NYT
Israel, a state founded in the aftermath of a genocide against the Jewish people, defended itself on Friday against accusations of perpetrating genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza.
Six lawyers stood in The Hague before the International Court of Justice to present Israel’s counterargument to a claim, brought on Thursday by South Africa, that the war it has waged in Gaza since October has violated the international Convention against Genocide, enacted after the Holocaust. The court is a legal arm of the United Nations that settles disputes between states.
Israel began striking Gaza after Hamas, the armed group based in the territory, raided Israel on Oct. 7, killing about 1,200 people, according to Israeli officials, and abducting roughly 240 others.
More than 23,000 Gazans have been killed since October, or roughly 1 in 100 residents of the territory, according to Gazan health officials. More than 80 percent of Gaza’s 2.2 million residents have fled their homes, according to the United Nations.
In Israel’s defense on Friday, its lawyers said that the Israeli military had worked to preserve civilian life, giving noncombatants two weeks to leave northern Gaza before Israel invaded the area in late October and, after freezing aid delivery at the start of the war, later enabling its daily supply. (Israel has been permitting trucks carrying medicine and other supplies to enter Gaza, but United Nations officials say that the amounts have failed to meet the needs of the residents.)
“Israel’s efforts to mitigate the ravages of this war on civilians are the very opposite of intent to destroy them,” Galit Raguan, one of the six representatives, said during the hearing.
“If Israel had such intent, would it delay a ground maneuver for weeks, urging civilians to seek safer space and, in doing so, sacrificing operational advantage?” Ms. Raguan asked. “Would it invest massive resources to provide civilians details about where to go, when to go, how to go, to leave areas of fighting?”
South Africa’s argument had rested in part on dehumanizing statements made by Israeli leaders and politicians, some of which called for the forced displacement of Gazans and, in one case, dropping a nuclear bomb on the territory.
“Israel’s political leaders, military commanders and persons holding official positions, have systematically and, in explicit terms, declared their genocidal intent,” Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, a lawyer for South Africa, told the court on Thursday.
But Israel’s lawyers said that some of those statements had been taken out of context, while others were made by people without executive power over the military campaign. The lawyers drew a contrast between the incendiary comments and assertions by senior Israeli officials that emphasized adherence to the rules of war.
The court’s judges will now decide whether to call on Israel to adopt provisional measures, such as a cessation of hostilities, while it spends months assessing the merit of the genocide claim. The judges did not set a date for the announcement of that decision and, in any case, the court has few means of enforcing its rulings.
Nevertheless, Israel’s lawyers argued that it would set a dangerous precedent if the judges ordered Israel to halt its offensive. They said that could allow international law to be used as a means of preventing states from defending themselves against terrorist attacks committed by groups like Hamas.
The Israeli lawyers also said it was Hamas that was guilty of genocidal acts on Oct. 7, and they blamed the group for bringing destruction on civilians in Gaza by embedding their fighters in residential areas.
Heavy symbolism hung over the proceedings, as Israel’s representatives addressed the paradox of Israel, a state created to protect Jews from genocide, standing accused of the same crime.
“For some, the promise of ‘never again for all peoples’ is a slogan,” said Tal Becker, who opened Israel’s defense. “For Israel, it is the highest moral obligation.”
Hours after the hearing ended, Germany announced that it would intervene as a third party in the case — a process that would allow the country to offer the court its own perspective on the genocide law. Germany said there is “no basis whatsoever” to the case, a move in keeping with its longstanding support for Israel.
Since the defeat of the Nazi regime, Germany has rooted much of its post-Holocaust identity in the idea of supporting the Jewish state.
