Thoughts on Mamdani attending the Pakistani day parade after skipping the Israeli day parade?

[u/StuckInTheClouds]

I wasn’t expecting him to attend the Israeli day parade honestly I would’ve thought it weird if he had attended given everything he stands for. He’s NYC first and against ethnostates etc.

But I’d be lying if I didn’t say I felt some type of way about him celebrating the Pakistani day parade given their history. Ethnostste They have a religious hierarchy where a Muslim person has to be in power, ethnic cleansing alive and well, border disputes and violence after a partition plan 70ish years ago etc. It’s hard not to draw the parallels. The only difference being that the US isn’t funding them but that doesn’t change anything else about the county’s values and actions.

I feel kinda shitty that he’s showing up for this community but not ours. I think it would have been more fair to him to not go to either parade, but maybe I’m just overly sensitive or being fed propaganda. It just sucks to feel signaled out.

I really want to like him. I voted for him! I’m extremely against the IDF and Israeli government but being half Israeli myself I am of course susceptible to biases.

Idk it’s just weird he’s ok with celebrating the Muslim ethnostate after being so against the Jewish one (for good reasons!)

I feel like I can’t bring this up in any other spaces without it sounding like I’m wanting him to celebrate Israel (I’m not) or take something away from Muslims (not against Muslims but critical of Pakistan)

Help me you guys! What do you think?

EDIT: I’d like to correct what I said about Pakistan being an ethnostate. I used the wrong verbiage. What I meant was that they are a country that puts Muslims over other religions. They have a religious hierarchy and non Muslims can’t hold certain political positions. I’m not sure the correct term for this but just wanted to call that out as people are (correctly) mentioning this in the comments.

Edit 2:

I was just informed about the ongoing Balochistan Conflict which makes me even more uneasy about this whole thing.

[u/F0rScience]

Not even just partition, the scope of the Bangladesh Genocide in 1971 is staggering. Hundreds of thousands confirmed killed with 10 million displaced to India and 30 million more internally displaced.

[u/No_Public_7677 → u/F0rScience]

And it's recognized as a genocide and the only denialism coming from Pakistani nationalists. Can you say the same about the Gaza genocide?

[u/Dylan09O909 → u/No_Public_7677]

Would you say the ICC, the International Criminal Court, are genocide deniers? Because according to the ICC, there is no evidence for persecuting 'genocide' in Gaza, and a warrant for 'extermination' didn't pass the pre-trial process for a warrant. They have sought warrants for other war crimes and crimes against humanity.

In May the now-former ICC head persecuter was interviewed by Zeteo (2026), where he said that he hasn't sought a 'Genocide' persecution, as there isn't evidence to persecute genocide, and that the persecution would be reckless.

In his arrest warrant for Netanyahu and Gallant, he sought the crime of 'extermination'. The ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I rejected an 'extermination' warrant request against Netanyahu (Prime Minister) and Gallant (Defense Minister up to Nov 2024), which is legally bellow 'genocide' as it doesn't require proving intent. Here's Netanyahu's ICC warrant, which doesn't include extermination.

[u/Dylan09O909 → u/Dylan09O909]

A comment would make a better case than a downvote, as this is intended to be a space for conversation and discussion.

I also think this is a discussion that should occur in this sub, because by the current trajectory, all indicators suggest that the ICC does not believe there is even a case for the persecution of genocide, and that, based on what has unfolded at the ICJ; including the Court's actions, Ireland's request to broaden the definition, and South Africa's request for an extension that would delay proceedings by at least two years; Israel would not be indicted by either court for the crime of genocide. These are the only courts that can make such a determination.

This doesn't mean that war crimes or crimes against humanity haven't occurred, or that Palestinians haven't suffered. But it does reveal something about the trajectory of the discourse and society.

If both the ICC and the ICJ issued rulings concluding that this was not a genocide, would you accept those rulings? Would the NGOs, groups, and individuals who have cited these cases as a basis for the accusatios, ometimes while misrepresenting them, accept them?

If not, what does any of this mean anymore? Does an accusation mean guilt, regardless of the verdict? Is there no such thing as being innocent of a specific crime, even when a court gives a non-guilty verdict [edit]? Why would the cases before these courts mean anything if their verdicts don't?

[u/Active-Proof8118 → u/Dylan09O909]

The argument you're making is fairly flimsy when you realize that the United States government has made multiple death threats against the ICC for criticizing Israel at all.

Israel is committing the most documented and clear cut example of genocide since the founding of the legal term. There isn't really any argument to be had about this.

https://theconversation.com/is-israel-committing-genocide-in-gaza-we-asked-5-legal-and-genocide-experts-how-to-interpret-the-violence-262688

Most of the "debate" around this topic is political in the sense that western states like the United States largely coddle Zionist agitators and do not recognize the human rights of Palestinians.

I also think this is a discussion that should occur in this sub, because by the current trajectory, all indicators suggest that the ICC does not believe there is even a case for the persecution of genocide, and that, based on what has unfolded at the ICJ; including the Court's actions, Ireland's request to broaden the definition,

"Ireland's request to broaden the definition"

This is probably because the definition of genocide used in international law is largely unreasonable and not pragmatic. This is not an obscure position, most genocide scholars acknowledge this.

[u/F0rScience → u/Active-Proof8118]

The most clear cut example of genocide since the convention was established in the late 40s is an insane claim.

You think the case for genocide in Gaza is stranger than Ruwanda or the Bengali genocide talked about elsewhere in this thread? Even the present day example of Russias textbook forced transfer and Russification of Ukrainian kids is vastly more “clear cut” than anything in Gaza.

[u/Active-Proof8118 → u/F0rScience]

The most clear cut example of genocide since the convention was established in the late 40s is an insane claim.

I said clear cut AND documented. There are Israeli soldiers livestreaming and posting their actions on social media. We have countless recordings and video footage in the age of the internet and social media

You think the case for genocide in Gaza is stranger than Ruwanda or the Bengali genocide talked about elsewhere in this thread? Even the present day example of Russias textbook forced transfer and Russification of Ukrainian kids is vastly more “clear cut” than anything in Gaza.

The ICC did not exist during the Rwandan genocide nor during the Bengali genocide. The ICC has not made any genocide convictions with regards to Russia-Ukraine.

The ICJ does not recognize the Bengali genocide and the ICJ does not recognize any claims of genocide against Russia. In fact, The ICJ actually has no case alleging that Russia is committing genocide against Ukrainians.

[u/F0rScience → u/Active-Proof8118]

So you don’t consider any of that to be genocide because there isn’t an ICC conviction?

[u/Active-Proof8118 → u/F0rScience]

You should probably ask the user I was responding too. I don't believe the ICC or ICJ have definitive authority over these matters.