Rights advocates and legal experts have welcomed the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling ordering Israel to take “all measures in its power” to prevent acts that could amount to genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. Gaza.
Although it did not explicitly demand a ceasefire, the United Nations’ highest court on Friday recognized the existence of a plausible risk of genocide in the bombed Palestinian enclave and refused to reject the case brought by South Africa.
“This is a huge defeat for Israel – one of the biggest defeats… in the last 75 years,” said Raed Jarrar, advocacy director at Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), a think tank in Washington, D.C. DC.
But the decision “goes beyond Israel,” Jarrar told Tel Aviv Tribune, because it highlights the legal and political obligations of countries to take steps to prevent the so-called genocide from taking place in Gaza.
The ICJ ruling in The Hague also sparked new calls to suspend arms transfers to the Israeli government, which advocates say amounts to complicity and violates international law. This includes arms shipments from the United States, Israel’s main donor.
“This is a watershed moment where the U.S. government is on notice that it cannot continue its blank check policy with Israel,” Jarrar said.
“The United States cannot and must not continue arms transfers with Israel at this time. »
Not a “gesture of goodwill”
The United States provides at least $3.8 billion in military aid to Israel each year. For years, human rights advocates and a growing number of U.S. lawmakers have called on Washington to condition such aid on Israel’s human rights record and international law.
However, US President Joe Biden has rejected these efforts while boosting aid to the Israeli government.
After Israel began the war in Gaza on October 7, following a Hamas attack that killed more than 1,100 people in southern Israel, the Biden administration sent a request to Congress to approve a $14 billion foreign aid program for Israel, the bulk of which would be military assistance.
The US government also twice bypassed Congress to provide thousands of artillery shells to the country as it continued to bombard Gaza. Israeli attacks have killed more than 26,000 Palestinians to date and decimated the coastal territory.
Yet despite reports and investigations showing that U.S. weapons were used in Israeli bombings that killed Palestinian civilians in Gaza, attempts to pressure Washington to halt the transfers or to determine whether the Weapons are deployed in failed rights violations.
“We told the Biden administration that this is not just a gesture of goodwill” to stop the transfer of arms to Israel, DAWN’s Jarrar said, explaining that Washington has obligations in under international and American law.
“This is something that they need to think about very seriously because the United States, as a government, is involved in these war crimes, and American officials are also involved,” Jarrar said. “They should take today’s (ICJ) order very seriously.”
International treaties
Rights groups have called on all UN member states to suspend their transfers of arms that “can be used to commit violations of international humanitarian and human rights law” in Gaza.
Among other countries, Canada and the United Kingdom faced increasing pressure Friday following the ICJ ruling. Both countries are parties to the Arms Trade Treaty, a United Nations pact that aims to regulate the flow of weapons globally and prevent them from being used to violate international law and human rights. ‘man.
It prohibits parties from authorizing arms transfers “if (they knew) at the time of the authorization that the weapons or objects would be used to commit genocide, crimes against humanity, serious violations of the Conventions of Geneva in 1949, attacks against civilians. property or civilians protected as such, or other war crimes.”
The United Kingdom has authorized more than 474 million pounds ($602 million) in military exports to Israel since 2015, according to Human Rights Watch (HRW), and it “currently supplies around 15% of the components for the F-stealth bomber.” 35”. used in Gaza.
Asked about British arms exports to Israel in November, Defense Secretary Grant Shapps said the country’s “defense exports to Israel are relatively small – just £42 million ($53 million) a year.” last “. Weapons “are also subject to very strict criteria before anything is exported,” Shapps said, according to a parliamentary transcript.
But on Friday, Yasmine Ahmed, HRW’s UK director, said the ICJ’s interim order should push the British government to “stop arms exports to Israel with immediate effect”. “There is NO doubt,” she wrote on social media.
“The Court found a plausible risk of genocide and the UK has an obligation to prevent genocide and not be complicit in it.”
There are no questions. In light of the decision on interim measures @CIJ_ICJthe 🇬🇧 must cease arms exports to Israel with immediate effect @David Cameron @KemiBadenoch
The Court found that there is a plausible risk of genocide and that the UK has an obligation to prevent genocide and not be complicit in it.
– Yasmine Ahmed (@YasmineAhmed001) January 26, 2024
This obligation arises from the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide – commonly known as the Genocide Convention. The United States, the United Kingdom and Canada are among the 153 countries party to the treaty.
It confirms “that genocide, whether committed in times of peace or in times of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and punish”.
South Africa invoked this “obligation to prevent genocide” when it brought its case to the ICJ, and the court recognized Friday that it had standing under the Genocide Convention. The treaty also states that “complicity in genocide” is punishable.
“If you supply weapons to a country where you know those weapons can be used for criminal purposes, then you could become complicit in those crimes,” said Geoffrey Nice, a British lawyer who led the prosecution of Slobodan Milosevic in the International Criminal Court. Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.
“And it is very difficult not to become complicit after you reach a certain stage of knowledge and after a certain stage of conduct continues,” Nice told Tel Aviv Tribune in a television interview on Friday.
“Gun suppliers should be very, very careful – and some may simply decide that it is not worth the risk of being involved in a possible humiliating and serious criminal investigation. »
“No other option” than to suspend arms exports
Most countries also have their own regulations regarding arms exports.
For example, Canada’s Export and Import Permits Act requires the Minister of Foreign Affairs to “refuse applications for permits to export and broker military goods and technology…if there is a substantial risk that these articles compromise peace and security.”
The minister should also refuse exports if they “could be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights laws” or in “serious acts of gender-based violence or serious acts of violence against women and children.”
Last year, Canada exported C$21.3 million ($15.7 million) worth of weapons to Israel.
Canadian anti-war group Project Plowshares said in a recent report that components made in Canada and transferred to the United States also end up being supplied to the Israeli military, including components used in F-35 jets.
“Because the vast majority of Canadian military exports to the United States are unregulated and unreported, the exact volumes and values of these exports are not publicly available and remain unknown,” the report states.
Michael Bueckert, vice-president of the advocacy group Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East, said Canada has been sending weapons to Israel “for many years despite significant human rights violations and war crimes.”
But the seriousness of these transfers increased significantly after the ICJ ruling, he added.
“There is simply no other option to prevent Canada from being complicit in potential genocide; Canada must cancel all exports and completely suspend the arms trade to ensure it does not contribute to these serious crimes,” Bueckert told Tel Aviv Tribune.
“There are no safe exports of military equipment from a human rights perspective in the context of a possible genocide. Canada must go above and beyond to ensure that it does not contribute in any way.
Global Affairs Canada did not immediately respond to Tel Aviv Tribune’s request for comment on calls to end arms transfers to Israel.