ICJ: SA Genocide Case vs. ISR - part 2

[HeidiInTheBigCity]

1st thread is full - here comes part 2!

Well this was just minutes after the ruling reported by the BBC

Minutes after the decision of the International Court of Justice, warplanes launched a series of air strikes on the Shaboura camp in the centre of the city of Rafah.
A local activist at nearby Kuwait Hospital told the BBC that the sounds of bombing were terrifying and clouds of black smoke hung over buildings in the Shaboura camp.
They said the rescue teams in the hospital were unable to reach the site of the raids due to the intensity of the strikes.

Fuck's sake. Horrendous.

Horrible!

Looks like they got angry about the ruling and took it out on the Palestinians.
Again.

According to Reuters, South Africa said they would be approaching the UN security council with Friday’s ICJ order.

It'll be interesting to see how the US proceeds at the Security Council given how they've basically already been asking Israel to do what the ICJ ruled today.

Indeed but after Jake Sullivans most recent diplomatic mission last weekend US didn't even release an official statement but leaked some wiffly-waffly stuff along the lines of Israel had listened to their concerns 3 days later

Bidens red lines over the invasion of Rafah have simply melted away

I hope that although this might not immediately change the course of actions, the people in Gaza at least take this as evidence that the majority of the rest of the world sees their suffering isn’t moral or justified.

They are not alone or forgotten.

Bombing Rafah straight after this ruling… a sign of weakness from the Israeli government.

I think they should reflect on why this ruling has been made.

Well reflection from these people is unlikely. They were out claiming the court is anti-semitic within minutes of the ruling.

Well that is the standard and expected response, isn't it?

Yes, they're nothing if not predictable.

And leads to Israel being so isolated - it's sort of self-fulfilling

Tweet from John Aziz:

"It seems to me like the ICJ order today has been misinterpreted, and a lot of the headlines being passed around are extremely misleading.

It seems they didn't actually call for a complete suspension of Israel's military operation in Rafah?

It is only an order to not violate the genocide convention in Rafah.

Which.... Israel was already bound by anyway????? And which every country is bound by?? "

https://x.com/aziz0nomics/status/1794023087186280787

@SomeCatFromJapan those were comments from one of the judges

This was from another
South African judge Tladi, holds the opposite opinion: “Today, the Court has, in explicit terms, ordered the State of Israel to halt its offensive in Rafah. The Court has previously, albeit in implicit and indirect ways, ordered the State of Israel not to conduct military operations elsewhere in Gaza because such operations prevent the delivery of human assistance and cause harm to the Palestinian people. The Court has also reiterated its urgent call for Hamas to release the hostages.”
Adds Tladi: “The reference to ‘offensive’ operations illustrates that legitimate defensive actions, within the strict confines of international law, to repel specific attacks, would be consistent with the Order of the Court. What would not be consistent is the continuation of the offensive military operation in Rafah, and elsewhere, whose consequences for the rights protected under the Convention on the Prevention and
Punishment of Genocide has been devastating.”

Not to mention the knock on effects to those who experience actual antisemitism. When you* label everything you don’t like as antisemitism, it dilutes the seriousness of the term and how likely people are to pay attention to it.

*’you’ meaning Netanyahu and company here, of course!

Correct. Attached is the legal opinion of four more judges which none of the other judges argued against. At least one of the judges (Nolte) voted as one of the 13 and yet makes it clear Israel isn't completely prohibited from ops in Rafah.

Mindful here of the speed the previous distortion of "ICJ ruled genocide was plausibly happening" until this was clarified later.

Much, much later! And that's too late.

Israeli Defence Force CAN operate in Rafah. Just not if they're engaging in genocide and remember ICJ has not once ruled they're engaging in that.

Israel can simply give Hamas an ultimatum to release all hostages and, with no reciprocation by Hamas, continue the Israeli Defence Force operation in Rafah.

Yes it’s mental and not unexpected. I wonder how much is delusion and how much is pure manipulation.

@DownNative ,can you explain how this reconciles with the following direct wrote from Nalaf Salam reading the ruling as reported in the New York Times, the “hometown paper of New York Jews”?
“The court considers that in conformity with obligations under the Genocide Convention, Israel must immediately halt its military offensive, and any other action in the Rafah governorate, which may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part,””

I think this is a really ambiguous statement which is disappointing and confusing. It is clear it is being interpreted in different ways internationally. The majority of international news reports are interpreting it as meaning a halt to operations in Rafah has been ruled. Others are interpreting it as meaning only a halt in operations is ruled if it gets to the extent that it:
"may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part".

Who judges what this looks like or who is going to determine when it gets to this stage? I haven't read the ruling so maybe it is clearer in the full report.

Now that Israel has ignored the ICJ ruling to stop the assault on Rafah and has also ignored the UNSC vote for a ceasefire, when is Israel going to face any consequences? Or is nothing going to happen yet again and Israel continues to do whatever the hell it wants?

Or is nothing going to happen yet again and Israel continues to do whatever the hell it wants

If history is anything to go by, then this. It’s really annoying there isn’t anyone who can enforce the rulings.

A few words about Judge Salam - due to a conflict of interest & potential risk for his personal security should he visit Lebanon, he should have recused himself from the case.

There is no other mechanism to remove a judge bar themselves, IIRC.

See attachment.

His words:

“The court considers that in conformity with obligations under the Genocide Convention, Israel must immediately halt its military offensive, and any other action in the Rafah governorate, which may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part."

The view of the four judges I previously attached to actually addressed those very words. One judge, Tladi, differed slightly but still saw no complete prohibition on military action in or around Rafah.

The other ten judges did NOT offer a view against the four aforementioned judges.

Therefore, the ICJ ruled that military action AND other actions CAN proceed so long as it doesn't infringe on Israel's obligations under the Convention On Genocide.

The phrase "any other actions" is clearly not restricted to purely military action itself, especially since genocide can occur under non-military action.

So, Israel can proceed as long as none of its actions is intended to be genocidal in nature. The ICJ issued a QUALIFIED order.

Judge Nolte: “the measure obliging Israel to halt the current military offensive in Rafah is conditioned by the need to prevent ‘conditions of life that could bring about [the] physical destruction in whole or in part’ of the Palestinian group in Gaza. Thus, this measure does not concern other actions of Israel which do not give rise to such a risk.”

Judge Aurescu: “In my view, this measure needs to be interpreted that it indicates as well the halt of the Israeli military offensive to the extent that it ‘may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part’”.

Vice-President Sebutinde: “In my understanding, the objective of the Court is to order Israel to suspend its military offensive in Rafah only in so far as such suspension is necessary to prevent the bringing about of conditions of life that could bring about the destruction of the Palestinians in Gaza”.

Judge Barak: “Once again, South Africa has requested the Court to order the State of Israel to ‘cease its military operations in the Gaza Strip. . . and immediately, totally and unconditionally withdraw the Israeli army from the entirety of the Gaza Strip’. Once again, South Africa’s request has been rejected by the Court. Instead, the first additional measure indicated by the Court … requires Israel to halt its military offensive in the Rafah Governorate only in so far as is necessary to comply with Israel’s obligations under the Genocide Convention.”

Compare the above with the UNQUALIFIED order made in the Ukraine/ Russia case on 16 March 2022, which directed:

“The Russian Federation shall immediately suspend the military operations that it commenced on 24 February 2022 in the territory of Ukraine”.

If the ICJ wanted to explicitly prohibit Israel from military AND any other action in Rafah without qualification, the court absolutely could have done so.

One set of ICJ orders is ambiguous and one set is not.

Yes @DownNative we get it.
You believe Israel can carry on bombing Rafah because the ICJ ruling was abit ambiguous.
I'm sure all those parents whose kids burnt to death last night in the refugee camp in Rafah must be relieved that it was all legal bombings that killed them.

Sick, isn't it?

Anyway, I don't think that bombing the refugee camp area could possibly be legal under the Convention so it's all nonsense. But very interesting to hear people trying to justify the bombing and burning alive of children on Mumsnet.

Way to go in rubbing salt in the wounds after last night
Can we all give a round of applause to the judges who commented ambiguously so the bombings and burnings could continues supposedly LEGALLY
👏👏👏👏
Three cheers for them all

I'm merely telling you what the ruling does and doesn't prohibit. You have often been one for going all in on initial ICJ ruling interpretations as have others.

Until they're shown to be misleading, inaccurate or plain wrong.

If I was you, I'd be far more careful about your media consumption and running with their views.

As I said, the ICJ order isn't ambiguous and the court absolutely had (still has the ability!) to be as explicit as it likes in its wording. A contrasting example was given.

That you and others don't like it is neither my concern nor my problem.

Attempting to personalise the debate or replace actual debate with emotional appeals rarely adds to a debate and/or discussion.

But if you find the issues raised difficult at this time, I advise you to scroll on by for the foreseeable.