Israel’s Reputation forever Besmirched by UN Court Injunction to Cease Genociding Palestinians

Ann Arbor (Informed Comment) – The International Court of Justice’s ruling on “provisional measures” regarding the allegation of genocide against Israel for its behavior in Gaza is what in the US we would call a “preliminary injunction.” That is, it finds that South Africa in its complaint has made a plausible case that Israel is committing genocide and the justices want it to stop immediately. The court won’t make a final determination about the allegation of a Gaza genocide for some time, perhaps years. But it accepted the argument that the court can’t just let the current Israeli rules of engagement and treatment of civilians go on while the justices deliberate.

The court also rebuked Hamas’s continued holding of Israeli hostages.

Although a legion of newspaper headlines (intended to run interference for the extremist government of Binyamin Netanyahu) breathed a sigh of relief that the court did not order a ceasefire, it did in fact strictly prohibit, going forward,

(a) killing members of the group;

That is, the Israeli military can fight with and kill Hamas members under the doctrine of self-defense in the UN Charter, but it has to stop killing innocent Palestinian civilians immediately. My own guess is that 90% of the Palestinians killed so far are innocent non-combatants, and the Gaza Health Ministry says at least 70% are women and minor children.

The wide-ranging and no-nonsense ruling, which was nearly unanimous, strikes a serious and lasting blow to Israel’s reputation as a country born from the genocide of the Holocaust. It now stands plausibly accused of implementing genocidal policies against another people. In the weird Israeli information cocoon, there may be no Palestinians, or there may be no innocent Palestinians, or there may be no way for Israel ever to do any wrong, but the view from the Hague is quite different. There are millions of Palestinians, and it is plausible that Israel is committing massive war crimes against innocent noncombatants.

The court writes:

62. South Africa submits that there is a clear risk of irreparable prejudice to the rights of the Palestinians in Gaza and to its own rights under the Genocide Convention. It asserts that the Court has repeatedly found that the criterion of irreparable prejudice is satisfied where serious risks arise to human life or other fundamental rights. According to the Applicant, daily statistics stand as clear evidence of urgency and risk of irreparable prejudice, with an average of 247 Palestinians being killed, 629 wounded and 3,900 Palestinian homes damaged or destroyed each day. Moreover, Palestinians in the Gaza Strip are, in the view of South Africa, at

“immediate risk of death by starvation, dehydration and disease as a result of the ongoing siege by Israel, the destruction of Palestinian towns, the insufficient aid being allowed through to the Palestinian population and the impossibility of distributing this limited aid while bombs fall”.

The Applicant further contends that any scaling up by Israel of access of humanitarian relief to Gaza would be no answer to its request for provisional measures. South Africa adds that, “[s]hould [Israel’s] violations of the Genocide Convention go unchecked”, the opportunity to collect and preserve evidence for the merits stage of the proceedings would be seriously undermined, if not lost entirely.”

So the South Africa case is that A, the Israelis are killing over 200 Palestinians and damaging nearly 4,000 homes each day and B, they are destroying the evidence for the ongoing genocide even as they commit it.

The Court then reviews the evidence from UN agencies for the devastating situation under which Palestinians in Gaza are living. It concludes,

70. The Court considers that the civilian population in the Gaza Strip remains extremely vulnerable. It recalls that the military operation conducted by Israel after 7 October 2023 has resulted, inter alia, in tens of thousands of deaths and injuries and the destruction of homes, schools, medical facilities and other vital infrastructure, as well as displacement on a massive scale . . . The Court notes that the operation is ongoing and that the Prime Minister of Israel announced on 18 January 2024 that the war “will take many more long months”. At present, many Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have no access to the most basic foodstuffs, potable water, electricity, essential medicines or heating.

71. The WHO has estimated that 15 per cent of the women giving birth in the Gaza Strip are likely to experience complications, and indicates that maternal and newborn death rates are expected to increase due to the lack of access to medical care.

72. In these circumstances, the Court considers that the catastrophic humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip is at serious risk of deteriorating further before the Court renders its final judgment.

The point about infant mortality and maternal mortality is brought up because one of the elements of genocide is preventing births within the group.

The Court reviewed Israeli denials that things are so bad in Gaza and rejects these assertions out of hand. Lack of food, water, medicine and protection from the elements (it is cold and rainy nowadays) are too well attested by UN aid experts to allow Netanyahu and his Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir to sweep them under the rug. Any ameliorative steps taken by Israel so far “are insufficient to remove the risk that irreparable prejudice will be caused before the Court issues its final decision in the case.”

Aljazeera English Video: “ICJ interim ruling on genocide case against Israel – Live”

So here is the meat of the provisional measures prescribed, which were voted in by 15 to 2 or 16 to 1 (even the ad hoc Israeli-appointed judge joined in supporting some of these instructions). It is a crushing decision against Israel:

78. The Court considers that, with regard to the situation described above, Israel must, in accordance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, 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.

As for (b), it is estimated that over 60,000 Palestinians have been wounded by Israeli military action in Gaza in the past four months. Many of these injured are also women, children, and noncombatant men. Children have lost hands, arms, feet and legs. Since the Israelis have destroyed the hospital system, they have often been operated on without anesthesia or antibiotics. The court says that the Israelis must cease this carnage without delay.

(c) Addresses the unsanitary conditions under which Palestinians are living, without access to enough potable water (the last statistic I saw was that only 7% of available water is fit for human consumption) and vulnerability to the spread of infection diseases, including gastro-intestinal diseases that can kill infants and toddlers through dehydration.

The court went on to address the shocking statements of genocidal intent on the part of Israeli officials and members of the Netanyahu government:

79. The Court is also of the view that Israel must take all measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip.”

The relevant word here is “punish.” The Court wants the Israeli Attorney General to charge and try members of the current government for incitement to genocide (which is a crime under the 1948 Genocide Convention). Large numbers of Netanyahu’s cabinet ministers and other officials would be hauled off to jail if this instruction of the court were implemented.

80. The Court further considers that Israel must 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.

In other words, the Israelis maintain that they are doing enough to get food, water and medicine in to the Palestinians. The court says, “no, you’re not.” It sides with the UNICEF, UNRWA and other officials who have been screaming at the top of their lungs about the danger of large scale death from starvation, dehydration, and disease unless the conditions for the civilian population, which is now mostly crowded into Rafah in the far south of the strip.

Finally, the court addresses the deliberate Israeli destruction of documents:

81. Israel must also take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II and Article III of the Genocide Convention against members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip.

Israel destroyed the central archives of Gaza City, wiping out property and other records. Its ongoing targeting of municipal buildings and hospitals has resulted in the Ministry of Health sometimes losing the ability to document Israeli atrocities against Palestinian civilians. This cliocide, the destruction of the history of a people, must also cease, the Court insists.

The Court wants a report back from Israel on how it has carried out its instructions.

The International Court of Justice has no means of implementing its rulings. There is no UN police to make arrests or UN financial official to garnishee income. Israel can thumb its nose at the court, and Joe Biden will protect Netanyahu in the Security Council, where the US has a veto.

Still, the reputational damage here is enormous, and will certainly have serious consequences for Israeli diplomacy. It also undermines the credibility of the Biden administration, which is dismissing the ruling. To any extent that Biden goes on giving cover to Netanyahu and his fascist associates, he risks being tarred with the brush of genocide himself.