Israel has claimed that South Africa’s depiction of the conflict is heavily biased and aligns closely with Hamas. This was stated during Israel’s defense at the international court in The Hague, where they are facing charges of genocide.
One day after South Africa claimed that it had carried out genocidal actions in Gaza intentionally, Israel responded on Friday saying that this was an incomplete and inaccurate portrayal.
The statement stated that Hamas is responsible for numerous civilian deaths in Palestine, with a reported number of over 23,000 individuals killed since October 7th. This accounts for approximately 1% of Gaza’s population. The destruction of tens of thousands of buildings, which was used as evidence by South Africa in their application, was also attributed to Hamas, whether directly or indirectly.
According to Israeli legal representatives, Hamas is responsible for civilian deaths due to their actions of setting traps in homes, placing mines in alleyways, and firing rockets inaccurately. They also claim that the militant group’s utilization of educational and medical facilities for military purposes has resulted in the destruction of these buildings.
Unfortunately, Tal Becker, the legal adviser for the Israeli foreign ministry, stated in his opening remarks that the plaintiff has presented a heavily distorted account of both the facts and the law. The entire case is based on a carefully selected and intentionally misleading portrayal of the ongoing conflicts.
He stated that South Africa’s plea for the court to issue temporary measures commanding a ceasefire was an unreasonable demand that aims to obstruct Israel’s natural right to self-defense.
Becker vividly recounted the events of the 7 October attacks carried out by Hamas and other militant groups, resulting in the deaths of approximately 1,200 individuals and the capture of 240 hostages. He shared disturbing details of sexual assault and disfigurement, and also played an audio recording that he claimed was a Palestinian militant bragging to his father about killing 10 Israelis.
According to Becker, the reason for sharing these details is not to excuse Israel from its obligation to follow international law in its actions, but because it is crucial to understand the conflict in Gaza by recognizing the danger that Israel is facing. He stated, “If there have been acts of genocide, they have been committed against Israel.”
While Becker was talking, Palestinian supporters outside the court who were watching the proceedings on a large screen began chanting, “You’re lying! You’re lying!”
Israel’s legal representatives challenged South Africa’s assertion that its political and military figures, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, had demonstrated a desire to commit genocide, which was allegedly supported by its soldiers on the front lines.
According to remarks from Netanyahu, brought to attention by South Africa on Thursday, he mentioned the biblical account in which King Saul was instructed to annihilate the Amalekite people, including men, women, children, and animals. Professor Malcolm Shaw stated that the comments were only partially cited.
He informed the court that Netanyahu’s complete statement included the following words: “The IDF is recognized as the most ethical military force worldwide. The IDF takes all measures to prevent harm to innocent parties.”
Discussing additional potential violations of the genocide treaty mentioned by the legal representatives of South Africa, Shaw stated: “A few of the statements presented by South Africa appear to be purely rhetorical, uttered in the immediate aftermath of a situation that greatly traumatized Israel and should not be interpreted as a call for genocide. They expressed distress and the need to regain control over Israel’s territory, which was under serious threat, in order to ensure the safety of its citizens.”
According to him, a thorough examination of policies and official actions after 7 October would not reveal any intention of genocide.
Dr Omri Sander stated that Israel had made significant efforts to enhance the humanitarian conditions in Gaza, but these efforts were impeded by Hamas. Meanwhile, Dr Galit Raguam emphasized that hospitals were not targeted by bombings, and instead, the IDF deployed soldiers to locate and dismantle military facilities, minimizing the impact and disturbance.
Numerous humanitarian organizations have extensively documented the destruction of hospitals, as reported by a Guardian investigation.
At the end of the Friday session, Judge Joan Donoghue, the president of the court, announced that the panel of 17 judges would strive to reach a decision on the grant of provisional measures as soon as they can.
On Thursday, attorneys from South Africa petitioned the court to demand an immediate cessation of Israeli military actions in Gaza. It is expected that a ruling on this request will not be made for several weeks, and the entire legal process is anticipated to extend over multiple years.
Israel stated that they oppose all of the provisional measures proposed by South Africa, arguing that if implemented, they would benefit Hamas at Israel’s own expense.
After hearing Israel’s arguments, South Africa’s justice minister, Ronald Lamola, who presented the case against Israel at the ICJ, expressed his continued confidence in South Africa’s strong argument.
According to him, South Africa has denounced Hamas and urged for the release of hostages and an investigation into the militant group, contrary to Israel’s suggestion. He also stated that regardless of any actions taken by certain individuals in Palestine and Gaza, and the potential danger to Israeli citizens, targeting Gaza as a whole with the goal of annihilation is unjustifiable.
Germany stated that it would step in to support Israel in the legal proceedings, arguing that there was no justification for labeling Israel’s actions as genocide.
A spokesperson for the German government stated that they strongly and clearly deny the accusation of genocide made against Israel in the international court of justice.
He stated that due to Germany’s history and the atrocities of the Holocaust, their government is especially dedicated to the UN’s genocide convention, which was established in 1948 following the events of the Shoah.
According to the regulations of the court, should Germany submit a declaration of intervention in the case, they would have the ability to present legal arguments on behalf of Israel.
The 1948 convention, enacted after the mass murder of Jews in the Nazi Holocaust, defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group”. The ICJ’s decisions are final and without appeal, but the court has no way to enforce them.
Source: theguardian.com
