International pressure and proceedings are opening wider cracks in Israel’s occupation of Palestine. The UN Genocide Convention, obligating 153 signatory nations to counteract genocide, was invoked for the fifth time in the history of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) when South Africa formally accused Israel of genocide in occupied Palestine.
The ICJ, established to resolve disputes between states, recognized genocidal intent as plausible and handed down provisional measures for Israel to refrain from genocidal acts. On February 8, Nicaragua followed suit with an application to join the case against Israel “to liberate mankind from such an odious scourge.”
The trial continues. On Friday, after Israel bombed the last Palestinian refuge of Rafah, the court reemphasized the “immediate and effective implementation” of the provisional orders. Moreover, 52 states are set to testify in a separate UN request for an ICJ advisory opinion. Such proceedings follow the initial ruling, which revealed Israel’s isolation amid challenges from the Global South and growing support for Palestine based on international law.
On Trial
The political underpinnings embedded in qualifying the charge of genocide complicate the proceedings. Coined in the shadow of the Holocaust and treated as the world’s most heinous crime, it finds definition in Article 2 of the Genocide Convention: acts committed with intent to destroy a group “in whole” or “in part” — and “destruction,” says the treaty, can range from birth prevention to serious injury to murder.
Powerful states have long wielded power over the writing and implementation of international rules. Israel, US-backed to the tune of over USD150 billion, has historically slipped through ambiguities in international law, evading world condemnation and accountability for its occupation and genocide. The twist comes as the latter charge is now South Africa’s weapon against hegemony’s architects.
Israel denied these charges despite its murder of 28,000 Palestinians. South Africa countered, however, that Israeli Defense Forces’ attacks on civilians, Israeli officials’ statements, mass starvation, and the destruction of occupied Palestine’s healthcare system constituted genocidal intent beyond doubt.
By invoking a right to self-defense, Israel argued that hostilities began when Hamas breached the border fence on October 7. South Africa, on the other hand, looked back further, rooting the ensuing violence in 75 years of Israeli apartheid.
Israel is an occupier, erecting border walls intruding into a quarter of Gaza and depriving Palestinians of basic utilities, such as water and electricity. Israel already controls Gaza and thus cannot legally ascribe a foreign character to attacks from within and claim a right to self-defense over its occupied subjects, said Edre Olalia, chairperson of the National Union of People’s Lawyers.
Attempts to seal the widening cracks in Israel’s occupation are rendered futile by the continuing catastrophe that can no longer evade international scrutiny.
Half Measures
While legal victories were realized, implementation remains in limbo as powerful nations selectively enforce international law.
Ultimately, the ICJ ruled genocide plausible and provisional measures necessary. It did not, however, adopt all nine measures, one of which is a ceasefire. Instead, the court near-unanimously granted four, ordering Israel to desist from incitement, bodily harm, murder, and other punishment leading toward genocide. It also required Israel a compliance report within a month.
Fulfilling these measures necessitates a ceasefire, South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor argued, as they entail massive de-escalation of military force. “Despite [the ruling’s] apparent ambiguity and opaque language on the concrete operational steps that should amount to a much-needed ceasefire, it is a loud and strong slap on the arrogance and self-righteousness of the Israeli [government],” said Olalia.
In a legal victory, the decision recognized the Palestinian people as a distinct and protected group under the Genocide Convention. To make sure that states won’t be complicit in genocide, they now hold the imperative to curb Israel’s genocidal war on Palestine, according to Palestinian Foreign Affairs Minister Riad Malki.
Yet the ICJ remains powerless to enforce its decision especially while Western powers stand with Israel, including the US which has a veto power on the UN Security Council – the body that can enforce ICJ’s decisions upon the offending party’s noncompliance. Tailoring international law, they construct consensus to bludgeon humanitarian actors: In violation of the ICJ’s provisional measures, 15 states have cut off funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency over allegations that its staff participated in the October 7 attack.
While continuing the indiscriminate bombing of Rafah, Israel flouts the ruling as in 2004, when the ICJ issued an advisory opinion declaring the West Bank border wall illegal. Along with other high-ranking Israeli officials, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the court’s current measures, labeling genocide charges “false” and “outrageous.”
Nevertheless, Israel’s evasion of accountability may not last long amid the growing global solidarity with Palestine.
Pressure Points
The proceedings highlight Israel’s occupation and a widening rift between oppressor and oppressed nations in the international community. Israel is losing room to maneuver in materiel and propaganda as Global South countries, historically victimized and underdeveloped by the Global North, defend Palestine in public and court.
Growing solidarity saw 153 countries voting for a ceasefire in the UN General Assembly even before the trial and only 10 voting against, including Israel and the US. The shift in public opinion and state reactions only creates more momentum as many states begin to speak out against genocide.
Among the Global South, Indonesia, Bangladesh, and Nicaragua have expressed interest in joining the case against Israel. Additionally, South Africa’s own dismantling of apartheid and the Namibian genocide under German colonial rule tie them to Palestine. The proceedings show Global South countries standing strong against oppressive nations, according to Olalia.
Even the US, while playing unconditional backer, has tempered its rhetoric: US Secretary of State Antony Blinken denounced “extremist settler violence” during his January trip to Gaza, and President Biden issued orders sanctioning Israeli settlers. Not goodwill but pressure motivates them, however, as material support to Israel in a USD14 billion aid bill is still forthcoming.
It is an uphill fight. However, while a final ruling may take years and the task of liberation decisively lies with the Palestinian resistance, global pressure from nations, humanitarian groups, and international courts can be brought to bear on Israeli apartheid.
These twin forces of the Palestinians’ resistance and global solidarity can chip away at Israel’s wall of unaccountability and aid in the process of dismantling a 75-year occupation soaked in blood and tears. ●
