The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has issued an unequivocally harsh condemnation of Israel. It has publicly announced that Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem is illegal. Tensions and conflict continue to rise across the region. For half a century, Israel has enforced a presence that smothers the hopes of Palestinians who yearn for an independent nation. The court’s judgment orders Israel to stop and reparation for the damages resulting from its settlements and occupation.
The ICJ concluded that Israel’s lengthy, military dictatorship has, in a systematic manner, violated all rights of the Palestinian people. It should have been the final word from the court: Israel needs to cease its illegal settlement expansion. It further ordered the evacuation of all settlers from seized territories and required reparations for the destruction wrought upon the native population.
Judge Iwasawa Yuji, representing the ICJ, stated, “The occupying power may never invoke reasons of security to justify the general suspension of all humanitarian activities in occupied territory.” This declaration highlights the court’s continued insistence that humanitarian operations must be permitted in occupied territory.
Israel has long been accused of misusing its status as an occupying power, especially when it comes to the bombing of Palestinian non-combatants. Given these allegations, Israeli officials have argued that their military attacks comply with international law. Most recently, the Israeli Government has permitted more humanitarian aid into Gaza as part of a complicated truce agreement. The ICJ drew attention to the fact that Gazans endure “insufficient provisions.” This poses grave warning bells about the humanitarian toll resulting from continued restrictions.
Israel has long claimed that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) harbors terrorists. They argue that more than a thousand of the agency’s employees are associated with Hamas and that UNRWA foments animosity against Israel in its schools. Yet the ICJ ruled that Israel had failed to prove these charges against UNRWA staff.
Israel’s ambassador to the UN, Danny Danon, reacted to the ICJ’s decision by attempting to belittle it as a “political document.” His position is clear, arguing that the court’s opinion fails to grasp the nuances of the conflict. He asserted, “While The Hague accuses Israel, they deliberately ignore the crimes of Hamas and the role of UNRWA, which has long since become a hotbed of terrorism in Gaza.”
Israeli officials have, rather famously, accused the ICJ of being politicized and weaponized against their nation. This feeling mirrors to some extent the deep domestic frustrations with global condemnation and pressure, which has been aimed at their actions in Palestinian territories. According to the Israeli government, it is participating in a matter brought by South Africa. This case The Complaint claims Israel has violated multiple obligations under the genocide convention, which Israel has vehemently denied.
Israel should recognize its obligations under the ICJ statute as a UN member state. This praise is given even as the US faces a deep and worsening estrangement with international courts. The legal landscape is extremely complicated, exposing an uphill battle. Israel claims its right to self-defense, while international law aims to protect civilian occupied populations.
Sunday’s ICJ ruling comes amid an unusually tense atmosphere in the region. Hamas and Fatah divisions on display. This comes on the heels of another escalation of violence between Israeli forces and Palestinians. In addition, international observers—including those from the European Union—are watching the situation. Only time will tell how effectively Israel’s continued disregard for calls to comply with international law and humanitarian standards can be challenged.
