12 Jan 2024: A reflection on why South Africa v Israel in ICJ is important for the world now
12 January 2024
A reflection on why South Africa v Israel in ICJ is important for the world now
It's crucial to remember that the genocide case between South Africa (SA) and Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) took place nearly 100 days after Hamas launched attacks on Israel, following which Israel declared a war that has significantly destroyed Gaza. Many Palestinians have “lost multiple family members, and hundreds of multigenerational families have been killed in their entirety, with no remaining survivors” (Page 33 of the SA’s Application). And the return of Israeli hostages has seen minimal progress.
SA repeatedly quotes in its application to ICJ: “𝙉𝙤𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙨𝙖𝙛𝙚 𝙞𝙣 𝙂𝙖𝙯𝙖”.
This is a space where 2.3 million people are already struggling to live every day and are now seeing their homes turn to hell. It has undoubtedly not proven any safety for Israeli hostages. They have not returned home.
The haunting question for reasonable and compassionate individuals who believe in humanity is: What does it take to end this horrifying situation?
The lack of diplomatic efforts and effective interventions by the United Nations have impeded progress towards a ceasefire. As a UAE diplomat pointed out, “𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘗𝘢𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘤𝘢𝘴𝘦 𝘴𝘵𝘶𝘥𝘺 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘦𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴, 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘵𝘰”.
Beyond Gaza, the world grapples with weaknesses in a system established to ensure rights, security, and peace. This devastating situation has contributed to global despair about whether the principles of justice and humanity embedded into this system after World War II are still alive. The failure of this system means no one is safe, no nation, no community, no individual.
The South African genocide case against Israel should be viewed in the context of evaluating the effectiveness of the system without bias toward any specific nations. The critical question is whether the system functions to prevent abuse, regardless of the countries involved.
Delving into the reasons behind SA’s initiation of this case is of secondary significance, as they are delineated in the application. Essentially, South Africa is upholding its commitment as a State party to the Genocide Convention, with the primary goal of preventing genocide. Additionally, the application is situated within the broader framework of South Africa's foreign policy objective: “𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘐𝘴𝘳𝘢𝘦𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘗𝘢𝘭𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘦, 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘸𝘰 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘣𝘺 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘨𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘯 4 𝘑𝘶𝘯𝘦 1967, 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘵𝘣𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘬 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 1967 𝘈𝘳𝘢𝘣-𝘐𝘴𝘳𝘢𝘦𝘭𝘪 𝘸𝘢𝘳, 𝘪𝘯 𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘦𝘷𝘢𝘯𝘵 𝘜𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘕𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘭𝘢𝘸” (see para 3 of the Application).
Nevertheless, it contemplates why South Africa, like Gambia, another African state, took action against Myanmar. Perhaps these countries have comparatively less at stake concerning national interest and international relations. If that is the case, it raises whether global systems safeguarding rights, justice, security, and peace must be scrutinised and repaired within international politics.
In the present moment, irrespective of the outcome of this case, we find ourselves at an opportune juncture to institute reforms and improvements in the system. This is why this case is essential to the world. It is a case that is nudging our collective conscience, failing which humanity will become its destruction.
From my perspective, a pivotal aspect of this case is the interconnectedness of justice, security, and peace for Palestinians and Israelis. SA's application highlights the limitations of the ICJ's jurisdiction when addressing the urgent matter of promptly returning Israelis and other hostages, and this is unfortunate. Nonetheless, SA argues that the requested provisional measures are by and hold the potential to contribute to the progress and resolution of these issues. Acknowledging the validity and importance of this standpoint is crucial. Ensuring the secure return of Israelis and other hostages comes with a commitment to preserving the lives of Palestinians with dignity and ensuring their right to self-determination, safety, and long-term peace—a desire shared by Israelis for themselves. This fundamental truth must be realised on all sides and the world.
Indeed, given the adversarial nature of the case, the polarisation extends beyond individuals and communities to include states. Divisive opinions are surfacing with the rise of online juries, and individuals are aligning themselves with particular sides while others opt for silent observation. This phenomenon is not new; it's a familiar occurrence.
Nevertheless, in this context, safeguarding the potential for peace between the warring states remains crucial. Overlooking this possibility would be unwise, as it might lead to a temporary resolution rooted in animosity and hostility, only to erupt again in the future. Prioritising a sustainable path towards peace is essential to avoid perpetuating cycles of conflict and resentment.
Acknowledging that certain countries, leaders, and individuals may have to take on challenging roles in this mission is crucial. While non-binding, the International Court of Justice's verdict does not signify the conclusion of this conflict; instead, it serves as a pathway.
What is this pathway? That is the crux of this case before the world’s court, which is why it is essential for Palestinians, Israelis and the rest of the world.
Those of us dedicated to improving Jewish-Muslim relations and advocating for the adherence to international law, which is intended to safeguard all individuals, must recognize that this situation presents an opportunity to listen to both accusations and defences within the framework of a global tribunal.
Post-dated note
Read “The ICJ Ruling’s Hidden Diplomacy” on how the Court’s Considered Measures Can Help America Restrain Israel
https://reader.foreignaffairs.com/2024/01/26/the-icj-rulings-hidden-diplomacy/content.html
Holding the Ropes: Interfaith Dialogue & Reflections Surrounding the Israel-Gaza War is a blog series that follows the events, dialogues and reflections experienced by Nazhath Faheema in the aftermath of the 2023 Israel-Gaza war. Triggered by the Hamas attack on Israel on 7 October 2023 and Israel’s military response, there continues to be widespread destruction and civilian displacement in Gaza. Additionally, Israeli hostages remain in captivity.
Against this backdrop, Nazhath Faheema, through her reflections, provides insights into the dynamics of the war, its impact on interfaith relations, and the inherent challenges and opportunities in fostering understanding and empathy between Jewish and Muslim communities.
