A ray of hope

13 min read CRAIG MURRAY

CRAIG MURRAY

Finding that there is a plausible case against Israel, the International Court of Justice treated with disdain Israel's argument that the case should be dismissed as it is exercising its right of self-defense. This argument occupied more than half of Israel's arguments. Not only did the court find that there was a plausible case of genocide, but it only mentioned self-defense once in its provisional ruling, and it was simply to point out that Israel had claimed it. Paragraph 40:

In any case, Israel maintains that, since the purpose of the provisional measures is to preserve the rights of both parties, The Court must, in the present case, consider and “balance” the respective rights from South Africa and Israel. The Respondent emphasizes that it has the responsibility to protect its citizens, including those captured and held hostage as a result of the attack that took place on October 7, 2023. Consequently, he alleges that his right to self-defense is fundamental to any evaluation of the current situation.

That the ICJ has not affirmed Israel's right to self-defense is perhaps the most important point of this provisional resolution. He is the dog that didn't bark. The argument that all Western leaders have been using has been rejected by the ICJ.

The ICJ did not repeat that an occupying power has no right to self-defense. It was not necessary. He simply ignored Israel's misleading claim.

He was able to do so because what he reiterated went far beyond any plausible claim of self-defense. What surprised me most about the ICJ ruling was that the order went into much more detail about the evidence of genocide than was necessary. The description of him was stark.

Paragraph 46 is crucial:

46. The Court observes that the military operation carried out by Israel after the attack
of October 7, 2023 has caused a large number of deaths and injuries, as well as the massive destruction of homes, the forced displacement of the vast majority of the population and large damage to civil infrastructure. Although the figures relating to the Gaza Strip cannot be independently verified, Recent information indicates that 25.700 Palestinians have been killed, more than 63.000 have been injured, more More than 360.000 homes have been destroyed or partially damaged and approximately 1,7 million people have been internally displaced (see United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), Hostilities in the Gaza Strip and Israel, reported impact, Day 109 (January 24, 2024)).

The reason this is so crucial is that the Court is not saying that South Africa affirms this. The Court is saying these are the facts. It is a verification of the facts by the Court. I cannot stress too much the importance of this Tribunal's description of the situation in Gaza.

The Tribunal then details the United Nations' accounts of the factual situation, citing three different senior officials, including Philippe Lazzarini, Commissioner-General of UNRWA:

49. The Court also takes note of the statement issued by the Commissioner General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), Mr. Philippe Lazzarini, on January 13, 2024:

“It has been 100 days since the devastating war began, killing and displacing people in Gaza, following the horrific attacks carried out by Hamas and other groups against the population of Israel. It has been 100 days of ordeal and anxiety for the hostages and their families.
Over the past 100 days, sustained shelling across the Gaza Strip has led to massive displacement of a population that is in a state of flux, constantly uprooted and forced to leave overnight, only to move to places just as unsafe. This has been the largest displacement of the Palestinian people since 1948.
This war has affected more than 2 million people, the entire population of Gaza.
Many will carry lifelong scars, both physical and psychological. The vast majority, including children, are deeply traumatized.
Overcrowded and unsanitary UNRWA shelters have become “home” to more than 1,4 million people.
They lack everything from food to hygiene and privacy. People lives in inhumane conditions, where diseases spread, even among children. They live in the unlivable, with the clock rapidly ticking towards famine. The situation for children in Gaza is especially heartbreaking. a whole generation as children she is traumatized and will take years to heal. Thousands have died, mutilated and orphaned. Hundreds of thousands are deprived of education. Her future “is in danger, with far-reaching and lasting consequences.” (UNRWA, “Gaza: 100 days of death, destruction and displacement”, Philippe Statement Lazzarini, Commissioner General of UNRWA, January 13, 2024).

This explains, of course, why the immediate response to the ICJ ruling was a coordinated attack by Israel and the combined imperialist powers against UNRWA, designed to accelerate the genocide by cutting off aid, to provide a counter-narrative. propaganda to the ICJ ruling, and to reduce the credibility of UNRWA evidence before the court.

The Tribunal works very closely with the UN and is a deeply rooted part of the UN system. It has a particularly close relationship with the UN General Assembly – many of the Tribunal's cases are based on requests from the UN General Assembly. Within fifteen days, the Tribunal will begin its substantive hearings on the legal situation in the Occupied Territories of Palestine, at the request of the General Assembly. There are five specific references to the GA in the Order.

The Tribunal spent much time outlining the facts of the genocide unfolding in the Gaza Strip. It didn't have to be done in such detail, and very little attention has been paid to it. I was also surprised by the level of detail with which the Court laid out the evidence of Israel's genocidal intent.

It is especially humiliating for Israel that the Court cited the Israeli Head of State, the President of Israel himself, as clear evidence of genocidal intent, along with two other government ministers.

51. In this regard, the Court has taken note of a series of statements made by senior Israeli officials. Draws attention, in particular, to the following examples.

52. On October 9, 2023, Mr. Yoav Gallant, Minister of Defense of Israel, announced that had ordered a “total siege” of Gaza City and that there would be “no electricity, no food, no fuel” and that “everything [was] closed.” The next day, Minister Gallant declared, addressing Israeli troops on the Gaza border:

“I have released all restrictions. . . You have seen what we are fighting against. We are fighting against human animals. This is ISIS of Gaza. This is what we are fighting against. . . Gaza will never be what it was before. There will be no Hamas. We will eliminate all. If it doesn't take a day, it will take a week, it will take weeks or
even months, we will reach all places.”

On October 12, 2023, Mr. Isaac Herzog, President of Israel, stated, referring to Gaza:

“We are working, operating militarily according to the norms of international law. Unequivocally. It is an entire nation that is responsible. This is not true
rhetoric that civilians are not aware, are not involved. It is absolutely false. Could have gotten up They could have fought against that evil regime that took over Gaza in a coup. But we are at war. We are in war. We are in war. We are defending our homes. We are protecting our homes. That's the truth. And when a nation protects its
home, fight. And we will fight until their backs break.”

On October 13, 2023, Mr. Israel Katz, then Minister of Energy and Infrastructure of Israel, stated in X (formerly Twitter):

“We will fight the terrorist organization Hamas and destroy it. To the entire civilian population The entire civilian population of Gaza is ordered to leave immediately. We will win. They will not receive not a drop of water nor a single battery until they leave the world.”

Again, it is not a question of the Court saying that South Africa has alleged this. It is a verification of the facts by the Court. The ICJ has already declared Israel's denial before the court of incitement to genocide false.

Now think about this: the day after President Herzog made a genocidal statement, as determined by the International Court of Justice, met and received the “full support” of Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, and Roberta Metsola, president of the European Parliament.

When you take the details of what the ICJ has considered to be the actual facts of the case, in death and destruction and in intent, I have no doubt that this is a court that is currently prepared to find Israel guilty of genocide once the substantive case reaches the Court.

All of Israel's arguments were defeated. All. Israel's extensive effort to have the case dismissed on procedural grounds was undone. Also legitimate defense. And in its findings on the facts, the Court declared Israeli lies about the prevention of civilian casualties, Hamas' responsibility for infrastructure damage, and humanitarian access to Gaza manifestly false.

70. The Court finds that the civilian population of the Gaza Strip remains extremely vulnerable. Remember that the military operation carried out by Israel after October 7, 2023 has resulted, among other things, tens of thousands of dead and injured and the destruction of homes, schools, medical facilities and other vital infrastructure, as well as displacement on a massive scale (see paragraph 46 above). The Court notes that the operation continues and that the Prime Minister of Israel announced on January 18, 2024 that the war “will last many more long months.” Today, many Palestinians In the Gaza Strip they do not have access to the most basic foods, clean water, electricity, essential medicines or heating.

These are the facts of what happened.

Do not be confused by the absence of the word “ceasefire” in the Court's order. What the Court has ordered is very close to that. He has explicitly ordered the Israeli Army to stop killing Palestinians.

THE COURT,
Indicates the following provisional measures:

(1) By fifteen votes to two,

The State of Israel, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to the Palestinians of Gaza, will take all measures within its reach to prevent the commission of all acts falling within the scope of article II of this Convention, in particular:

(a) kill group members
(b) cause serious bodily or mental injury to group members;
(c) deliberately subjecting the group to conditions of existence that will lead to its physical destruction, in whole or in part; and total or partial physicality of the group; and (d) impose measures aimed at preventing births within the group;

IN FAVOR: President Donoghue; Vice President Gevorgian; Judges Tomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Yusuf, Xue, Bhandari, Robinson, Salam, Iwasawa, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant;
Judge ad hoc Moseneke;
AGAINST: Judge Sebutinde; Judge ad hoc Barak;

(2) By fifteen votes to two,

The State of Israel will ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit any of the acts described in point 1 above;

IN FAVOR: President Donoghue; Vice President Gevorgian; Judges Tomka, Abraham,
Bennouna, Yusuf, Xue, Bhandari, Robinson, Salam, Iwasawa, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant; Judge ad hoc Moseneke;

AGAINST: Judge Sebutinde; Judge ad hoc Barak;

(3) By sixteen votes to one,

The State of Israel will take all measures at its disposal to prevent and punish
direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip;

IN FAVOR: President Donoghue; Vice President Gevorgian; Judges Tomka, Abraham,
Bennouna, Yusuf, Xue, Bhandari, Robinson, Salam, Iwasawa, Nolte, Charlesworth, Brant; Judges ad hoc Barak, Moseneke;
AGAINST: Judge Sebutinde;

That is absolutely clear. And while I accept that it is tautological, in the sense that it commands Israel to obey a Covenant that Israel is already obliged to comply with, there could not be a clearer indication that the Court believes that Israel is not currently obeying it.

So what happens now?

Well, Israel has responded by killing more than 180 Palestinian civilians since the International Court of Justice order was issued. If this continues, South Africa could return to the Court to ask for more urgent measures, even before the monthly report ordered to Israel arrives. Algeria has announced that it will take the Order to the UN Security Council for its implementation.

I doubt the United States will veto it. Israel and its supporters have reacted schizophrenicly to the ICJ order. On the one hand, the ICJ has been denounced as anti-Semitic. On the other hand, the official narrative has been (unbelievably) to claim that Israel actually won the case, while downplaying coverage in the mainstream media. This has been reinforced by the massive and coordinated attack on UNRWA, to create alternative headlines.

It is difficult to claim that Israel has won and at the same time try to block the implementation of the Security Council order. My suspicion is that there will continue to be a two-way street: pretending that there is no genocide and that Israel is obeying the “unnecessary” order, and at the same time attacking and ridiculing the ICJ and the UN in general.

No matter what the ICJ said, Israel would not have stopped the genocide; That is the pure truth. The immediate reaction of the United States and its allies to the Order has been to attempt to accelerate the genocide by paralyzing UN relief efforts. I confess that I did not expect something so ruthless and brazen.

The wheels of God grind slowly, but they grind very little. Since the ICJ has pointed out a possible genocide so forcefully, it is quite possible that it will be up to the judges of each country to stop international support for the genocide. As I explained in detail, the Genocide Convention has been incorporated into UK law by the International Criminal Court Act 2001.

Legal advisers at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) will no doubt have issued minutes warning that ministers now risk personal liability under British law for complicity in genocide, should the attacks continue. arms shipments and other forms of military and intelligence cooperation with the Israeli genocide. In the United States, hearings have already begun in California on a lawsuit for complicity in genocide filed against Joe Biden.

Of course, I wish all of this worked faster. But it won't be like that. The UN General Assembly can suspend Israel from the organization. Other useful actions can be taken. But it's a long road, not a quick fix, and people like you and I continue to play a vital role, like everyone else, in using the power of the people to wrest control from a ruthless political class of murderers.

This has been a good victory. I am pleased that this direction I advocated and pressure has worked and has increased the pressure on the Zionists, and that my judgment that the International Court of Justice is not just a tool of NATO like the corrupt International Criminal Court, has been vindicated.

He cannot help the children killed and maimed last night or those who will die in the coming days. But it is a ray of hope on the horizon.