Analysis ICJ Fires Warning Shot at Israel Over Genocide Case at World Court. This Is Why Netanyahu Should Be Worried

[Nanjeanne]

Three key points emerged from the International Court of Justice's provisional ruling at the Hague on Friday, in response to South African allegations that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.

First, the court did not order Israel to cease fire and halt all military operations in the Gaza Strip in its war against Hamas – which began when the terror group killed some 1,200 people in southern Israel on October 7. This indicates that the court isn't convinced at this point that the charge of genocide is visibly founded.

Second, the court issued a series of provisional orders requiring preventive Israeli actions, which suggest it believes Israel is perilously close to violating the UN Genocide Convention to which it is a signatory.

Third, combined with advanced talks over a hostage deal that includes an extended cease-fire in Gaza, this could create major strife in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's governing coalition where far-right ministers are vehemently opposed to any steps to reduce the intensity of the war.

SNIP
The United Nations' top court considers whether a state committed genocide under the Genocide Convention of 1948. It defines this as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group."

SNIP
However, that was not the issue being ruled upon on Friday.

"The court is not required to ascertain whether any violations of Israel's obligations under the Genocide Convention have occurred," court President Joan E. Donaghue said at the outset, after confirming South Africa's standing in the case despite not being a party to the conflict and against Israel's objection.

The allegations of violations, she said, will be dealt with at a later stage in the process.

Lots more in the article to read - but since many seem to think that the issue of violations under the Genocide Convention was what today's ruling was supposed to address - thought this article would explain what today's ruling set forth and what is still ongoing.

Haaretz Free Link: [link:https://archive.is/OERS0#selection-1107.0-1215.92|]
Haaretz for subscribers: [link:https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-01-26/ty-article/.premium/icj-fires-israel-a-warning-shot-over-genocide-case-this-is-why-netanyahu-should-worry/0000018d-4625-dc44-a5bf-ceb7d5cf0000|]

[lapucelle]

1. The ICJ voted 15:2 in favor of allowing Israel to keep defending itself against Hamas.

- The ICJ denied SA's demand for an immediate ceasefire

- The ICJ said that Israel must take "all measures within its powers" to prevent the commission of genocidal acts

- The ICJ ordered the immediate release of hostages held by Hamas

www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192/192-20240126-ord-01-00-en.pdf

[Nanjeanne]

2. Yes Indeed from the full document . . .

(1) By fifteen votes to two, The State of Israel shall, inaccordance with its obligations under the Conventionon the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of ArticleI I of this Convention, in particular:-
(a) killing members of thegroup;
(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and
(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(2)By fifteen votes to two, The State of Israel shall ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit any acts described in point 1 above

(3) By sixteen votes to one, The State of Israel shall take all measures within its power to prevent and punish thedirect and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip

(4)By sixteen votes to one, The State of Israel shall take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip

(5)By fifteen votes to two, The State of Israel shall take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of ArticleI I and Article III of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide against members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip

(6)By fifteen votes to two, The State of Israel shall submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to this Order within one monthas from the date of this Order.

[lapucelle]

3. It's clear from the order that the ICJ accepts that Israel has been complying with the Convention

on genocide and that it expects Israel to continue to comply with the Convention.

It was interesting that the document concludes with the ICJ's damning reminder to an unconcerned South Africa that the Hamas terrorists it hosted in December are in clear violation of international humanitarian law.

The Court deems it necessary to emphasize that all parties to the conflict in the Gaza Strip are bound by international humanitarian law. It is gravely concerned about the fate of the hostages abducted during the attack in Israel on 7 October 2023 and held since then by Hamas and other armed groups, and calls for their immediate and unconditional release.

[TheRealNorth]

4. That was my interpretation as well

The question is whether Netenyahu and the IDF think they can continue to shoot grandmas and drop 2000 lbs bombs on civilians and "blame it on Hamas". Based on the responses of the usual suspects here on DU, I don't think this will change much.

[lapucelle]

5. It seems that the ICJ was susceptible to neither hyperbole nor propaganda.

Both the denial of SA's demand for an immediate ceasefire and the pointed concluding remarks concerning the hostages (despite SA never having mentioned them in its boilerplate filing) sent a clear message to the world community: the ICJ will not be party to the politicization of the Convention on genocide.

[Beastly Boy]

6. It is interesting how this analysis ends:

Whether you think the court's decision was lenient or harsh, less or more than feared, under or over the expectation, is not the point. That Israel was even mentioned in respect to the accusation of genocide is a travesty. That it may have created the conditions that may lead to a "genocide" – an allegation fueled by idiotic, incendiary remarks made by a select collection of its dumbest politicians – makes this a very bad day.
Intent will never be proven for one simple, overriding reason: Israel never had the slightest of intentions to commit anything remotely close to genocide. But that's not the point. Friday's provisional ruling was the world court issuing a warning to Israel."

It exposes South Africa's disingenuos intent in bringing their accusations to the court: the intent was to accuse and never to address the facts that from the start were known to not support their accusations.

I am not sure why Netanyahu should be worried: South Africa's stunt single-handedly discredited the "genocide" narrative that had been persistently pushed by various activist groups and NGO's for months. This can only play into Netanyahu's hand, with the minimum of effort on his part.

[Nanjeanne]

7. Yes that appears to be Alon Pinkus's view. I may not agree with him nor may many other writers - but the article

is worth reading in total.

I post articles that I think people will like reading and that may give food for thought. I will post other articles I'm sure where you don't agree with a paragraph of the writer. But they are all worth reading - it's how many of us learn and discuss.

[Beastly Boy]

8. Thank you.

I don't know about others, but I welcome both the consensuses and the challenges in your posts.