The ICJ ruling is not good for Israel

On the 26th January, a few days ago, the International Court of Justice delivered its interim verdict on the charges of genocide in a case brought by South Africa against Israel. The outcome was much more positive than many of us thought it would be. 

Although the word genocide wasn't mentioned, the court did refer to genocidal statements made by Israeli politicians and officials. The court made clear that Israel must not commit war crimes including injuring and killing Palestinian civilians, and denying them, food, healthcare and energy.

As you would expect, the Israelis dismissed the finding of the court and continued to bomb Gazaand deny food, medical supplies, and energy to the Palestinians trapped there. So, the genocide continues.

The following day, Israel claimed that twelve members of UNWRA took part in the 7th October attacks by Hamas. This has lead to Many countries including the USA, UK, Germany to cease funding to the relief orgainsation, further worsening the plight of the people of Gaza. I haven't been able, as yet, to confirm this allegation is true, but if it is, why did the Israelis wait until the 27th January to reveal this? Why didn't we know weeks ago? 

It has also been reported that Israeli settlers are trying to block aid entering Gaza. 

And so, the death toll continues to grow, and the catastrophe remains with no end in sight. If you want to donate to UNWRA to help the Palestinians, you can do so here.

Will South Africa succeed at the ICJ on it's charges of genocide against Israel?

The big news this week was the hearing at the International Court of Justice (IJC). South Africa, a state which itself has been a victim of apartheid, brought a case of genocide against Israel. On Thursday 11 January, South African lawyers delivered a compelling case to the court, detailing Israel's slaughter of Palestinian civilians in Gaza, and the bombing of hospitals, schools, churches and mosques, as well as the denial of food, water, electricity and medical supplies. Their arguments were delivered calmly and convincingly. 

There can be no doubt that the South African case is irrefutable. Not only is the damning evidence there for all to see, but Israeli politicians have gone on record openly calling Palestinians animals and supporting their elimination. They have condemned themselves through their own mouths. 

On the following day, Israeli lawyers delivered a predictable response - Hamas, Hamas, Hamas and accusing their detractors of lying and blood libel.

The media coverage was - no surprise - appalling. The South African case was ignored by the major channels (Sky, BBC, CNN etc) who then proceeded to broadcast the Israeli case the following day.

The result ought to be a forgone conclusion - Israel is guilty as charged, but unfortunately it's more complicated than that. The ICJ 'judges' are appointed by UN countries, the chair by the USA, and the UK, Germany, France and other Israeli allies. How will they rule in judgement? I think we know the answer already. As Craig Murray said, "Israel is not on trial here, what's on trial is actually the international court". 

If, as it seems likely, the court will rule against South Africa, where do we go from here? Well, we can keep up as much pressure as we can through the massive global demonstrations that have been taking place and increase the pressure for boycott, divestment and sanctions, which is already having an effect on Israel and the corporations, such as Starbucks, that support it.

I doubt that this will be the end of legal attempts to stop the Israeli genocide of the Palestinians, but we must hope that the IJC ruling will be in favour of South Africa and keep up the fight!