non-directly injured State acting to defend international law”, a decision in favour of the Gambia may significantly strengthen South Africa’s still pending decision-making process against Israel.

U.S. Ambassador Mike Waltz accused Pillay, who serves as an ‘ad hoc’ judge at the TIJ, of intending to impose “a weakened and false standard that can then be used as a weapon against U.S. military and allies whenever they raise a finger against terrorists hiding behind civilians,” in an indirect reference to the case against Israel.

“[ The United States will not allow] false global judges to use the law as a weapon against our troops, call into question our sovereignty or put at risk American lives,” said Waltz.

The U.S. diplomat also criticized the Nobel Committee, which he considered “dishonored” for awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to a person who, in his opinion, represents an “international community” with a leftist, globalist and anti-Semitic agenda.