Last weekend, South Africa decided they wish to take Israel all the way to the Hague for its Gaza offensive, alleging genocide. "Acts and omissions by Israel are genocidal in character," they said, adding, "Israel has engaged in, is engaging in and risks further engaging in genocidal acts against the Palestinian people in Gaza."
Read more:
Israeli Foreign Ministry responded by saying, "Israel is committed to international law and acts in accordance with it, and directs its military efforts only against the Hamas terrorist organization and the other terrorist organizations cooperating with Hamas. Israel categorically rejects the outrageous South African blood libel and its appeal to the International Criminal Court (ICC).
"South Africa is cooperating with a terrorist organization that is calling for the destruction of the State of Israel. The Hamas terrorist organization - which is committing war crimes, crimes against humanity and tried to commit genocide on October 7 - is responsible for the suffering of the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip by using them as human shields and stealing humanitarian aid from them," the response read.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu took issue with South Africa's stand during the weekly Cabinet meeting. "We're not the ones committing genocide, Hamas is. It would have killed all of us if it could. On the other hand, IDF is acting morally, doing everything possible to avoid civilian casualties, while Hamas is trying to make us hurt them by using them as human shields, so I ask: Where were you, South Africa and the rest of our detractors, when millions were killed and displaced in Syria, Yemen and other places? You were nowhere to be seen. All you do now is lie and obfuscate. We will continue our just war."
Nick Kaufman, an Israeli-born attorney who has represented several countries in front of the Hague, says that while South Africa's latest appeal to the UN regarding Israel's war in Gaza presents no peril to Israel from a security standpoint, it does serve to further isolate Israel among its international peers, putting Israel in the same light as other countries that have become a sort of geopolitical pariah, such as Russia and Myanmar.
Kaufman further says South Africa has set its sights on discrediting Israel in the international arena for a while now, as back in February, it spearheaded a move to revoke Israel's standing as an observer in the African Union. At present, South Africa serves as a sort of Palestinian proxy.
So what is the point of the discussion set to be held in the Hague?
"South Africa is seeking an interim order as a preliminary step for a future appeal, requesting the court to determine that Israel has adopted a policy aimed at destroying the Palestinian people. It is important to note that the court will not decide whether Israel is committing genocide during the upcoming discussions.
"At this early stage, the court will assess if there are reasonable grounds to protect the rights that may arise if South Africa's allegations are proven accurate. The question of whether genocide has occurred or not will be addressed in a comprehensive trial in the coming years. However, if it is ultimately established that genocide has taken place, it will undoubtedly facilitate the plaintiff's case in the ICC, which holds the authority to prosecute individuals for such crimes."
How can Israel respond?
"Although Israel is a member of the ICC, it is not required to participate in its proceedings. It's important to note that this is not a criminal trial, and it is common for senior political figures to utilize their position to make appearances and express their opinions, as seen with Aung San Suu Kyi, the former prime minister of Myanmar.
"It is likely that the prime minister, given his proficiency in English and his commitment to the international stage, may entertain the option of personally deflecting the accusations against Israel. This consideration is particularly relevant when the political advantages outweigh the personal risks, enabling his participation in the Hague without apprehension."
Adv. Nick KaufmanPhoto: ICJThe notion arises that Israel's presence in preliminary proceedings is unnecessary, as the granting of an order in favor of the Palestinian Authority lacks inherent clarity. Over the past months, numerous South African politicians, notably including Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor, have levied accusations at Israel. However, these allegations have predominantly emerged within the realm of media discourse, failing to reach the Israeli government through established diplomatic channels. Consequently, Israel possesses a legitimate opportunity to provide an official response.
It was only on November 17, 2023, amid an appeal to the International Criminal Court, co-signed by four pro-Palestinian nations, that the Palestinian Authority formally alleged suspicion of Israel's involvement in genocide. Israel has not delivered an official response to the Palestinian Authority's claims.