According to the ICC a crime of aggression is “the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, integrity or independence of another State.” What Garak did (again it wasn’t Sisko that did it) in no way threatened the sovereignty or independence of the Romulan Empire.
I don’t think courts would see Sisko as an accessory after the fact as he was conspiring to bring the Romulans into the war using false pretenses.
I don’t think lying is a war crime. If it were, every politician in the world would be on trial.
A crime (but not a war crime) was committed by Garak. Sisko was an accessory after the fact because he didn’t report what Garak did. It’s just our culture has gone towards being hyperbolic with the use of terms like “war crime” so it’s often repeated that Sisko committed war crimes.
He was active in a conspiracy to draw the Romulan empire into a war, which resulted in the death of a Senator. Sisko engaged Garak into the conspiracy. How do you not see Garak blowing up Vreenak’s ship as “the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, integrity or independence of another State”. Garak was engaged in the conspiracy by a federation captain. It was the very definition of a crime of aggression. It doesn’t matter if Sisko intended the result, he (and the Federation by extension) orchestrated the conspiracy.
Do you consider Lindsey Graham’s death a threat to the sovereignty, integrity or independence of the US? I don’t think the death of one Senator quite meets that standard. Though I’m sure if Lindsey Graham were still alive he’d try to argue that it is.
Garak was engaged in the conspiracy by a federation captain.
A conspiracy limited to disinformation, not involving assassination. Garak on his own had a contingency plan which involved assassination. Sisko was not a party to that part of the plan until after the fact.
It doesn’t matter if Sisko intended the result, he (and the Federation by extension) orchestrated the conspiracy.
Why wouldn’t it matter? If you post some disinformation on Lemmy in an effort to effect some political change and then someone else on Lemmy assassinates someone in support of that disinformation campaign, are you complicit in that assassination?
According to the ICC a crime of aggression is “the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, integrity or independence of another State.” What Garak did (again it wasn’t Sisko that did it) in no way threatened the sovereignty or independence of the Romulan Empire.
I don’t think lying is a war crime. If it were, every politician in the world would be on trial.
A crime (but not a war crime) was committed by Garak. Sisko was an accessory after the fact because he didn’t report what Garak did. It’s just our culture has gone towards being hyperbolic with the use of terms like “war crime” so it’s often repeated that Sisko committed war crimes.
He was active in a conspiracy to draw the Romulan empire into a war, which resulted in the death of a Senator. Sisko engaged Garak into the conspiracy. How do you not see Garak blowing up Vreenak’s ship as “the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, integrity or independence of another State”. Garak was engaged in the conspiracy by a federation captain. It was the very definition of a crime of aggression. It doesn’t matter if Sisko intended the result, he (and the Federation by extension) orchestrated the conspiracy.
Do you consider Lindsey Graham’s death a threat to the sovereignty, integrity or independence of the US? I don’t think the death of one Senator quite meets that standard. Though I’m sure if Lindsey Graham were still alive he’d try to argue that it is.
A conspiracy limited to disinformation, not involving assassination. Garak on his own had a contingency plan which involved assassination. Sisko was not a party to that part of the plan until after the fact.
Why wouldn’t it matter? If you post some disinformation on Lemmy in an effort to effect some political change and then someone else on Lemmy assassinates someone in support of that disinformation campaign, are you complicit in that assassination?