The International Court of Justice today found South Africa’s assertion that Israel is committing genocide “plausible.” South Africa basically won the case:
They (the ICJ) agreed that they (South Africa) had jurisdiction in this case, that they have standing in the case, that some of the things that South Africa has alleged are certainly taking place (and fall) within the definition of the Genocide Convention. –James Bays
Al-Jazeera summarized the ICJ’s ruling:
Critics are saying that the Court didn’t go far enough in its ordered remedy. Obviously the order to allow humanitarian aid and prevent the deaths of innocent civilians makes no sense if Israel is allowed to continue killing hundreds of innocents each day while pulverizing Gaza. A clearcut ceasefire order would have been better than an implicit one.
The significance of the ruling is not that it will quickly stop the genocide—even a ceasefire order wouldn’t have been obeyed—but rather that it has put Israel’s ongoing 75-year genocide of Palestine in the international spotlight. Whatever happens in Gaza, the case will drag on for years, and the words Israel and genocide have been permanently linked—as synonyms rather than antonyms.
Israel’s excuse for invading Palestine and murdering and expelling Palestinians has always been the classic psychopath’s pity play: “We are genocide victims.” The current war in Gaza has flipped that equation and exposed the truth. From now on, Israel will be correctly viewed as a nation of genocide perpetrators.
Checking in with three religious leaders
During the next 24 hours I will be interviewing three notable American religious figures and authors about the ICJ’s ruling, and about their latest writings.
