ICJ orders Israel to take steps to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza
www.aljazeera.com
World Court to deliver interim ruling on case against Israel; South Africa wants ICJ to order immediate Gaza ceasefire.

On the live stream at aljazeera.com: “People here are disappointed, but not surprised.” And anticipating an escalation in violence.

Highly anticipated ruling over

The reading of the ruling has now ended.

The ICJ demanded Israel, among others, to try to contain death and damage in the Gaza Strip but stopped short of ordering a ceasefire.

  • Red Wizard 🪄English
    30•4 months ago

    ‘If you read the order, by implication a ceasefire must happen’: South Africa

    Speaking on the steps of the seat of the ICJ, Naledi Pandor, South Africa’s minister of international relations, tells reporters Israel will have to halt fighting in Gaza if it wants to adhere to the orders of the UN’s top court.

    “How do you provide aid and water without a ceasefire?” Pandor said. “If you read the order, by implication a ceasefire must happen.”

    Back in South Africa, senior officials welcomed the ruling.

    “It’s a watershed judgement for all those who want to see peace in Palestine,” Fikile Mbalula, secretary-general of the ruling African National Congress party, told reporters.

    That may very well be the implication, but implications come with interpretation, and I think we can all guess how this will be interpreted.

    • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]English
      19•4 months ago

      Yeah the court ruled that Palestinians are a protected group, and Israel cannot do the following:

      • Kill members of the group;
      • Cause serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
      • Deliberately inflict.on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
      • Impose measures intended to prevent births within the group;

      Israel has to follow those conditions in order to carry out its military operation in accordance with international law. If they cannot do that, the military operation is illegal. That is also what is meant by the implication of a ceasefire.

      We all know that Israel does not care about this anyways and will continue bombing Gaza and committing genocide, same as if the court ordered a ceasefire. It’s still important that this happened though. It implicates Israel’s allies in being complicit in a potential genocide.

      • Red Wizard 🪄English
        7•4 months ago

        Absolutely, agree with you 100%. My reaction is simply centered around the thought that the West is clearly going to have an interpretation that they can use to justify their continued involvement and maintaining their current position. An interpretation such as “Hamas are not Palestinians, and are comprised of a mix of combatants from around the region” or some nonsense. The curious bit for me is how does the other end of the pole react to this ruling. Time will tell.

        • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]English
          9•4 months ago

          It’s impossible for the Israeli military operation to only kill Hamas militants and their military allies though, as demonstrated by the past three months. If Israel can carry out their military operation by only killing militants, sure they can legally continue, but that is impossible due to Israeli military doctrine. If they were able to do that, we wouldn’t be at the ICJ in the first place.

          South Africa has welcomed the ruling though, I imagine similar reactions from China and most other global south countries.

    • Runcible [none/use name]English
      15•4 months ago

      between this implication and the non-binding accords on climate change I think we’ve finally proved good things can happen!