If it was not possible to have international institutions we would still be back in the stone age in terms of international trade.
Nonsense. International trade doesn't require any international institutions.
Israel should be held to account for its war crimes.
I suppose. If you can hold everyone responsible for war crimes. But to actual impose serious sanctions on the side that doesn't routinely commit war crimes, and actually makes some effort to investigate them when they happen, than you impose on organizations who's normal every day action in a conflict is to commit war crimes.
More generally while the ideal of having a just and fair arbitration of war crimes might be good, that isn't the world we live in. We don't have a world government. Maybe we eventually will but it could be hundreds of years from now, or tens of thousands, or never.
The Nazis where, to an extent, held responsible for their war crimes, but only after their country had been largely destroyed and forced in to unconditional surrender. Imposing war crimes trials in cases where the crimes are as obvious as they where under the Nazis, and where the country involved had unconditionally surrendered, is indeed possible. Imposing war crimes when there is no surrender, in fact when the conflict is still active (at least as a sort of cold war), and where many of the alleged crimes are reasonably disputed is quite another. The effort will likely be useless, and may even be counter-productive.
Pointing out how your ideas won't work in the real world isn't supporting or condoning criminal behavior. |
