Nesrine Malik, a columnist for The Guardian, titled her January 15 article
It’s not only Israel on trial. South Africa is testing the west’s claim to moral superiority. Malik says it is significant that the case of genocide against Israel is being brought by South Africa, which she calls “an icon of the
ravages of colonialism, settlement and apartheid.”
Malik quotes from
a comprehensive article on South Africa’s case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which shows some of the countries supporting the case: 57 nations in The Organization of Islamic Countries in addition to many others, including Bolivia, Colombia and Brazil. Malik says such countries have memories of “colonial occupations and postcolonial imbalances” that cause them to be sympathetic to the Palestinians.
Malik quotes from South Africa’s opening statement in The Hague:
“The very reputation of international law hangs in the balance.”
Then she comments: “But it is Israel and its allies that put that reputation in such jeopardy.
Describing South Africa’s case at the ICJ, Malik says:
It was only a little over six hours of legal argument, but the genocide case brought by South Africa against Israel at the International Court of Justice had decades of history bearing down on it. The specifics dealt with Israel’s assault on Gaza….
Malik says South Africa’s case at the ICJ showed that the “international response has fallen shockingly short.”
When you are on the wrong side of the UN secretary general, numerous human rights organizations, and objecting to a submission in a global court to which you are a signatory (and in the case of the US and the UK, a court that you established), you are dismantling your house with the very tools that built it.
Referring to massive marches in Europe showing the disconnect between politicians and the people they represent:
For weeks now, anger at events in Gaza has spilled out on to the streets across Europe. Yet this anger has been resolutely ignored, dismissed, banned, or vilified by political leaders. Public support for a ceasefire, now at more than 70% in the UK, is not reflected in the positions of either the government or the opposition.
Summarizing the inaction:
A UN resolution calling for a ceasefire was blocked by the US. ...The UK foreign secretary, David Cameron, thinks we should not “bandy about” the charge of genocide….In other words, the Israel-Palestine conflict is complicated, best left to the grownups.
These facts were made public at the ICJ:
6,000 bombs a week in the first three weeks of the conflict; 2,000 lb bombs deployed at least 200 times; 85% of Gazans displaced; 93% of the population facing crisis levels of hunger.
Evaluating the proceedings at the International Court of Justice:
It matters that these claims are linked to the Geneva conventions and human rights law. And it matters that they are spoken in a formal setting, within a legal framework, uttered by lawyers and listened to by judges.
Malik says that regardless of the outcome at the court, it is important that the case was brought to the ICJ. “You can agree or disagree on whether the legal hurdle for genocide has been met (or whether it even matters, if Israel and its allies will disregard it anyway),” but South Africa’s submission forces attention to the issue.
--------------------------
Nesrine Malik was born in Sudan and educated at the University of Khartoum.
The systems to implement international law remain weak. This is by design, and it allows powerful countries to act with impunity, and to shield its proteges – as we see with the US and Israel. Even if the ICJ issues a provisional order for Israel to halt its violence, and even if, years later, it finds Israel guilty of genocide, without any enforcement, Israel can (and probably will) simply ignore those decisions. That would surely be the end of the current world order, as any facade of fairness would collapse.
Enforcement of international law is in the hands of the UN Security Council, but with its veto rights for the five countries that happened to be on the winning side in 1945, that body has time and time again proven itself incapable of fulfilling its mandate.