Top UN court orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza but stops short of ordering cease-fire
Top UN court orders Israel to prevent genocide in Gaza but stops short of ordering cease-fire
The UN's top court stops short of ordering a cease-fire in Gaza but demands that Israel limit deaths. The case was filed by South Africa accusing Israel of genocide.
Here is a pdf of the ICJ's Order of 26 January 2024.
For convenience, I will list the provisional orders below edited for ease of readability:
(1) The State of Israel shall, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular:
- (a) killing members of the group;
- (b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
- (c ) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and
- (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(2) The State of Israel shall ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit any acts described in point 1 above;
(3)The State of Israel shall take all measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip;
(4) The State of Israel shall take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip;
(5) The State of Israel shall take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II and Article III of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide against members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip;
(6) The State of Israel shall submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to this Order within one month as from the date of this Order.
Stop! Or I'll say "stop" again!
15Stop would be ordering Israel to not continue their war. This is more of a "feel free to continue, but behave yourself" order.
10Yeah pretty much. This is one reason I thought it was a bad idea to try to base the ICJ case on "genocide," which invites quibbles about whether particular facts constitute genocide. I thought there was a much stronger case to be made highlighting particular factual war crimes which are pretty tough to factually dispute or argue aren't war crimes.
(Side note, everyone yelled at me when I did that as if it constituted somehow defending Israel. Long story short lemmy.ml isn't full of a lot of nuanced thinking on the issue.)
6
There is a huge reason to be skeptical of the efficacy of the ICJ. This however is an extremely high profile case with global attention in 2023 where the US is not quite as hegemonic in world affairs as it once was. This case could have an impact in some way, and I will be following it.
6I hope so, yeah. I'm irritated at the ineffectiveness, not at the attempt.
7
It is crucial to understand the weight and gravity of the term "genocide". It is not a term to be thrown around lightly or used carelessly. The act of genocide is the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. It is a heinous crime against humanity and a violation of the most fundamental human rights.
Unfortunately, the term "genocide" has been misused and abused in recent times. The ongoing conflict in certain regions of the world has led to the misapplication of the term, especially in situations where it does not necessarily apply. The mislabeling of such conflicts as "genocides" is not only inaccurate but also disrespectful to the victims of actual genocides.
The Tutsi in Rwanda, the Cambodians by the Khmer Rouge, the Armenians by the Ottoman Empire, and Darfur are just a few examples of the horrific atrocities that have been committed in the name of genocide. These are real genocides with real victims, and to equate them with other conflicts that do not meet the criteria of genocide is to belittle the suffering and pain of those who have endured such atrocities.
It is important to distinguish between acts of violence and genocide, as the latter is a specific and intentional crime. The use of the term "genocide" inappropriately can have serious consequences, including the potential to undermine legitimate efforts to prevent and respond to actual genocides.
Therefore, it is essential to use the term "genocide" with caution and precision. Those who misuse the term, either intentionally or out of ignorance, do a disservice to the victims of real genocides and hinder efforts to prevent such crimes from occurring in the future.
5This is good to keep in mind in general although I'm not sure how it's relevant here. In fact, there are the definitional points from Article II of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide quoted by the order in the body of my post. The point of this ruling by the International Court of Justice is that there is a credible case for genocide here according to the definition of Genocide which Israel explicitly agreed to.
11That's talent, writing a wall of text extolling the importance of accurately labeling genocide which simultaneously minimizes a genocide. This is beehaw so I'm going to keep my mouth shut and hope Hanlon's razor explains your comment.
10
Enable JavaScript and cookies to continue
Anyone else gave a link to the PDF if the orders that loads?
2Try this link:
1
🤖 I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — The top U.N. court stopped short Friday of ordering a cease-fire in Gaza but demanded that Israel try to contain death and damage in its military offensive in the tiny coastal enclave.
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — The United Nations’ top court decided on Friday not to throw out genocide charges against Israel for its military offensive in Gaza, as part of a preliminary decision in a case that goes to the core of one of the world’s most intractable conflicts.
In a statement Thursday, Palestinian Prime Minister Mohammed Shtayyeh said he hoped the decision would “include immediate action to stop the aggression and genocide against our people in the Gaza Strip ... and a rapid flow of relief aid to save the hungry, wounded and sick from the threat of slow death that threatens them.”
But this time, it took the rare step of sending a high-level legal team — a sign of how seriously it regards the case and likely the fear that any court order to halt operations would be a major blow to the country’s international standing.
The genocide case strikes at the national identity of Israel, which was founded as a Jewish state after the Nazi slaughter of 6 million Jews during World War II.
Its governing party, the African National Congress, has long compared Israel’s policies in Gaza and the West Bank to its own history under the apartheid regime of white minority rule, which restricted most Black people to “homelands” before ending in 1994.
Saved 75% of original text.
1