Big Deal! ICJ Interim Requirements of Israel

Diarmuid Breatnach

(Reading time: 3 mins.)

The good news from South Africa’s case against Israel at the International Court of justice is that it considers that the zionist entity has a case to answer with regard to genocide against the Palestinians. But its interim instructions are profoundly disappointing.

The ICJ did not even order a humanitarian cessation of bombing from Israel and without that food, water, waterproof emergency shelters, blankets, medicine and fuel for heating cannot be brought in to Gaza. Ambulances often cannot get to bombed sites to collect and deliver victims to hospitals.

Or to collect the dead for burial.

*Hunger Gazans queue for food* (Photo sourced: *Internet*)

And in addition to the Israeli bombing, the health situation of the Palestinians in Gaza is dire. According to the relief agency of the EU, though visibly biased against the Palestinians: “Urgent needs include water and fuel … to run generators of hospitals and desalinate water; and

“protection of civilians in line with international humanitarian law, including rapid, unhindered, and safe access of humanitarian aid – at the scale needed – into the Gaza Strip for it to reach those in need; health services; food; sanitation and hygiene; shelter and education in emergencies.”

A Victory?

Some states, organisations and people are calling the interim judgement of the ICJ a victory. I just cannot see that, even partially. So Israel has a genocide case to answer? NO. Israel in full view of the world has been guilty of genocide not just since this bombing of Gaza but since 1948.

Clearly. Repeatedly. And with impunity (save for actions of Palestinian resistance and allies). Not only that but the UK, the USA and the EU are complicit in that genocide, funding, arming and justifying the Zionist state’s actions.

And, like the Irish State, in failing to act to prevent genocide, which is a statutory obligation on signatory states.

The Zionist state is also of course violating the UN Convention on Genocide to which it is a signatory.

None of that is debatable to any degree whatsoever. Not according to the evidence of our eyes and ears and to the UN’s definition of genocide: a crime committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, in whole or in part.

If killing well over 26,000 Palestinians – a national and ethnic group – in little over 100 days doesn’t fit that definition, what would?

If laying siege to Gaza and shutting off food, medicine and heating to its people, blanking telecommunications, bombing housing, hospitals, refugee camps, schools, bakeries, fishing boats, churches, mosques, water and sewage treatment plants, does not fit the definition, then what will?

And yet we may have to wait years for the final judgement of the ICJ on this question.

Interim Measures

Meanwhile, the ICJ, without specifying an interim humanitarian cessation of bombing, has instructed Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention (i.e on Genocide),

But since Netanyahu claims that they are already doing that, how is that instruction going to make any difference?

The ICJ specified in particular: “(a) killing members of the group; (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. The Court recalls that these acts fall within the scope of Article II of the Convention when they are committed with the intent to destroy in whole or in part a group as such.

“The Court further considers that Israel must ensure with immediate effect that its military forces do not commit any of the above-described acts.”

Again, but since Netanyahu claims that they are already refraining from such acts, how is that instruction going to make any difference?

The only interim instruction of practical use would have been to oblige Israel to a humanitarian cessation of bombing, even if temporary but it failed to do that.

The international humanitarian restrictions on states to prevent and punish genocide after the European genocides of the 1930s and 1940s have failed. They failed before in Cambodia, the Balkans and they are failing now in Palestine.

Perhaps a socialist world order can restore them. It is clear that a world dominated by imperialism cannot.