RSS
In a Worst-Case Scenario, the Recent ICJ Legal Ruling Could Threaten the Existence of Israel
Judges, including Sarah Cleveland, arrive at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), during a ruling on South Africa’s request to order a halt to Israel’s Rafah offensive in Gaza, in The Hague, Netherlands, May 24, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Johanna Geron
Is the Western Wall an “illegal settlement” built on “occupied Palestinian territory”?
Is Israel an “apartheid” state?
Is it possible that terrorism against Israelis simply doesn’t exist at all?
These are some of the extraordinary conclusions that stem from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion last week. (A summary of the opinion can be found here.)
Though much of the ICJ’s analysis flies in the face of international law, logic, and common sense, the body has reached a conclusion and it is not subject to appeal. Therefore, the only relevant question that remains is: what impact will this advisory opinion have, and what will happen next?
The ICJ came to several conclusions in its decision, which I will briefly review.
“Occupation”: The ICJ held that Israeli presence on “Palestinian territory” is an illegal occupation. The Court unilaterally adopted a definition of what constitutes “Palestinian territory,” which includes the eastern part of Jerusalem, that, in turn, includes the entire Old City and its ancient Jewish Quarter, the Western Wall, and the Temple Mount.
This means, in effect, that visiting or praying at the Western Wall would technically constitute a type of war crime, as would living anywhere in the region of Judea and Samaria.
Security Fence: The Court addressed Israel’s “wall” (which is actually a security fence for 95% of its length), declaring it illegal. The court made no mention of the Second Intifada, nor the fact that the fence reduced Israeli deaths from terrorism by 95%, nor that the conditions necessitating such life saving security measures — i.e., official Palestinian support for terrorism — have not changed.
The Oslo Accords: A well-established principle of international law is that mutual agreement of two or more parties supersedes international conventions. Since 1995, Israel’s security measures, settlement activities, humanitarian aid, and physical presence in Judea and Samaria have been performed in strict accordance with the Oslo Accords, by mutual agreement of both Israel and the Palestinian Authority.
The ICJ has ignored or overruled the Oslo Accords so many times, that it effectively dissolved the Accords as a functioning agreement.
Negotiations: The ICJ has effectively required an end to negotiations over peace or co-existence by mandating the results of such negotiations without regard for the input of the parties themselves.
A few notable statistics: In its 80 page opinion, the ICJ used the word “occupation” 121 times, “violating” international law or Palestinian rights 29 times, “apartheid” three times, and alluded to “genocide” twice.
The ICJ did not acknowledge terrorism against Israelis, incitement to terrorism, or the “Martyr’s Fund” (which pays Palestinians to kill Israelis) even once — not even in its passing reference to October 7, which made no mention of the word “terrorism” nor the astonishing death, destruction, and hostage-taking perpetrated upon the Israeli people.
The vote by the ICJ was not unanimous — the vote was either 11-4 or 12-3 on most of the nine issues that were decided.
The Court’s Vice-President, Julie Sebutinde of Uganda, consistently sided with Israel, and wrote an eloquent dissenting opinion which is well worth reading. Judge Sarah Cleveland of the United States (a long-time Biden nominee) voted consistently against Israel.
The President of the Court, who also voted consistently against Israel, is Nawaf Salam of Lebanon — a country controlled by the Iranian-backed terror organization Hezbollah, which is currently at war with Israel.
In order to understand the possible impact of this decision, one must understand the “diplomatic intifada.”
In 2001, the Palestinians and various allies held a UN-sponsored (but ultimately Palestinian-controlled) conference in Durban, South Africa. Misleadingly entitled a conference “against racism,” the Durban conference was riddled with antisemitism, including Nazi symbology and rhetoric, and early examples of the “Israel apartheid” claims.
This conference also marked the inception of the anti-Israel boycott movement (BDS), as well as what later came to be called the Palestinian “diplomatic intifada,” the stated goals of which include isolating Israel and having Israel removed from the United Nations.
Though merely an advisory opinion, this ICJ decision is a meaningful step in a Palestinian campaign that spans 23 years of work, and billions of dollars of investment, aimed at discrediting, isolating and harming the Jewish State.
In a theoretical worst case scenario, the United Nations Security Council could remove Israel from the United Nations entirely, making Israel effectively a rogue state, as well as order Israel to implement the ICJ recommendations, and then impose sanctions if Israel refuses.
These would not be “BDS-style” sanctions, which are largely rhetoric, but instead what are called “Chapter 7 Sanctions” — the kind that one sees in places like North Korea. Not only would such measures plunge Israel’s economy and civilians into utter poverty, but sanctions would also cut off the IDF from necessary resources and resupply. Within months, Israel would become effectively “army-less” and vulnerable to attacks by any number of neighboring enemies.
It is likely (though never 100% certain) that the United States would veto such a resolution. However, short of the “worst case scenario” there are many intermediate scenarios that could result.
For example, individual countries may choose to implement the terms of the ICJ recommendation by cutting off trade with Israel, removing Israel from international events (such as the Olympics or FIFA), or embargoing arms shipments to Israel. In fact, some countries have already implemented such measures. The ICJ opinion would give these measures the legitimacy of international law, making them more widespread and more difficult to combat.
Most critically, a resolution of this nature can impact how voters view Israel in democracies around the world, leading, over time, to decreased support by Israel’s critical allies. We are already seeing signs of this on campuses and in political parties throughout the US and Europe.
This should hardly be surprising.
Israel’s global isolation has been the openly stated goal of the Palestinian Authority for over two decades. While Israel has (understandably) focused its resources on military defense and economic growth, the diplomatic battlefield has been left largely undefended, and the ICJ decision is just the latest result.
Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.
The post In a Worst-Case Scenario, the Recent ICJ Legal Ruling Could Threaten the Existence of Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israel’s Supreme Court Orders Improved Food for Security Prisoners
Israel’s Supreme Court. Photo: Wikimedia Commons.
i24 News – Israel’s Supreme Court on Sunday instructed the Prison Service (Shabas) to guarantee adequate food supplies for security prisoners, ruling that current conditions fall short of minimum legal standards. The decision followed an appeal filed by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.
In a 2–1 ruling, the court found that the food situation posed “a risk of non-compliance with legal standards.” Justice Dafna Barak-Erez stressed that the matter concerned “basic conditions necessary for survival, as required by law,” not comfort or privilege. Justice Ofer Grosskopf agreed, noting the state had not shown the policy was consistently applied to all inmates.
Justice David Mintz dissented, maintaining that the existing policy already met legal requirements.
The court underscored that Israel’s legal obligations remain binding, even in light of the ongoing hostage crisis in Gaza and the fact that many of the prisoners include Hamas members involved in the October 7, 2023 attack.
National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir condemned the ruling, arguing that while hostages in Gaza lack protection, “terrorist murderers, kidnappers, and rapists in prison” benefit from the Court’s intervention. He added that prisoners would continue receiving only the minimum conditions required by law.
RSS
Ukrainian Government Building Set Ablaze in Record Russian Airstrike
Illustrative. More damage caused by the Russian drone that hit the Perlina school in Kyiv, Ukraine, Oct. 30, 2024. Photo: Jewish community JCC in Kyiv, Kyiv municipality, and Yan Dobronosov
i24 News – The Ukrainian government’s main building in Kyiv was hit overnight Saturday by Russian airstrikes for the first time since the war, igniting a fire in the building, authorities said. Firefighters are working to put out the flames.
“The government building was damaged by an enemy attack — the roof and upper floors,” Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Sviridenko said. The blaze is is burning in the area of the office of the prime minister.
Ukraine’s air force said Russia launched a total of 805 drones and 13 missiles overnight on Ukraine — a record number since the start of the war.
Also as a result of the strike, a baby and a young woman were killed after a nine-story residential building was hit in the Svyatoshynsky district, also in Kyiv. Rescuers are still looking for a third body, authorities said. A woman was also reported killed in the strike in Novopavlivka village.
“The world must respond to this destruction not only with words, but also with actions. We need to increase sanctions pressure – primarily against Russian oil and gas. We need new restrictions that will hit the Kremlin’s military machine. And most importantly, Ukraine needs weapons. Something that will stop the terror and prevent Russia from trying to kill Ukrainians every day,” wrote Sviridenko after the attack.
RSS
‘Trump’s Legacy Crumbles’: Israelis Call on US President to End Gaza War
Israeli protestors take part in a rally demanding the immediate release of the hostages kidnapped during the deadly October 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Hamas, and the end of war in Gaza, in Jerusalem September 6, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Ronen Zvulun
Thousands of Israelis rallied in Tel Aviv on Saturday night, issuing direct appeals to US President Donald Trump to force an end to the Gaza war and secure the release of the hostages.
Protesters packed a public square outside the military headquarters, waving Israeli flags and holding placards with images of the hostages. Some carried signs, including one that read: ‘Trump’s legacy crumbles as the Gaza war persists.’
Another said: “PRESIDENT TRUMP, SAVE THE HOSTAGES NOW!”
“We think that Trump is the only man in the world who has authority over Bibi, that can force Bibi to do this,” said Tel Aviv resident Boaz, 40, referring to the Israeli prime minister.
There is growing despair among many Israelis at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who has ordered the military to capture a major urban center where hostages may be held.
Families of the hostages and their supporters fear the assault on Gaza City could endanger their loved ones, a concern the military leadership shares, according to Israeli officials.
Orna Neutra, the mother of an Israeli soldier who was killed on October 7, 2023 and whose body is being held in Gaza by militants, accused the government of abandoning its citizens.
“We truly hope that the United States will push both sides to finally reach a comprehensive deal that will bring them home,” she told the rally. Her son, Omer, is also American.
Tel Aviv has witnessed weekly demonstrations that have grown in size, with protesters demanding that the government secure a ceasefire with Hamas to obtain the release of hostages. Organizers said Saturday night’s rally was attended by tens of thousands. A large demonstration was also held in Jerusalem.
There are 48 hostages held in Gaza. Israeli officials believe that around 20 are still alive. Palestinian terrorists abducted 251 people from Israel on October 7, 2023, when Hamas led its attack. Most of the hostages who have been released were freed after indirect negotiations between Israel and Hamas.
NO PURPOSE
Trump had pledged a swift end to the war in Gaza during his presidential campaign, but nearly eight months into his second term, a resolution has remained elusive. On Friday, he said that Washington was engaged in “very deep” negotiations with Hamas.
Israeli forces have carried out heavy strikes on the suburbs of Gaza City, where, according to a global hunger monitor, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians are facing famine. Israeli officials acknowledge that hunger exists in Gaza but deny that the territory is facing famine. On Saturday, the military warned civilians in Gaza City to leave and move to southern Gaza.
There are hundreds of thousands of Palestinians sheltering in the city that was home to around a million before the war.
A video released by Hamas on Friday featured Israeli hostage Guy Gilboa-Dalal, 24, saying that he was being held in Gaza City and feared being killed by the military’s assault on the city. Rights groups have condemned such videos of hostages as inhumane. Israel says that it is psychological warfare.
The war has become unpopular among some segments of Israeli society, and opinion polls show that most Israelis want Netanyahu’s right-wing government to negotiate a permanent ceasefire with Hamas that secures the release of the hostages.
“The war has no purpose at all, except for violence and death,” said Boaz from Tel Aviv. Adam, 48, said it had become obvious that soldiers were being sent to war for “nothing.”
Tens of thousands of Palestinians have been killed by the Israeli military since it launched its retaliatory war after Hamas fighters attacked Israel from Gaza in October 2023. Around 1,200 people were killed in that attack on southern Israel.
The terrorist group, which has ruled Gaza for nearly two decades but today controls only parts of the enclave, on Saturday once again said that it would release all hostages if Israel agreed to end the war and withdraw its forces from Gaza.
Netanyahu is pushing for an all-or-nothing deal that would see all of the hostages released at once and Hamas surrendering.
The prime minister has said Gaza City is a Hamas stronghold and capturing it is necessary to defeat the Palestinian militant group, whose October 2023 attack on Israel led to the war.
Hamas has acknowledged it would no longer govern Gaza once the war ends but has refused to discuss laying down its weapons.