What it all means
Trita Parsi, executive vice president for the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a Washington-based think tank, called it “a devastating blow to Israel’s global standing.”
Although a final decision is still years off, “Israel will now be similarly associated with the charge of genocide,” Parsi added. “As a result, those countries that have supported Israel and its military campaign in Gaza, such as the U.S. under President Biden, will be associated with that charge, too.”
Other experts did see some positives for Israel.
“I think it’s notable that the court did not call for an immediate cease-fire, which was something that South Africa was seeking,” said David J. Simon, director of the genocide studies program at Yale University. “Implicitly, the court recognized Israel’s invocation of their right to self-defense.”
Both sides have claimed some semblance of victory — although Israel has kept up its vehement rejection of the entire process.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the accusation of genocide was not only “false, it’s outrageous, and decent people everywhere should reject it.” However he praised the ICJ, which he said had “justly rejected” the “vile attempt” to deny his country’s right to defend itself.
Israel’s defense minister vowed that its campaign — launched after Hamas’ Oct. 7 attacks, which saw some 1,200 people killed and another 240 taken captive — would continue and that it “does not need to be lectured on morality in order to distinguish between terrorists and the civilian population in Gaza.” Itamar Ben-Gvir, one of the most right-wing ministers in Netanyahu’s coalition government, posted a two word response on X: “Hague Shmague.”
Hamas is not a country and therefore not party to the ICJ or the Genocide Convention. However the International Criminal Court, a separate body, says it is investigating the militant group’s widely condemned assault.
Though the…
Read the full article here