South Africa has made its genocide case against Israel in court. Here's what both sides said and what happens next
theconversation.com
The International Court of Justice has heard arguments from each side of an extraordinary genocide case. What was said, and what happens now?

Ai generated TLDR:

South Africa has presented a case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) alleging that Israel’s attacks on Gaza amount to genocide. The case centers on the killing of 23,210 Palestinians, mostly women and children, and the displacement of 85% of Palestinians. South Africa argues that Israeli forces were often aware that their bombings would cause significant civilian casualties and that they targeted safe zones, mosques, hospitals, schools, and refugee camps. The Israeli government rejects these allegations and argues that its attacks are directed at Hamas soldiers, not civilians. The ICJ will decide whether the allegations are plausible and may order an interim ceasefire and steps to prevent genocide. If the court rules in favor of South Africa, it would be a major development in international law, but enforcement of the ruling is uncertain. The case could influence smaller powers and put countries like Australia in a difficult position.

  • eatthecake@lemmy.world
    26·
    6 months ago

    https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide.shtml

    In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

    Killing members of the group. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part . Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

    Hamas certainly seem to have committed genocide.

    I’m actually struggling to see how any international war is not genocide by this definition ,given that there is always intent to destroy at least a part of your enemies national group. If said destruction has to be the reason for the war in order to meet the definirion of genocide then I don’t think Israel qualifies in this instance as their primary objective is defense against Hamas.

    • Sodis@feddit.de
      91·
      6 months ago

      In a war you usually target soldiers and evacuate civilians. I don’t think, that there are many wars, where one side was able to block all access to food and drinkable water.

      • eatthecake@lemmy.world
        36·
        6 months ago

        Israel has not blocked all access to food and drinkable water. If they had done so there would be noone left alive by now. Humantitarian aid is insufficient but not non existant.

        Is the truth not bad enough? Why the need to lie?

      • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
        14·
        6 months ago

        And by the numbers and actions it sure seems like Israel warns civilians and targets soldiers. It’s just a war crime that Hamas is using civilians as human shields.