Belarus (Brussels Morning Newspaper), In December 2023, the South African government brought a case of a genocide crime against Palestinian people committed by the Israeli government to the International Court of Justice, calling for the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in Gaza Strip. The resolution came in January 2024. In its final verdict, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to “take steps to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza.” After the case consideration has been prolonged, ICJ decided not to call for an immediate ceasefire, and the United Nations resolution 2728 is calling for that. In additional provisional measures, the International Court of Justice urges to ensure urgent humanitarian aid reaches Gaza Israel.
Nonetheless, the Israeli state responded with a complete rejection of the accusations:
“Israel does not recognize the legitimacy of the discussion at the International Court of Justice in the Hague regarding the legality of the occupation- a move designed to harm Israel’s right to defend itself against existential threats. The discussion in the Hague is part of the Palestinian attempt to dictate the results of the political settlement without negotiations. We will continue to fight this attempt and the government, and the Knesset are united in rejecting this wrong trend.”
In this response, the Israeli government declares its position on the non-existence of the Palestinian state and its stance on its right to self-defense. The Israeli government is calling in this case for article 51 of the UN Charter:
“Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security.”
However, the International Court of Justice ruled in its 2004 advisory opinion that Israel could not invoke Article 51 against a threat coming from an occupied territory over which it has control and that it has a right to respond with actions “in conformity with applicable international law.” Nevertheless, the Israeli government claims that it is no longer occupying the Gaza Strip, however, does it justify a genocide against Palestinian people in Gaza? In its defense, Israel says that it does not target civilians.
“We are in a war, in a war civilians get hurt. Israel targets military targets. Israel targets terrorists and when these terrorists surround themselves with civilians with these little children, with these old ladies, with these old people- these civilians might get hurt. But it’s not the fault of Israel. It’s the fault of those, who used them as a human shield.”- said one of Israeli lawyers.
“Israel does more than even it’s required. It drops flyers over Gaza to tell people to vacate the area. It makes phone calls to local civilians to vacate the area. Once Israel has taken these precautions, it’s allowed to take down the building. If civilians prefer to stay- they take their responsibility.”
Excuses that there were extraordinary events of the 7th of October are legitimate reasons, however, the right of the Palestinians in Gaza to be protected from the acts of genocide is a legitimate reason as well.
International Criminal Court in this case says the following:
“Israel shall: (a) take all necessary and effective measures to ensure, without delay, in full co-operation with the United Nations, the unhindered provision at scale by all concerned of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance, including food, water, electricity, fuel, shelter, clothing, hygiene and sanitation requirements, as well as medical supplies and medical care to Palestinians throughout Gaza, including by increasing the capacity and number of land crossing points and maintaining them open for as long as necessary; and (b) ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit acts which constitute a violation of any of the rights of the Palestinians in Gaza as a protected group under the Genocide Convention, including by preventing, through any action, the delivery of urgently needed humanitarian assistance.”
What is important in this case is that the court implies only part of the “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide” namely “prevention.” “The ICJ has double standards for the allies of the powerful and for those that it thinks of as its enemies.”- says one of the political experts concerning the ICJ decision. For the ICJ question is if the genocide occurred in Gaza…
However, the Security Council could also take measures according to the “threat to the peace and security”. The question remains if the Security Council will adopt a “peace enforcement” measure as not so many are currently willing to vote for this decision. Although, as genocide convention implies not only on Israel, but on other 151 state parties, they are under an obligation to take steps to prevent genocide. The question is what steps and by whom will be taken?
United States is partially withdrawing from the “defend and support” position towards the Israeli government after the resolution of the ICJ and the accusation of US government of being involved in the genocide crimes in the Gaza Strip. However, it was the only state to vote “abstention” for the UN Security Council Resolution 2728 for the immediate ceasefire in Gaza.
Canada is heeding to calls of 16 global human rights organizations to halt arms sales to Israel and Palestinian armed groups. UK government stays with “considerable concerns” about the ICJ ruling and rejects genocide accusations. France is “deeply committed to respect for international law and reaffirms its confidence in and support for the ICJ.” Germany is sharing France’s perception and additionally calling for the release of all the hostages taken by Hamas. Russia still didn’t issue an official statement in this case.
Opinions expressed in the op-ed section are solely those of the individual author and do not represent the official stance of our newspaper. We believe in providing a platform for a wide range of voices and perspectives, even those that may challenge or differ from our own. As always, we remain committed to providing our readers with high-quality, fair, and balanced journalism. Thank you for your continued support.Sincerely, The Brussels Morning Team
