American lawyer Francis Boyle: South Africa has a good chance of winning its case against Israel in the International Court of Justice

By Hafsa Elmi

The world is awaiting the outcome of the upcoming session at the International Court of Justice in The Hague next Thursday and Friday in the context of the lawsuit filed by South Africa against Israel, accusing it of committing genocide crimes in the Gaza Strip.

International human rights lawyer Francis Boyle - who has won two applications at the court, the UN's main judicial body under the 1948 Genocide Convention - says he is confident South Africa will win the case.

It is noteworthy that no government or lawyer in the history of the International Court of Justice has won two requests in one case since its founding in 1921.

In an exclusive interview with Al Jazeera Net, Boyle described the United States as "guilty" for aiding and abetting genocide, criticizing the International Criminal Court, which has been "stained with the blood of the Palestinian people since 2009," as he put it.

The following is the text of the interview:

Based on your experience, what is your opinion on the application of temporary protection measures by the South African government?

This file reminds me of the case I won in the International Tribunal for the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina against Yugoslavia to stop genocide against Bosnians, which was the first time any lawyer or state had won under the Genocide Convention.

Based on my careful review of all the documents submitted by the Republic of South Africa so far, I believe it will win against Israel.

What legal facts were you based on?

I compared the documents provided by South Africa to the work I did to ensure that the Bosnians won 3 applications before the International Court.

There is the section related to genocidal intent by senior Israeli officials and acts of genocide, and we find that South Africa filed 4 different charges, which are:

The first charge: committing genocide, as more than 30,000 Palestinians were killed, which means doubling the Srebrenica massacre in which 7,000 Muslims were killed in Bosnia.

The second charge: causing serious physical or mental harm. The number of wounded in the Gaza Strip exceeded 50,000 Palestinians. As for psychological suffering, anyone can turn on any media source - and Al Jazeera in particular - to see the extent of the suffering.

The third charge: Intentionally subjecting individuals to living conditions that completely or partially destroy them. We saw this clearly when an Israeli minister announced that food, water, medical supplies, and fuel were being denied to residents of the Gaza Strip, or when another official said that Gaza should be turned into the Auschwitz concentration camp.

The fourth charge: imposing measures aimed at preventing births, as hospitals were destroyed, doctors were killed, and ambulances were deliberately targeted by the Zionists in a place where there were tens of thousands of pregnant Palestinian women.

In an international issue like this, do you think that powerful countries like the United States could change the outcome of the recent ruling?

They are trying hard, which is why US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken is visiting the Middle East, and since Americans are working to aid and abet genocide against the Palestinian people, they will be guilty, under Article 3E of the Genocide Convention, which prohibits complicity and genocide, as well as violating the Convention. of the US government and the Genocide Convention Implementation Act.

Since it is a serious crime, the Americans are doing their best, in cooperation with the Israeli and Zionist forces, to sabotage this lawsuit in some way.

Do you blame Zionist control and its dominance over the American and international judiciary?

I am not saying that this is the case for all judges of the International Court of Justice, but I am certain that the Israelis, Americans and Zionists will threaten these judges and their families, making it a matter of their integrity.

The president of the court, John Donahue, has worked for a long time in the US State Department, and she is volatile, corrupt, and subject to the pursuit of American interests. I am sure that she is in contact with the State Department to inform her of all the maneuvers taking place in the back rooms of the Hague Court, and she will do everything in her power to shape the case in favor of the court. Israel and America.

The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court is facing harsh criticism because of his delay in examining the complaint submitted by hundreds of lawyers. Could the same scenario be repeated in this case?

I was the lawyer who advised Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to accept the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court after the end of the so-called Operation Cast Lead (Battle of Al-Furqan) in 2009.

Since then, the Criminal Court has not done anything to help the Palestinians because of the power and pressure of the United States and the Zionists. If the Israeli officials were tried at that time for avoiding the Palestinian people, perhaps everything is happening today.

I stress that the International Criminal Court is responsible for all the Palestinian blood that has been wasted and the death and destruction they have suffered since 2009.

Let's expect the worst. What will Israel's legal arguments be if it wins?

It will not win because its main argument is self-defense, and the International Court has previously rejected that argument, saying that Israel is the belligerent occupier of the West Bank, and therefore East Jerusalem and Gaza, and has no right to self-defense under international law or Article 51 of the United Nations Charter against Occupied people.

If South Africa wins, what steps will be taken?

The matter will be left to South Africa, of course, but when I won the Bosnian file, for example, I went to the court’s outer lobby and told the international media that the International Court had just recognized the existence of the Yugoslav genocide, calling for direct military intervention by the United States and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) countries to save the Bosnians.

Later that day, NATO headquarters in Washington, D.C., and Brussels announced that they would establish a no-fly zone over Bosnia.

Do you think that the International Court’s decision will oblige Israel to stop killing Palestinians?

Yes, it will be binding on Israel, but I do not expect Israel to stop because of the resolution alone, as it must be referred to the United Nations Security Council for implementation.

I suspect that based on the Nicaragua case and the current position of Washington, they will veto any executive action adopted by the Security Council, and then South Africa can take the matter to the UN General Assembly for implementation under the “Uniting for Peace” resolution.

This would mean dire consequences for Israel, because the UN General Assembly could suspend participation in all of Israel's activities, and this is exactly what it did with the criminal apartheid regime in South Africa and Yugoslavia, which committed genocide.

Second: The General Assembly cannot accept Palestine as a full member state in the United Nations because it is recognized by a jury of about 139 countries, but if they grant it full membership, this will guarantee the existence of Palestine.

Third: The United Nations General Assembly could establish an “international criminal court for Israel” modeled on the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, as a subsidiary body under Article 22 of the United Nations Charter.

I started this initiative before and it was supported by Malaysia, Iran, and many Arab and Islamic countries, but it was not completed, and I hope that it will be reconsidered to begin prosecuting senior Israeli officials.

You have been calling for the establishment of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement on Israel since 2000. Do you think that implementing these methods is difficult today in light of the great support provided to the occupying state?

I did, and in 2005 Palestinian civil society asked me to join them to create the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) campaign.

When it started, it spread throughout the world like wildfire, and the Zionists were unable to stop the campaign, and I believe that the success of the case in the International Court will contribute to accelerating it.

Despite all the obstacles - they even created a separate ministry in Israel to fight us - we will win and the Zionists will lose.

Source: Al Jazeera

Interview with former Shin Bet head Ami Ayalon: “The wrong theory assumed that the Palestinians are not a people. They have proven that they are willing to kill and be killed in order to achieve their independence.”

By Yossi Melman

“As part of a deal that includes the return of the kidnapped people, we must release Marwan Barghouti,” says former Shin Bet chief Ami Ayalon, in response to my question. "This is what must certainly be done. Because the recovery of the kidnapped Israelis is the closest thing we can achieve to an 'image of victory' in the ongoing war in Gaza, and because Marwan is the only Palestinian leader who can be elected, and who is capable of leading a unified and legitimate Palestinian leadership on the path to a separation process." Agreed upon on behalf of the Palestinians.

This is the first interview Ayalon has given since the outbreak of war. For the past three months, the man refused to talk about the progress of the battles in Gaza and the northern border. He also refrains from talking about the Houthi attacks in the Red Sea, areas he knows well since he was commander of the Shayetet 13 naval unit [the Israeli naval commando], and later, when he was commander of the navy. Ayalon says: “I left the army about 30 years ago, and the Shin Bet about 24 years ago, and I refrained from attending discussion groups and talking about matters that I did not understand properly.”

What interests the man, and by the way, was his only condition for agreeing to be interviewed, is to talk about the “exit strategy,” or in today’s common term, “the day after the war.”

“We will not see in this war a picture of victory,” Ayalon says, “not like the picture that represented the raising of the American flag on the island of ‘Iwo Jima’ at the end of World War II, and not like the picture of Junior Lieutenant Yossi Ben Hanan (who later became a general in The army) raising a Kalashnikov rifle in the Suez Canal, at the end of the Six-Day War. Indeed, it is not like the scene of Arafat’s departure from the port of Beirut towards Tunisia, after the First Lebanon War.

Ayalon says, “The wars of the past that von Clausewitz described in the nineteenth century, in which victory was achieved by military decisiveness on the battlefield, were actually an image of victory that clearly shows that the ‘day after the war’ represents the transition to negotiation between the victor and the vanquished. The war on "terrorism", we will not see white flags being raised. Even Arafat returned after 10 years from Tunisia to Gaza.

What if we eliminate Sinwar? Wouldn't that represent some kind of victory?

“No! Even if Sinwar takes his last breath. If there is someone who thinks that the Palestinians will surrender, he does not know the Palestinians, nor does he know Hamas and the movements of radical Islam in the current era.”

To further clarify his position, Ayalon recalls the moment of the arrest of Hamas founder Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, who was paralyzed and used a wheelchair. “When he was in prison, we cared about his health. We were afraid that he would die in prison so that he would not turn into a martyr. We, in the Shin Bet, We opposed his release. There were generals on the General Staff who underestimated our position. “What are you afraid of? He is not a leader, he is a poor man in a wheelchair.” In response, I claimed that the concept of leadership in the Arab and Islamic world is something that we do not understand, because we always look at the leader with Western eyes, through his television appearance, his hairstyle, and the tone of his voice.

“We must realize that Sheikh Yassin, as the leader of Hamas who drafted its charter, was in the eyes of the Palestinians, because of his disability and his fragile appearance, very much a symbol of their misery. He was the man who managed to unify the religious, social, political and military leadership that embodied himself. Today, Hamas does not have such leadership, as the military wing practices independent politics, while the social arm, with all its charitable networks, has disappeared. The conflicts existing in Hamas today are between the internal and military arm that imposes its say in Gaza, and the political arm that exists in Abroad, in Turkey, Qatar and Lebanon. Sinwar is the leader of the interior. It is true that there is always existing tension between the military and political arms of Hamas, but cooperation between them has become closer during the Sinwar era.

Divide and conquer

Ayalon looks differently at Israel’s wars in the current century. He says, “The war to establish and protect Israel has been fought for about 140 years, since the migration of the first Zionists at the end of the nineteenth century.” This war continues at different paces, and includes military campaigns, battles, and clashes. In his opinion, what is happening in the past three months “is not a war, but rather an additional battle in the ongoing war that we are waging, in defense of our independence.”

Will we not win this war?

“We won in March 2002: At the Arab League conference, the Arab countries surrendered and raised the white flag. They retracted the Arab League’s decisions of August 1967 in Khartoum, known as the “three noes.” In March 2002, after 35 years of conflict, the Arabs agreed to recognize Israel and establish full relations with it, based on the resolutions of the United Nations and the UN Security Council. Thus, the three aforementioned directives were reformulated in the opposite way: yes to recognition, yes to negotiations, and yes to peace with Israel. The tragedy here is that we "We refuse to acknowledge our victory, and we continue to fight. We have turned the war into a goal in itself."

Do we do this to avoid making decisions?

"Yes. In order to avoid the controversy that is tearing apart Israeli society, the controversy that revolves around the question: What brought us to this land as a people? The Cabinet's decision not to discuss the issue of 'the next day' turns the war into a military conflict without a political compass. We cannot In this case, we know 'victory', which is always formulated in political terms, and the greatest danger that threatens us is that this war turns into a goal in itself. The moment Benny Gantz and Gadi Eisenkot entered the cabinet, and it is clear that their withdrawal from it would lead to undermining the government coalition, it became clear that Internal political considerations. Without categorically formulating the political goal, we will not be able to delineate an exit strategy from the war, as we walk, with open eyes, towards drowning in the sands of Gaza.”

Do you think this is the biggest problem for Israel?

“Yes. In all disagreements, this is the basic problem. If we do not decide where we will go together, and what are the values that unite us, then we run the risk of continuing to fight forever, for nothing, except because wars with others are the stages in which we take a break from fighting.” Each other. The saying 'Together we will win' [the slogan that Israel raises in war], is a correct saying, but it is only true in time of war, when enemies from outside impose on us a national unity that we did not choose. This unity of ours is empty of its content. If it is a way for us to escape from the real debate, which we refuse to have, or cannot engage in, perhaps because the horror of the differences may push us towards civil war.”

Were we close to civil war after Rabin's assassination?

“Rabin was killed only for this reason. Because of his answer to the great question of ‘Who are we, and why are we here?’ Rabin was killed because rabbis issued a legal ruling against him requiring him to be hunted down, and against this background, there was someone who saw himself as a representative of the people, so he executed The murder. I did not realize, until I entered the Shin Bet apparatus [Ayalon was appointed head of the Shin Bet apparatus after the assassination of Rabin], the vast difference and rift that had existed since then and the extent of the change in their depth."

This crisis reached its peak during the past year with the coup against the regime?

“Motivated by arrogance, the right-wing government decided, about a year ago, that the nature of the regime must be changed. Along with the hundreds of thousands who took to the streets in protest, the generals of staff, the heads of the security establishment told the prime minister and members of the cabinet that there is an existing threat on multiple fronts, and that the move to The government is endangering Israel's security. The Defense Minister, in his speech to the nation, defined the dangers of war as 'clear and immediate,' and therefore, he was immediately fired. The Prime Minister and the Prime Minister refused to listen to the matter, and made it clear that the warnings issued by the army were internally politically motivated. Thus, we found ourselves involved in the current war.”

Are you saying that the events of October 7 were the result of this?

“Yes, the collapse was on several levels of wrong theories. First, there was the political theory, which began the collapse of the negotiations at Camp David [with Arafat], which stated that there was no one on the other side to negotiate with, in addition to Barak’s statements.”

Do you think there is someone to talk to on the other end?

“The Palestinian Authority has recognized the State of Israel within the 1967 borders, and has agreed to exchange territories. It has also agreed to discuss the right of return with Israel in the framework of negotiations. We need to talk to anyone who is willing to negotiate with us on the basis of these principles. He was the last to try to push The direction of the move to settle the conflict is Ariel Sharon, who decided to withdraw from Gaza and the northern West Bank because he realized that Israeli society was being lost from his hands, and Ehud Olmert. Since Netanyahu's return to the Prime Minister's office, he has designed 'conflict management' policies through the intentional weakening of the Palestinian Authority. And strengthening Hamas, in order to avoid negotiating with the authority regarding a political settlement.

Is Netanyahu also practicing the policy of divide and rule?

"Indeed. Netanyahu made a mistake in believing that this policy would buy him time, and he refused to see the threat lurking in 'Hamas'. The Shin Bet leaders told Netanyahu: You do not know 'Hamas', and they demanded that he work to weaken it militarily. The political stagnation makes 'Hamas', In the eyes of the Palestinians, they are the only ones struggling to achieve national liberation. Our mistaken theory was based on the assumption that the Palestinians are not a people. If we provide them with economic prosperity, they will give up their dream of independence. Ultimately, the Palestinians define themselves as a people. They are ready to kill and be killed In order to achieve their independence, the 'terrorists' who are killed become martyrs, in their eyes.”

What are other wrong theories?

“There is the intelligence theory, which estimated that Hamas was deterred after the “Guardian of the Walls” campaign in May 2021. We measure the danger by the number of Hamas activists we killed, the infrastructure and weapons, or the tunnels we destroyed, while the Palestinians measure the matter in terms of Content: For these people, the measure is the amount of support they get among the people. After every round of violence, support for Hamas doubles because it is the one fighting the occupation, while the Palestinian Authority, which does not engage in violence, is seen as an agent of Israel. "

Crises entail opportunities

Ayalon also points out that the Israelis do not realize that the world is changing, and that China and Russia are aligning with Iran, creating an axis that challenges the United States. “This is why Biden is changing his policies. He is ready to reconcile with the ruler of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, in order to curb the influence of the counter-axis. He, unlike Netanyahu, realizes that the political process with the Palestinians must be advanced.”

If what you say is true, what will happen?

In "The Day After the War", in your opinion?

“On the way to that day, we reached a T-shaped intersection, with only two exits, and at the present time we refuse to resolve our position, and because of the differences tearing apart Israeli society, Israelis refuse to understand that not making a decision is also a decision. There is another way.” I believe in it. It leads to a Jewish and democratic Israel, guided by the spirit of the Declaration of Independence, a state with a majority of Jews. This process will be long, with many obstacles, and may last perhaps 40 years, and it will force us to make concessions and reach understandings among ourselves. If we proceed on this path The road, we will find the Arab countries that signed the Arab Peace Initiative, and with them the Western democracies, on our side. I assume that this road leads us to a safe, Jewish, and democratic Israel.”

What about the other scenario?

“The other path is the one followed by those who wrongly assume that the occupation is a security asset, and others who assume that we have no right to give up areas of the Land of Israel, even if that leads to endless war. In my view, this perception is Messianic and does not recognize Within the limits of reality. This path leads to the reality of one state, in the region where 7 million Jews and 7 million Arabs live today. This is a violent reality in which Israel will lose its Jewish and democratic identity. This reality takes us back to the Great Palestinian Revolt in the 1930s, which is a religious conflict that polarizes "The most radical and violent groups on both sides."

Ayalon looks with hope to the day after the great crisis on October 7: “The lessons we must draw from the past year are that we must recognize the depth of the divisions that have brought us to the abyss of violence, along with the external danger, and the challenge is to harness this energy.” In a positive matter, to the unity that will lead us to a reality in which people take to the streets, not only to demand the formation of investigation committees and protest against those with whom they disagree politically, but to search for ways to meet, get to know each other, and find commonalities.”

“Crises create opportunities. The October 6 War, in which more than 2,600 soldiers died, taught us that peace with Egypt without Sinai is better than Sinai without peace with Egypt. It is time for us to decide where the October 7 War will lead us.”

Source: Haaretz + Institute of Palestine Studies

By Patrick Wintour

The UK is facing accusations of double standards after formally submitting detailed legal arguments to the international court of justice in The Hague six weeks ago to support claims that Myanmar committed genocide against the Rohingya ethnic group through its mass mistreatment of children and systematically depriving people of their homes and food.

The UK made its 21-page “declaration of intervention” jointly with five other countries, but it is not supporting South Africa as it prepares to try to convince the ICJ on Thursday that Israel is at risk of committing genocide against the Palestinian people.

The UK submission on Myanmar argues there is a lower threshold for determining genocide if the damage has been inflicted on children as opposed to adults. The submission said other actions that could be defined as genocidal, if systematic, include forced displacement from homes, deprivation of medical services and the imposition of subsistence diets.

It argues that given declarations of intent to commit genocide are rare, the court’s test should not solely be explicit statements or numbers killed, but reasonable inference drawn from a pattern of conduct and factual evidence.

Israel will defend itself at the UN-derived ICJ insisting it has been seeking to protect its civilian population in an attempt to destroy Hamas but not the Palestinian people. It says its post-war plans for Gaza involving Palestinian-led governance is proof of a lack of genocidal intent.

Tayab Ali, the head of international law at Bindmans, said the significance of the UK’s submission on Myanmar “lay in showing the importance the UK attaches to adherence to the [UN] Genocide Convention and in showing the UK took a wide, and not a narrow, definition of acts of genocide, and the intent to commit genocide. It also made clear that the court should take into account risks to life after a ceasefire caused by disabilities, inability to reside in their homes and wider injustices.

“It would be wholly disingenuous if the UK, six week after advancing such a significant and broad definition of genocide in the case of Myanmar, now adopts a narrow one in the case of Israel.”

South Africa is likely to highlight the UK’s arguments about Myanmar, submitted in conjunction with Canada, Germany, Denmark, France and the Netherlands, when it makes its high-stakes accusation of genocide against Israel.

The November joint submission was in support of an original application made to the ICJ by The Gambia in November 2019 that genocidal acts occurred during a 2017 military campaign by Myanmar that drove 730,000 Rohingya into neighboring Bangladesh.

Myanmar has always denied genocide, rejecting the UN findings as “biased and flawed”. It says its crackdown was aimed at Rohingya rebels who had carried out terrorist attacks in Rakhine state.

The ICJ unanimously accepted The Gambia’s request for provisional measures in December 2020, and issued a legally binding order to Myanmar to ends its genocidal acts and report to the court on the steps it was taking to comply.

The ICJ also threw out Myanmar’s assertion that The Gambia had no right to bring the claim in December 2022, and it is now making a determination of the case on its merits, allowing nation states such as the UK to intervene with supporting legal arguments. Human rights groups widely welcomed the UK’s intervention.

Some of the key principals on the meaning of genocide contained in the joint submission and their potential relevance to Gaza have also been extracted in the US by Robert Howse, the Lloyd C Nelson professor of international law at New York University.

Passages he highlights include: “A narrow construction of underlying acts of genocide obscures how killings and other underlying acts can be waged together in a coordinated strategy aimed at destroying a protected group.

“Given their ordinary meaning, the words ‘physical destruction’ in Article 11(c) are not limited to cases where members of the group immediately die as a result of the ‘conditions of life’ inflicted on the group.”

The submission also highlights the importance of children in assessing a genocide. Nearly 10,000 children and babies have been killed in Gaza, according to the territory’s health authority, about 40% of the fatalities.

The Myanmar submission states: “There is a lower threshold for ‘serious bodily or mental harm’ when the victim is a child ... acts which ... may not be regarded as contributing to the physical or biological destruction of the group when done to adults, might be regarded as meeting those thresholds when done to children.

“It is important to adopt a construction which recognizes that what it means for a child to suffer ‘grave and long-term disadvantage to [their] ability to lead a normal and constructive life’ may be different than for an adult.”

Stakes high as South Africa brings claim of genocidal intent against 

The submission also reminds the ICJ that it has already recognized that “Article 11(c) of the Convention, covers methods of physical destruction, other than killing, whereby the perpetrator ultimately seeks the death of the members of the group.”

It points out that examples of such conduct recognized by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda include “subjecting a group of people to a subsistence diet, systematic expulsion from homes and the induction of essential medical services below minimum requirement.”

It states: “When considering the deprivation of food or the imposition of a subsistence diet, it would be relevant to consider that the amount of food that would ultimately lead to the death of an adult is different than that which would lead to the death of a child. Similarly, the medical needs of children are different than those of adults, and account needs to be taken of those differences in considering whether the absence of particular medical services amounts to the imposition of conditions of life that would bring about the destruction of specific members of the group.”

According to a leak to the US news website Axios, Israel has already ordered its diplomats to build international opposition to the South African case, pointing out that an adverse ruling “could have significant potential implications that are not only in the legal world but have practical bilateral, multilateral, economic and security ramifications”.

The Israeli government is also taking steps to disassociate itself from some of the more extreme remarks about displacing Palestinians from Gaza made by ministers and other elected politicians.

The Foreign Office has been contacted for comment.

By Mark Leonard

Over the past year, as Western diplomats shuttled frantically from one end of the world to the other in their struggle to contain an ever-growing succession of wars, crises, and other calamities—from Ukraine to Darfur to Nagorno-Karabakh to the Democratic Republic of the Congo—China leaned in to the disorder. Hamas’s October 7 attack and Israel’s military campaign in the Gaza Strip have presented Beijing with yet another crisis to exploit. While the United States discredits itself with the countries of the global South through its seemingly unqualified support for Israel, Beijing has carefully calibrated its response to the war, paying close attention to public opinion in the developing world.

Six months ago, I warned in Foreign Affairs that while the West is seeking to preserve the existing rules-based international order by tweaking some of its elements and inviting in a few additional actors, Chinese strategists are increasingly focused on surviving in a world without order. And they are offering to help other countries build their own sovereignty and freedom of maneuver as Western dominance recedes.

Since Hamas’s brutal attack, the Biden administration has tried to reconcile public support for Israel with private pressure to more carefully target its attacks in Gaza and to be more open to a political settlement with the Palestinians. Beijing, on the other hand, has been much less constrained by the need for balance. By calling for a two-state solution, refusing to condemn Hamas, and making symbolic efforts to support a cease-fire, it has taken advantage of global anti-Israeli sentiment in a bid to elevate its own standing in the global South. In its painstaking attempts to mirror global public opinion as closely as possible, China is following a broader strategy: embracing the global conflagrations that so bedevil Western policymakers.

WEASEL WORDS

Just as an artificial intelligence model improves its response to a prompt with each new batch of data it is trained on, each new global crisis has given China a further opportunity to hone its rhetoric toward the global South. In this light, comparing China’s response to the war in Gaza with its response to the war in Ukraine is instructive.

When Russian President Vladimir Putin invaded Ukraine in February 2022, China took some time to find its feet. It fumbled its initial response, waiting before issuing somewhat confusing statements. In most of its messages, Beijing underlined the inviolability of Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty. It also sought to emphasize its closeness to Russia and acknowledged the country’s “reasonable security concerns,” criticizing the United States and NATO. Beijing was intentionally vague to avoid alienating everyone, but its execution was clumsy.

By the time Hamas launched its brutal attack on Israel, however, Beijing had sharpened its approach and was able to respond rapidly. As it became clear that public opinion in the global South was overwhelmingly weighted against Israel, China immediately sought to leverage the crisis to expose what it sees as American double standards. On October 8, China’s foreign ministry released a statement calling for a cease-fire and endorsing the two-state solution. What wasn’t included in the statement was any criticism of Hamas or condemnation of the massacre it carried out, even though four of the terrorist group’s victims had been Chinese nationals.

China’s anti-Israeli rhetoric extends to its diplomatic outreach.

The researcher Tuvia Gering has painstakingly documented the rise in anti-Israeli rhetoric, some of it anti-Semitic, that the Chinese Communist Party is encouraging in response to the war, through both official and unofficial channels. In late October, China Daily, a propaganda outlet, declared, “The U.S. is siding with the wrong side of history in Gaza.” Elsewhere, Chinese state television rolled out an anti-Semitic canard made a few years ago by one of its reporters: that Jews account for three percent of the U.S. population but “control more than 70 percent of its wealth.” This sort of language should be understood as a conscious attempt to echo the narratives that dominate the debate in the global South. By aligning with majority opinion in such countries as Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa, China can present itself as an alternative to what it sees as a warmongering, hegemonic, and hypocritical America. 

And China’s anti-Israeli rhetoric extends to its diplomatic outreach. On November 20, a group of Arab foreign ministers embarked on a tour to the countries that are permanent members of the UN Security Council. Their first stop was in Beijing, where they were welcomed by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. The choice to travel east before their meetings in France, the United Kingdom, and the United States was surely intentional. It can be read as evidence of China’s increasing cachet in the Middle East since negotiating a détente between Iran and Saudi Arabia last March. Even though the meeting in Beijing produced no concrete results, this never seems to have been the goal. Instead, it was a way for the Arab countries to signal that they have choices apart from just the United States. And China relishes playing the role of alternative partner.

PLAYING TO THE CROWD

Since the start of Israel’s campaign in Gaza, which the Biden administration has largely endorsed, distrust of the United States has deepened across the Arab world. Opinion polls show that Arab publics now favor China over the United States. This is part of a long-term trend, but one that is being exacerbated by the war in Gaza. Polling conducted in the fall of 2023 in eight major non-Western countries—Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russia, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and South Africa—by the European Council on Foreign Relations (which I direct) found that China, in contrast to Western powers, is much more closely aligned with public opinion in the global South. Whether it is believing in the likelihood of Russia winning its war with Ukraine, the likelihood that the EU might fall apart, or the fragile state of American democracy, China’s official positions take great care to reflect the sentiments of the average Brazilian or Turk.

China’s attempt to mirror global public opinion on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is part of a much broader strategy aimed at winning over the global South. First and foremost, the wars in Ukraine and Gaza underpin China’s argument that the world is becoming ever more disorderly. In Beijing’s view, the United States’ support for Israel’s campaign in Gaza demonstrates that its much-vaunted rules-based order was always a self-serving sham. Whereas the United States was quick to condemn Russian war crimes in Ukraine and China’s treatment of the Uyghurs, it has remained silent when confronted with what the rest of the world views as identical behavior by Israel (whether that conception is grounded in fact or not).

The strategy was on full display on November 20, when the Chinese leader Xi Jinping participated in a virtual BRICS summit focused on the war in Gaza. The meeting brought the original members of the bloc, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, together with its newest additions, Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. The summit was a clear attempt to present the grouping as a new alternative to Western organizations such as the G-7. As with Wang’s meeting with Arab leaders, the optics of the meeting were far more important than the substance, and again, the group proposed no practical steps to end the violence, either in the short term or in the long term. 

Opinion polls show that Arab publics now favor China over the United States. 

Moreover, China’s stance on the war in Gaza is an attempt to make a virtue of its relative isolation. China has just a single treaty ally in the entire world—North Korea. In the Middle East, the United States has been steadfast in its commitment to Israel’s security since the 1973 Yom Kippur War. China, by contrast, is free to pick and choose its partners in the region depending on the issue—for example, buying Iranian oil while cooperating with Saudi Arabia on ballistic missile technology or building infrastructure in Syria while trying to bind Turkey into the Belt and Road Initiative. Thanks to this relative freedom, China has been able to prioritize the performative aspect of its response to the war in Gaza over everything else; unlike the United States, it has no long-standing ally to accuse it of betrayal.

Finally, China is not trying to unite these countries in a Chinese-led anti-Western alliance, as many in Washington seem to believe. Whereas the United States talks about how other countries should align with its positions and follow global rules, China presents itself as a champion of a “multicivilizational world” and a partner for development and sovereignty. Indeed, Beijing’s selling point is precisely that in a world of fragmentation, it is not forcing other countries to choose sides.

Here again, China is very much in line with global public opinion. According to a European Council on Foreign Relations poll of major non-Western countries conducted in December 2022 and January 2023, substantial majorities across the world do not think that their countries will ever have to choose between China and the United States. For example, only 14 percent of Indians expect a bipolar world in ten years in which they might be forced to choose between Chinese- and U.S.-dominated blocs. So even though the United States demands ever-closer alignment from those countries caught in between, China’s perceived nonalignment has allowed it to become the favored partner for infrastructure investment and economic development in many parts of the world.

THE DISCREDITED ORDER

In its attempts to contain the war between Israel and Hamas, the Biden administration has developed a strategy of hugging Israel closely, continually reiterating its support for the Jewish state and refraining from overt public criticism in order to influence the way it prosecutes the war. In public and private, however, the Biden administration is also encouraging the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to develop a realistic military strategy in Gaza, pay attention to international law, and do more to mitigate the unfolding humanitarian crisis. By leaning in, the administration seems to be setting itself up to act as a broker for a political process between Israelis, Palestinians, and their Arab neighbors after the violence subsides.

Everyone should hope that this strategy succeeds, but in the court of global public opinion, the limits of the U.S. approach and of Biden’s influence on Netanyahu have been striking. With every civilian casualty from an Israeli airstrike, the West’s arguments in defense of a rules-based order ring hollower in the global South. This could have enduring consequences for Ukraine, which derives the legitimacy for its struggle from the order-breaking nature of Russia’s aggression. And if, at some point in the future, Xi makes the fateful decision to invade Taiwan, he will surely hope that his stance on the Gaza war has made it more likely that the global South will line up behind Beijing rather than Washington.

The government media office in the Gaza Strip announced on Monday that the death toll of journalists inside the Strip had risen to 112 since last October 7, after two of them were killed by Israeli bombing.

The office said in a statement: “The number of journalist killed has risen to 112 journalists, since the start of the genocidal war on the Gaza Strip (October 7), after the ascension of two fellow journalists: Abdullah Burais and Muhammad Abu Dayer.”

The office indicated in its statement that Burais and Abu Dayer “were killed by the ongoing Israeli occupation bombing of the Gaza Strip (without specifying the location).”

As tensions in the Middle East exacerbate due to the ongoing brutal Israeli attack on the Gaza Strip, US officials warn that US President Joe Biden's decisions could lead to a major regional war.

According to what was published by the “HuffPost” website, American officials told the website that “Israel has ignited an all-out war in southern Lebanon, and the consequences could be disastrous.” “All scenarios show that this will escalate into something terrible... whether in terms of counterterrorism or war with Iran,” one official said.

The official said that many in the Biden administration fear that unconditional American support for Israel may encourage Israeli officials to expand their operations in Lebanon. Last week, Israel dramatically escalated the situation by launching a drone strike in Beirut that killed a senior Hamas official who was involved in hostage negotiations.

The American official told the site: “I was trying to prevent the (mountain) avalanche from falling on Lebanon, and so did many people, but the problem is that no one can restrain Biden, and if Biden has a policy, he is the commander in chief - and we must implement it. This is what things have come to, unfortunately, very, very, very unfortunately.”

Another American official said that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer “are very determined to seize this moment to expand the war into southern Lebanon and deliver an imaginary, legendary knockout blow to Hezbollah.”

The United States sent Biden's energy envoy, Amos Hochstein, of Israeli origin and birth, to try to reach a diplomatic solution between Israel and Hezbollah, but no progress was made.

US officials also told Politico that the administration is making plans to respond to a "long-term regional conflict." Lebanon is just one area where Israel's assault on Gaza is spilling over into the region, where the US and its allies are threatening to strike the Houthis in Yemen over their attacks on commercial ships linked to Israel in the Red Sea, and the US is already in a low-level conflict with Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria that could explode. .

Instead of pressuring Israel to end its brutal attack on Gaza and ease tensions with Hezbollah, President Biden is opting for regional escalation while continuing to provide full military and political support to Israel. The officials who spoke to the Huffington Post reiterated that the Biden administration is not considering placing any conditions on military aid to Israel at this time.

Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Galant announced on Monday that Israel will move into a “long” third phase of the war on the Gaza Strip.

Gallant told the American newspaper "The Wall Street Journal" that the Israeli forces will shift from what he called "the intensive maneuver phase of the war" to "different types of special operations," without specifying a start date for that, or details about these operations.

But he warned that "the next chapter of the war will last much longer."

While Israel has not officially announced the transition to the third phase of the war, Israeli reports say that the matter “will be on the agenda of US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken’s meetings, on Tuesday, with Israeli officials in Tel Aviv,” in what is the fourth visit by Blinken since the start of the war in October 7 last.

On Thursday, the Israeli Broadcasting Corporation revealed that the army “has moved to the third phase of the war in some areas of the Gaza Strip with smaller forces.”

According to Israeli media, the third phase requires moving from “intensive bombing to specific bombing and withdrawing the largest number of forces from inside the Gaza Strip to the border.”

Blinken will arrive in Israel, Monday evening, for a two-day visit, during which he will meet with the War Council on Tuesday, before heading to Ramallah in the West Bank, on Wednesday, as part of a tour of the region to discuss developments in the war on Gaza and prevent its expansion.

In this context, Gallant stressed in his statements to the American newspaper that “Israel will not abandon its goals of destroying Hamas, ending its control over Gaza, and liberating the remaining (Israeli) hostages (in Gaza).”

He explained that Hamas's sudden attack on Israeli towns and military bases in the Gaza Strip on October 7 "severely shook the Israelis' sense of security, and profoundly changed the way they look at the world around them."

He said: "October 7 was the bloodiest day for the Jewish people since 1945. The world needs to understand, this is different. The Hamas attack on October 7 represented a major failure in deterrence."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday that Hezbollah has been miscalculating Israel since 2006 until today, adding that his government "prefers to restore security to the north, without a large-scale war."

This came in blog posts published by Netanyahu’s office on the “X” platform, which conveyed statements made by the Israeli Prime Minister to a number of soldiers on the border with Lebanon in northern Israel.

According to Netanyahu's office, the latter visited the soldiers and listened to security reports.

Netanyahu's office did not clarify whether the Israeli Prime Minister made these statements before or after the raid that killed the prominent field commander of the Lebanese "Hezbollah", Wissam Al-Tawil, on Monday morning, and Israel was accused of being responsible for it, while it did not officially announce its responsibility until 1:35 p.m. 

Netanyahu told the soldiers: “Hezbollah misjudged us in 2006, and it is making a big mistake in our judgment even now,” according to the same source.

He added: “Hezbollah thought we were a spider’s web, and suddenly he saw what a spider it was,” referring to the words of the Secretary-General of Hezbollah in several speeches, most notably dating back to the period of the “July 2006 War,” in which he said that Israel and its army “ Weaker than a spider's web."

He continued: "It (Hezbollah) sees here a tremendous force, a united people, and a determination to do everything necessary to restore security in the north, and I tell you: this is my policy."

In this context, Netanyahu stressed in his speech to the soldiers: “We will do our best to restore security in the north and allow your families, as many of you are local residents, to return to their homes safely and in the knowledge that we cannot be messed with.”

He continued: "We will do whatever it takes, and of course, we prefer that this be done without a large-scale (war) campaign, but that will not stop us."

Last December, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Galant vowed to remove Hezbollah beyond the Litani River in southern Lebanon, “whether by international political arrangement or military action.”

Otherwise, Israeli Foreign Minister Eli Cohen said, on the 17th of the same month, that “nothing will prevent the outbreak of war with Lebanon except the implementation of International Resolution 1701 to remove Hezbollah fighters to the north of the Litani River.”

On August 11, 2006, the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1701, which called for a complete cessation of hostilities between Lebanon and Israel, after a 33-day war between Hezbollah and the Israeli army.

The resolution calls for the creation of an area between the Blue Line (separating Lebanon and Israel) and the Litani River in southern Lebanon, free of any militants, military equipment and weapons, except for those belonging to the Lebanese Army and the United Nations Interim Force (UNIFIL).

In "solidarity with the Gaza Strip", Hezbollah and Palestinian factions in Lebanon have exchanged intermittent daily bombardment with the Israeli army since October 8, resulting in dozens of deaths and injuries on both sides of the border.

Tensions escalated and attacks were exchanged between the two sides, following Israel's assassination of Saleh Al-Arouri, the deputy head of the Hamas political bureau, last week in Beirut.

The Palestinian Ministry of Health in the Gaza Strip announced that the number of dead as a result of the ongoing Israeli occupation aggression has risen to 23,084 people, and the number of injured has risen to 58,926 since the seventh of last October.

The ministry said in a statement on Monday that during the past 24 hours, the Israeli occupation forces committed 17 massacres against families in the Gaza Strip, killing 249  Palestinians and wounding 510 .

The occupation forces continue their aggression against the Gaza Strip for the fourth day after the 90th, and the occupation bombed the areas of northern, central and southern Gaza Strip, raising the number of dead and wounded.

The government media office in Gaza had called for the necessity of opening the Rafah crossing and transferring 6,000 wounded people for treatment abroad “immediately and urgently,” in light of the humanitarian catastrophe that the Strip is experiencing as a result of the aggression.

The Israeli army announced that 19 soldiers were injured during the past 24 hours in the ongoing battles in the Gaza Strip.

This announcement comes while violent battles are taking place between the resistance and the occupation forces, especially in the central and southern Gaza Strip.

The Prisoners and Ex-Detainees Affairs Authority confirmed on Monday that female detainees at Damoun Prison north of Haifa, especially those arrested from the Gaza Strip, face very difficult detention conditions and are subject to severe punishments that have been increasing in frequency on a daily basis since the 7th of last October.

The Commission said, according to the visit of its lawyer, that the occupation forces launched a massive campaign of arrests of women in the West Bank, Jerusalem and Gaza, noting that they were subjected to torture and abuse from the moment of arrest and in the interrogation cells.

It added that the prison administration deliberately isolates female detainees and commits the most horrific crimes against them, including: surprise inspections at all times by special teams of “Shabas.” The female detainees also suffer from the terrible and extreme cold due to the lack of sufficient clothing. They are also only allowed one blanket, and the food is poor in terms of quantity and quality.

It pointed out that the number of detainees inside the rooms is very large, as there is no possibility of complete movement, and all electrical appliances such as television and radio have been seized.

The Commission confirmed that what was mentioned expresses a very small part of the suffering of female detainees inside the occupation prisons, calling on the international community to break its silence regarding the practices of the Israeli occupation authorities against all detainees, in which they violated all international laws and norms.

On Monday afternoon, the Israeli occupation army assassinated a prominent field commander in the Lebanese Hezbollah group. Lebanese sources said it was a long medal.

The Islamic Resistance in Lebanon (Hezbollah) announced the death of the leader of the Radwan Unit, Wissam Hassan Tawil, “Hajj Jawad,” from the town of Khirbet Selm in southern Lebanon.

Lebanese sources said that Al-Tawil, who was targeted, is a field commander in Hezbollah's highly trained Radwan unit.

The Lebanese News Agency reported that there were casualties as a result of the occupation targeting a vehicle in Khirbet Selm.

While the Hebrew channel Kan commented that the assassination of the senior official in the Radwan unit was a “very painful blow” to Hezbollah

Israeli Knesset member Ofer Cassif  said, “The Israeli government and its members are calling for ethnic cleansing and even genocide.”

Cassif  added in blog posts on the X platform: “My constitutional duty is towards Israeli society and all its residents, and not towards a government whose members and coalition call for ethnic cleansing, or even actual genocide.”

He continued, referring to the government: "They are the ones who harmed the country and the people. They are the ones who led South Africa to appeal in The Hague, not me and my friends."

Cassif  had signed a petition supporting the lawsuit submitted by South Africa against Israel to the International Court of Justice in The Hague, to oblige it to an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, against the backdrop of its accusation of committing “genocide crimes.”

He continued in his blog posts: “When the government works against society, the state, and its citizens, especially when it sacrifices them and commits crimes in their name to maintain its existence, it is my right and even my duty to warn against this and to do everything I can within the law to stop it.”

He added: "I will not give up the struggle for our existence as a moral community. This is true patriotism. No wars of revenge and calls for extermination, no unnecessary bloodshed, and no sacrifice of kidnapped citizens and soldiers in false wars."

Cassif is a member of the Knesset for the Democratic Front for Peace and Equality, an Arab and Jewish party that rejects the occupation and calls for the establishment of a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital.

In this context, the Hebrew newspaper Maariv reported on Sunday that Cassif  "was subjected to severe criticism from the right, after he signed a petition to support the lawsuit filed against Israel in the International Court of Justice."

Smotrich calls for settlement in Gaza

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich stressed the necessity of controlling Gaza “at all times,” calling on the government to establish Jewish settlement within the Strip.

The minister, known for his extremist statements, added that Israel will not be able to permanently control Gaza without a civilian presence, so that terrorism has no place to grow, he said.

He added, "See why Jenin and Tulkarm turned into capitals of terrorism? Because there is no Jewish settlement there."

The severity of Smotrich's extremist statements has increased since the start of the aggression on Gaza, the last of which was a few days ago when he spoke with National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir about the necessity of displacing the residents of Gaza, reoccupying the Strip and building settlements there.

The extremist statements even affected the Palestinians in the West Bank, as Smotrich said late last November that “there are two million Nazis” in the West Bank.

In early January, South Africa filed a lawsuit before the International Court of Justice, the main judicial body of the United Nations, accusing Israel of committing “genocide crimes” in the Gaza Strip. Next Thursday and Friday, the International Court of Justice is scheduled to begin hearing the pleadings of Israel and South Africa in the case, with deliberations continuing later.

On October 7, 2023, Hamas and other Palestinian factions in Gaza launched Operation “Al-Aqsa Flood,” in response to “the continuing attacks by Israeli forces and settlers against the Palestinian people, their property, and their sanctities, especially Al-Aqsa Mosque in occupied East Jerusalem.”

In response, the Israeli army launched a devastating war on Gaza, leaving about 23,000 dead and more than 58,416 wounded, most of them children and women, massive destruction of infrastructure, and an “unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe,” according to Palestinian and international sources.

The Bolivian Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced its support for the lawsuit filed by South Africa before the International Court of Justice against Israel for genocide crimes in the Gaza Strip.

The Bolivian Ministry of Foreign Affairs praised the step taken by South Africa in this regard, in accordance with its commitment to the Genocide Convention, considering it a historic step in defending the rights of the Palestinian people and the Palestinian cause, stressing the need to support this initiative from the international community.

The ministry pointed out that Bolivia, in partnership with South Africa, Bangladesh, Comoros, and Djibouti, submitted a lawsuit on November 17 to the International Criminal Court to investigate the situation in the Palestinian territories.

Bolivia is the first country in Latin America to announce its support for South Africa's lawsuit.

The International Court of Justice said that it received a request from South Africa on December 29 to sue Israel on charges of committing genocide in the Gaza Strip. The lawsuit stated that Israel “conducted acts aimed at ethnic cleansing in Gaza.”

The court explained that South Africa had submitted a request to file a lawsuit against Israel for violating the Genocide Convention.

South Africa asked the court to indicate interim measures in order to protect Palestinians in Gaza “from any further serious and irreparable harm” under the convention, and to ensure “Israel’s compliance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention not to engage in, prevent and punish genocide.”

South Africa's move comes in the wake of the death of more than 23,000 citizens, most of them women and children, in the ongoing Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip since last October 7.

A Gallup poll in the United States concluded that there is no clear direction from the American public regarding US involvement in “resolving the conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza,” with nearly four in 10 (of respondents) saying that the United States It does “about the right amount” of effort required (41%), while 39% think the US is doing “not enough” and about two in 10 (19%) think the US is doing “too much.”

Forty percent of both Republicans and Democrats believe that the United States is not doing enough to resolve the conflict, but Democrats (48%) are more likely than Republicans (33%) to say that American intervention is right. On the other hand, Republicans are more likely than Democrats to believe that the United States is doing too much (26% vs. 11%, respectively). Independents' opinions are on par with national averages.

The poll indicates that Americans are divided regarding American efforts in the conflict between Israel and Hamas

Gallup conducted its poll during the period from the beginning of December 2023 until the twentieth of the same month, that is, about two months after the start of the war in Gaza.

Israel pledged to "eliminate" Hamas following the attack launched by the movement on Israel on October 7, which led to the killing of about 1,200 people, both military and civilian, according to what Israel says.

During the attack, Hamas also took about 250 hostages, 132 of whom are still being held in the Gaza Strip, according to Israeli army figures.

The continuous Israeli bombing of the Gaza Strip, accompanied by a ground attack since October 27, has led to the deaths of at least 22,722 people, the majority of whom are women and children, according to the latest figures from the Ministry of Health in the Gaza Strip.

Also, the bombing and battles led to widespread destruction in the besieged sector, and a growing humanitarian crisis in light of the scarcity of humanitarian aid and the displacement of about 85 percent of the population, according to United Nations figures.

Poll data indicate that Americans are also divided regarding American support for Israelis and Palestinians.

About 40 percent of respondents say that Israel receives the appropriate amount of (American) support, while 36 percent believe that Israel receives too much support, while 24 percent believe that Israel receives too little support.

Americans' opinions regarding American support for the Palestinians are more evenly divided, with about a third saying that the United States supports the Palestinians too much, a third saying that Washington supports them too much, and a third saying that it receives too little support.

Regarding Americans’ view of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the negative view of him increased to 47 percent among those polled, which is considered the highest since he has been in power since 1998.

Gallup notes that “Netanyahu is the longest-serving prime minister in Israel, but he is accused of fraud, bribery, and breach of trust. He has denied these accusations, and he leads the most right-wing government to date. He recently tried to limit the ability of Israeli courts to reverse the government’s actions, not to mention the criticism directed at him.” His government accused him of allowing serious security lapses that allowed Hamas to carry out its attacks.

Gallup concluded that "Americans lack consensus in their views regarding US intervention in the war between Israel and Hamas, and its comprehensive support for Israel and the Palestinians."

It added that US President Joe Biden faces difficult choices regarding the American role in the Middle East, especially with the start of the presidential election year, as he may face criticism from part of his Democratic base.

Abdul Aziz Abu Bakr

Johannesburg - Last week, South Africa became the first country to file a lawsuit against Israel at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, which increases international pressure on the Israeli occupation to stop the ongoing aggression against the Gaza Strip, since last October 7, which has so far resulted in the death of more than 22 thousand Palestinians, including thousands of children.

In the 84-page lawsuit, which South Africa submitted to the court on December 29, the accompanying evidence explains the brutality being committed in Gaza, in addition to an urgent request for the court, which is considered the United Nations body for resolving disputes between states, to quickly declare that... “Israel has violated its obligations under international law since October 7th.”

South Africa accused Israel before the International Court of Justice of committing genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza, noting that “Israel carried out specific actions with the intent to destroy the Palestinians as a national, racial and ethnic group,” which constitutes a violation of the Convention on Genocide.

It noted in its lawsuit that “Israel failed to prevent genocide and incited it,” and the request calls for “interim measures to protect the rights of Palestinians and ensure Israel’s compliance with its obligations under the Genocide Convention.”

Previous experience

The state of Namibia, a former German colony, came under the administration of South Africa after World War I, through a League of Nations mandate, and despite the subsequent dissolution of the League of Nations, South Africa refused to give up its control over Namibia.

The United Nations considered that “South Africa’s continued administration of Namibia is illegal,” while South Africa considered that the United Nations aimed, with this statement, to transfer its control over Namibia to the United Nations, which prompted it to reject the resolutions of the United Nations General Assembly and the Security Council.

In 1960, the United Nations requested an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the legal consequences of South Africa's continued presence in Namibia, and the International Court of Justice issued its decision in 1971, in which it noted that "South Africa's continued administration of Namibia is illegal under international law." Stressing that South Africa is obligated to withdraw its administration from Namibia immediately.

Despite the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice, South Africa retained control over Namibia for several years, and the issue remained a focal point in international forums, which in turn put diplomatic pressure on South Africa, leading to Namibia eventually gaining its independence from South Africa in 1990, after extensive international pressure, negotiations, and implementation of the United Nations plan for the independence of Namibia.

What are South Africa's accusations against Israel?

Israel committed genocide in Gaza, in violation of the 1948 Genocide Convention, which defines genocide as “acts committed with intent to destroy, in part or in whole, a national, racial, religious or sectarian group.”

Committing genocidal acts, including killing Palestinians in Gaza in large numbers, especially children, destroying their homes, expelling and displacing them, and imposing a blockade on basic resources.

Imposing measures that prevent Palestinians from giving birth, by destroying basic health services necessary for the survival of pregnant women and children.

Responsibility for incitement to genocide and refraining from prosecuting instigators, referring in particular to statements made by Israeli officials during the war, which sought to justify the killing and destruction in Gaza.

An emergency request to stop operations and move quickly to prevent Israel from committing more crimes in the Strip, most likely by issuing an order to stop the attack. The International Court said - in a statement - that this request would be a priority, but it did not specify a timetable.

The importance of the lawsuit

For his part, researcher in African and Middle Eastern affairs, Naeem Jenna, considered that "the documentation provided by South Africa indicates the urgent need for such issues, in light of the increasing misinformation about the war."

Gina adds, “These measures are important to slow the normalization of any mass crimes committed by Israel, and send a message that if there is a country that will commit mass crimes as Israel is doing, we must expect it to be brought before an international court with authority at the international level, to review the record of the country in question.” In front of international standards.

Anthony Hodgson, an activist in the Jewish Committee to Support Palestine, also welcomed the decision of the South African government to pursue urgent recourse to the International Court of Justice, regarding the ongoing genocide committed by Israel in Gaza.

He affirmed their rejection of “the deliberate and malicious attempts made by the Israeli government and its allies to interpret attempts to hold Israel responsible as anti-Semitism,” indicating that they “praise their government’s decision to take a principled position and not to be intimidated by bad faith actors who deliberately distort the facts on the ground.” ".

Cite evidence

South Africa also explained that statements made by Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, showed “genocidal intent.” For example, the lawsuit cited Netanyahu’s statements in which he compared the Palestinians to the people of the Amalekites (Amalekites) in the Jewish Bible, where God commanded The Israelites destroyed them, and the Bible verse says, “Now go and smite the Amalekites... kill the man, the woman, and the infants.”

Moreover, it cited Netanyahu saying in his statement on December 26 that “despite the destruction of Gaza and the killing of thousands, we will intensify the fighting in the coming days, and this will be a long battle.” Several other statements were also cited, including those In which Israeli officials described the people of Gaza as a “force of injustice,” in contrast to Israel, which they described as a “force of light.”

South Africa says that “the scope of the Israeli army’s operations, its indiscriminate bombing and executions of civilians, in addition to Israel’s blockade of food, water, medicine, fuel, shelter and other humanitarian assistance,” are evidence of its claim, stressing that these measures have brought the sector to “the brink of famine.”

It stated that Israel is committing other violations of international law in the Gaza Strip in addition to genocide, such as launching attacks on Palestinian culture, by targeting sites of “religion, education, art and science, historical monuments, hospitals and places where the sick and wounded are collected.”

Similar issues

Researcher Naeem Jenna confirms to Al Jazeera Net that, “Under the Genocide Convention, cases of genocide crimes have been filed against other countries, whether they were directly involved in the conflict or not,” noting that in 2019, The Gambia submitted - on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation - A request to the court against Myanmar, due to its crimes against the Rohingya.

Jena explained that both South Africa and Israel are parties to the International Court, which means that its decisions are binding on both parties. However, the International Court does not have executive authority, and its orders have been ignored in some cases without serious penalties.

Kiev had filed a case against Moscow in the court in March 2022, one month before Russia's war on Ukraine, in which Ukraine asked the court to establish emergency measures to stop Russia's aggression.

The court ordered Moscow to halt military operations after a short time, and indicated that it was "extremely concerned" about the attack on Ukraine, but all of this did not prevent the ongoing Russian war on Ukraine.

Court procedures

The International Court of Justice will hold a hearing from January 11 to 12, although the procedures may take time that may extend to years. To this day, the Court is still examining the Gambia v. Myanmar case since 2019, but South Africa has requested to revitalize the process. This could lead to a request for an emergency order from the international court, which could lead to quick results within weeks, as happened in the Ukraine case.

In response to the lawsuit, the Israeli Foreign Ministry strongly denied the genocide accusations, describing the case as a "bloody slander, grotesque exploitation, and disdain for the court." The ministry accused Pretoria of being a "criminal accomplice in Hamas attacks."

For the first time in its history, Israel agreed to stand before the court and file an appeal in the genocide case filed by South Africa. While this is not the first judicial move against Israel in its history, this lawsuit filed by South Africa is considered a difference, because it used the agreement paper. The International Committee against Genocide, which Israel has agreed to and is a signatory to.

Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Elon Levy stated, “Tel Aviv will defend itself in the Hague sessions, assuring South African leaders that history will judge them, and it will judge them without mercy.”

Source: Al Jazeera

Today, Monday, the Israeli occupation forces arrested dozens of citizens from various governorates of the West Bank.

By Meron Rapoport

Israeli leaders are explicit about reusing the methods of 1948 in Gaza today. But what didn’t quell the Palestinians then will not do so now.

In early December 2022, shortly before Israel’s far-right government was sworn in and long before the horrendous events of October 7 and Israel’s ongoing brutal assault on the Gaza Strip, Ameer Fakhoury and I published an article on these pages entitled, “Why the ‘second Nakba’ government wants to remake the Israeli state.” Our concern that this government would carry out an expulsion modeled on the mass dispossession of the 1948 Nakba was based on the fact that Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir had been given central roles in the government — Smotrich as finance minister and de facto West Bank overlord, and Ben Gvir as national security minister. This duo, we wrote, desire chaos, believing that this “will lead to the decisive moment in which Palestinians either come to heel or are expelled.”One year on, our worst fears have come to fruition: 1.9 million of the Gaza Strip’s 2.2 million Palestinian residents are currently displaced from their homes — which in many cases have been totally destroyed — and senior Israeli government figures are openly touting, and actively working toward, mass expulsion from the besieged enclave.

In recent days, Smotrich has laid out his vision for the Strip in clear terms. “My demand is that Gaza not continue to be a hotbed where 2 million people grow up on hatred and aspire to destroy the State of Israel,” he said in an interview with army radio last week. “If there are 100,000 or 200,000 Arabs in Gaza and not 2 million, the whole discourse about the day after will be different.”At a meeting of his Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power) faction in the Knesset on Jan. 1, Ben Gvir called for “encouraging the migration of the residents of Gaza” as the “correct, just, moral, and humane solution,” and echoed Smotrich’s call to reestablish Jewish settlements in the Strip. This comes after two Knesset members from Netanyahu’s Likud party published an article in the Wall Street Journal in November titled “The West Should Welcome Gaza Refugees.”Netanyahu himself told members of his Likud party last month that Israel is “working on” facilitating the so-called “voluntary migration” of Gaza’s Palestinians, while another party member, Agriculture and Rural Development Minister Avi Dichter, explicitly described the army’s current operation in the Strip as “Nakba 2023.

And, as +972 and Local Call revealed in full at the end of October, Israel’s Intelligence Ministry has recommended the forcible and permanent transfer of Gaza’s entire Palestinian population to the Sinai Peninsula. Egypt, for its part, still maintains that it will not acquiesce to any transfer of Palestinians into its territory.

There is nothing new about Israeli politicians using the threat of the Nakba as a political tool; indeed, Fakhoury and I published another article in June 2022 entitled, “How threats of a second Nabka went mainstream,” which detailed how the Israeli right has shifted in recent years from denying the Nakba to justifying it and wielding it as a renewed threat against the Palestinians. Now, however, this threat has transformed from a rhetorical strategy into a devastating reality.

A ‘strategic weapon’ — and an end

The Israeli army’s declared goal in Gaza is to incapacitate Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups. Its actions over the past three months, however, attest to a far broader campaign resembling policies of Nakba: expelling civilians en masse and rendering their homes and neighborhoods uninhabitable.Within days of the Hamas-led rampage in southern Israel, the Israeli military ordered 1.1 million Palestinians residing in the northern half of the Strip to abandon their homes and move south of Wadi Gaza until further notice — while still bombing the areas to which they were told to flee. More recently, the army has given further expulsion orders to Palestinians in various parts of southern Gaza, pushing hundreds of thousands toward the coast and Gaza’s border with Egypt.

The editor-in-chief of Israel’s liberal Haaretz newspaper, Aluf Benn, argued that expulsion is “Israel’s main strategic move” in the war, and the army’s ability to kill civilians who try to return home will be key to Israel’s victory. The newspaper’s Middle Eastern affairs analyst, Zvi Bar’el, similarly described the humanitarian crisis that Israel has induced in Gaza as a “strategic weapon” designed “to sear into Palestinian consciousness the apocalyptic punishment facing anyone who from now on dared challenge Israel.”

Not only does Israel see forcible displacement as a tool, it also appears to see it as an end in itself. Testimonies and documentation that have trickled out of Gaza throughout this period, in addition to the analysis of satellite imagery, suggest that the Israeli army is making sure many of the people it has displaced will have no homes to return to. The army has leveled entire neighborhoods, damaging or destroying approximately 70 percent of Gaza’s homes. It has destroyed libraries and archives, municipal buildings, universities, schools, archeological sites, mosques, and churches. Even if Israel doesn’t ultimately force a mass expulsion of Palestinians out of the Strip, precious little will remain from their lives before this war.“Israel has no interest in Gaza being rehabilitated,” Giora Eiland, the former head of Israel’s National Security Council, said on Israel’s national broadcaster, Kan, in November. “Is a situation of ongoing chaos in Gaza, similar to Somalia, a situation that Israel can live with? Israel can live with it. Whoever wants to change that can do so on our terms.” Beyond the moral depravity of the very idea of deporting or killing 2 million people, the flourishing of the “Nakba camp” in Israeli politics testifies to the ideological poverty of Israeli society. Seventy-five years after the state’s establishment, the only thing that Jewish-Israeli politics has to offer is a second Nakba. 

Returning to 1948’s foundational military and political strategy, to that same method of mass deportation of an entire people, demonstrates the instability and weakness of the other methods Israel has suggested for dealing with the “Palestinian question” over the years: annexation, maintaining the status quo, unilateral disengagement, “shrinking the conflict,” and even two-state solution proposals centered primarily around Jewish interests. 

Moreover, the prominence given to “the Nakba option” in contemporary Jewish-Israeli political discourse further testifies to Israel’s exceptionality in today’s world. After World War II, and despite some cases to the contrary, the international consensus largely deemed forced population transfer and mass expulsion no longer legitimate, even designating them as grave international crimes.

Even when these tactics have been put to the test more recently, such as in Bosnia or Rwanda, hardly any state has dared to declare it as official policy, and the international community — even if sometimes acting atrociously late — has generally worked to end their use. But expelling Palestinians from their homes and preventing their return is Israel’s oldest policy, and its leaders are primed to put it into action once more.

At the edge of the abyss

October 7 was a moment of crisis unlike anything Israel has seen for half a century, or perhaps even since 1948. Israel’s national security crumbled, along with the personal sense of security of many of its citizens. The viciousness of the Hamas-led attacks aroused a deep desire for revenge; indeed, most of the Jewish public views living by the sword as the most reasonable option.But it is still worth remembering: the Nakba of 1948 didn’t resolve the conflict between Jews and Palestinians. Seventy-five years later, Israel is fighting the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the Palestinian refugees who fled or were expelled to Gaza in 1948 from their lands inside what became the State of Israel.

Now, Israel is making its fantasy of enacting a second Nakba into reality, intoxicated with its own power and military advantage over Hamas, and effectively greenlit by the legitimacy that the international community has granted Israel to “respond” after October 7. But Israel may sober up sooner than expected.

A complete “cleansing” of the entire Gaza Strip appears to be an impossible mission: Hamas won’t surrender, Palestinians won’t raise the white flag, and the humanitarian crisis would likely lead to Arab, American, and European intervention. The question of the fate of the remaining Israeli hostages in Gaza may also complicate an unambiguous course of action, while domestic Israeli politics is much less cohesive than ubiquitous performances of patriotism may suggest.

If Israel does eventually sober up, how will it change course? One can hope that, unlike in previous cases, perhaps this time Israeli society won’t simply return to the absurd idea of “managing the conflict.” One can hope that, especially after experiencing such a terrible trauma, Israeli society will begin to understand that a secure future in this land can only be guaranteed by coming to some sort of agreement with the Palestinians — and that coercion, violence, and supremacy will never achieve this. Jews and Palestinians are closer today to the abyss than we have been for 75 years, and Israel’s embrace of a full-blown Nakba solution could cast us all into it. But it is also important to remember: when you stand at the edge of the abyss, it is still possible to glimpse the other side.

BY MITCHELL PLITNICK  

The instability in the Middle East cannot be overstated as the region stands on the precipice. It all stems from Israel’s ongoing slaughter in Gaza and the Biden administration’s blind support of it.

Joe Biden and his administration have put themselves in a difficult position with their blind support for Israel’s genocidal and warmongering aggression in Gaza and Lebanon. Israeli leaders across its government keep making it clear that they intend to ethnically cleanse the Gaza Strip. In response, the U.S. has tried to highlight statements along those lines by Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben-Gvir, in an effort to portray such sentiments as fringe and not representative of the full government’s plans.These efforts are regularly undermined by the fact that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and many members of his Likud party—the so-called “mainstream” of Israel—are saying the same things. Fortunately for Biden and his cadre of genocide backers, a credulous U.S. media has kept dutifully silent about those statements while highlighting those of Smotrich and Ben-Gvir. But it’s not just the disconnect between what the U.S. supports rhetorically and what it supports in practice that vexes Biden and his accomplices. One genuine policy point that has driven U.S. engagement in this ongoing genocide is its desire to contain the fighting in an effort to limit the slaughter to the Palestinians on whose lives the administration places no value. They do not want to see the fighting spread to the rest of the region. AdvertisementThe problem is that containing it is not so easy, especially when Israel has some different ideas. Although the Israeli government has been careful not to push too openly for a wider war, they have articulated some goals that go beyond Gaza and have taken some reckless actions that certainly risk escalation. 

The U.S. does itself no favors by allowing Israel to dictate the flow of events with virtually no pushback, aside from the occasional, empty, and mild rebuke. Both Hezbollah and Ansar Allah (commonly referred to as the Houthis) took what were at first relatively minor steps to express solidarity with the Palestinians, doubtless hoping that their actions would incentivize the U.S. to lean on its Israeli client to back away from the full-blown genocidal nature of its attacks. They surely didn’t even hope the U.S. would stop Israel, but it was reasonable to think the threat of escalation might diminish American support and thereby convince the U.S. to press Israel to lessen its assault, eventually leading to a ceasefire, as it has in previous conflicts. But rather than take this obviously sensible step, as previous administrations have done, Biden doubled down on his support. Israel is now escalating even more. Its Christmas Day assassination of Sayyed Razi Mousavi, a top commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in Syria was a provocative act that threatened to widen the conflict. Iran has threatened retaliation and will probably take some action in the future, but the Islamic Republic knows how much it has to lose if the war expands to include its confronting Israel and the U.S. They have continued to show restraint. Whether Israel is really trying to draw Iran into a wider conflict is debatable, but Israel has established wartime goals regarding Lebanon and Hezbollah. Israel has made it clear that it wants Hezbollah to redeploy at least eighteen miles away from the southern border, claiming only this will allow the residents of northern Israeli towns that have been evacuated since October 7 to return. 

Hezbollah, naturally, is disinclined to acquiesce to Israel’s demand that it retreat to the 2006 ceasefire line as long as Gaza is under attack. Yet it also faces domestic Lebanese pressures. As much as many Lebanese feel strong solidarity with the Palestinians, the last thing they want to see in their country—already reeling from decades of civil war, corruption, and the more recent economic collapse—is a new round of full-blown warfare with Israel. Israel, for its part, would like to force Hezbollah to pull back from the border without having to commit to greater warfare in the north. With the ethnic cleansing of Gaza proving to be more difficult than Israel at first might have thought, and with international discomfort with Israel’s actions growing, Israel is likely reluctant, at least for the moment, to expand the carnage it is causing in Southern Lebanon to too great a degree. 

Yet at the same time, its devotion to military force as the solution to its problems has led it to take real risks of expanding the fighting.Mousavi’s assassination was one example. Another was the more recent attacks that killed Hamas leader Saleh al-Aruri and, later, Hezbollah commander Hussein Yazbeck. With numerous northern Israeli towns having been evacuated, Israel could, potentially, launch much broader attacks on Hezbollah, although that carries the risk of retaliation in the rest of Israel. 

There is nowhere in Israel that Hezbollah’s missiles—which are vastly superior to those that the Palestinian groups, including Hamas, have—cannot reach. Still, if Israel were really determined to hit Hezbollah and push them away from the border, they could. Instead, they are settling for continuing the gradual escalation in the hope that pressure, mostly from the Lebanese public, does the job for them. Failing that, Israel is likely to continue the gradual escalation until it feels comfortable diverting more of its forces from Gaza to the northern border area.All of this is a delicate balancing act, easily tipped asunder by other actors. 

The attack in Kerman, Iran during a ceremony honoring the assassinated IRGC leader Major General Qassim Suleimani, was a clear example of this. Many leaped to the conclusion that Israel was responsible, although it turned out to be ISIL that claimed responsibility. The motivation for this specific attack is not clear, although ISIL has launched many attacks on Iran over the years. But one result was to increase the air of tension in Iran, as well as the sense of growing chaos in the Persian Gulf and Red Sea areas. Meanwhile, the United States, following the reckless lead of its Israeli partners, assassinated Mushtaq Talib al-Saidia, the deputy commander of operations for Baghdad, of the Iraqi Hash al Sha’bi militia, in a strike in the middle of Baghdad. The attack was apparently revenge for recent attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq. Hash al Sha’bi is part of the quasi-official Popular Mobilization Forces in Iraq and opposes the U.S. presence in Iraq. 

The PMF is made up of a wide variety of groups spanning the spectrum of Iraqi identity, but many of its constituent groups are distinctly pro-Iran. The presence of U.S. troops is contentious in Iraq, and actions like this one are certain to exacerbate tensions there and lead to increased attacks on U.S. bases, rather than deter them.The United States has also escalated its actions against Ansar Allah in the Red Sea, sinking three of its boats in the Red Sea that had attacked a commercial container ship, killing ten Ansar Allah fighters. All of these escalations are inevitably going to grow, along with the risk of either a misstep or an intentional act by some actor that leads to the regional war that most of these actors want to avoid. And all of it can be avoided simply by stopping the ethnic cleansing of Gaza, something most of the world, aside from the United States and Israel, wants. 

Then there is the departure from the Eastern Mediterranean of the giant American aircraft carrier, the USS Gerald Ford, this week. The departure of the ship itself is no surprise; it had been in that location longer than usual, and it is normal for ships to be rotated out so that its crew does not spend too much time at sea for any one period. But rather than replace the Ford with another aircraft carrier, the United States decided to replace it with ships that carry only a few helicopters and are meant to carry Marines who are specially trained for evacuations of American and allied personnel. 

The Ford, by contrast, had many aircraft that could provide air support for Israel and a much greater ability to intercept drones and missiles should large-scale attacks from Iran be launched.

This change reflects American confidence, perhaps overconfidence, that the risk of an expanded war has lessened. The decision to change the nature of the U.S. presence, however, was made prior to the recent escalations by Israel. The timing of the Israeli actions would seem to indicate that they are concerned about this American repositioning. Also, the numerous incidents in recent days have caused the Biden administration to reassess the threat of escalation, creating more incoherence in its policy. 

In response to that concern, Biden has dispatched his senior adviser, Amos Hochstein, to the region. Hochstein’s mission is to diminish tensions on the Israeli-Lebanese border. But, while Hochstein will meet with Lebanese leaders, and thereby can send messages to Hezbollah, he can only talk directly to Israel. At those meetings, it seems likely that he will try to reassure Israel that American support is not waning and that the departure of the Ford does not mean the U.S. is any less protective of Israel’s genocidal actions in Gaza. 

The instability that all of these myriad factors come together to produce cannot be overstated. The region is on the precipice of a new conflagration. And it all stems from Israel’s ongoing slaughter in Gaza and the Biden administration’s blind and heartless support of it. It is possible that Israel is finally being forced to admit that the world won’t allow it to empty Gaza of its inhabitants, as Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant announced a plan on Thursday that would leave Israel in overall control of Gaza but will “permit” some Palestinian civilian control. Gallant’s plan is not an official Israeli position, and its announcement seems aimed at mollifying a Biden administration that is concerned about explicitly supporting ethnic cleansing while not committing to stopping any part of its crimes in Gaza. 

But colonial pretensions and political theater aside, the risk of a regional explosion remains high and continues to grow. It may take time, but if the United States doesn’t depart from its current course of backing Israeli violence with its protection and with violence and lawlessness of its own, that explosion will come eventually, just as it did on October 7.

Estimates from officials in the Israeli security services indicate that US Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, who arrives in Tel Aviv on Monday, will demand that Israeli government officials allow residents of the northern Gaza Strip who are in areas sheltering displaced persons in the central and southern Strip to return to their areas, according to Haaretz newspaper quoted sources it described as “informed.”

The newspaper indicated on its website that officials in the White House “fear” the worsening humanitarian catastrophe taking place in the southern Gaza Strip, and they want to “convey a message” to officials in Tel Aviv that the method of combat operations in the northern Gaza Strip, as it is currently taking place, is "You must change."

The newspaper added, "Despite the widespread destruction caused by the Israeli army in the northern Gaza Strip, in recent weeks, American officials have raised clear demands from officials in the Israeli government that the residents of the northern Gaza Strip be allowed to return to their homes."

It stated that estimates by senior security officials in Tel Aviv indicate that Blinken will present clear and direct demands in this regard. Note that Blinken said during a press conference held on Sunday evening in Doha, with the participation of the Qatari Prime Minister, Mohammed bin Abdul Rahman, that “the United Nations can play a decisive role regarding the return of the Palestinians to their homes in northern Gaza.”

He said, "90% of the population of the Gaza Strip faces a severe food shortage," noting that "the immediate increase of aid in Gaza, especially in the north, is essential."

According to Haaretz, Israeli army officials realize that “international law prohibits forcing anyone to leave their home in combat zones, and therefore it will be difficult to continue preventing the movement of civilians to the north.”

It pointed out that "the return of nearly a million people to their areas in the northern Gaza Strip will make things difficult for the Israeli army, especially with regard to maintaining large forces inside the Gaza Strip that may be exposed to direct contact with the civilian population."

It added, "It is possible that Hamas will exploit the return of the population to its advantage, such that the Israeli security services will be forced to modify the nature of operational activities in the region so as not to expose the forces to danger."

Israeli reports indicate that the Israeli army is already moving to the third phase of combat operations targeting the northern areas of the Gaza Strip, which includes carrying out lightning raids, specific incursions and raids, instead of intensive attacks and widespread deployment of forces.

Israeli Channel 12 reported, on Sunday evening, that Blinken will demand that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu officially announce the end of the phase of concentrated and violent fighting in northern Gaza, and move to the “next” phase, which includes specific operations and attacks.

However, Channel 12 reported that the talks that Blinken will hold with officials in Tel Aviv will focus on the “northern front,” in reference to the escalating confrontations with Hezbollah.

The channel pointed out the escalation of American fears of “opening another front in Lebanon,” referring to the escalation of confrontations leading to a comprehensive war with Hezbollah, in light of the shuttle talks conducted by the American envoy, Amos Hockstein, in this regard.

During the press conference in Doha, US Secretary of State Blinken said, “The Palestinians cannot and should not be forced to leave Gaza.” He stressed that "Palestinian civilians must be able to return to their homes."

He added, "As soon as circumstances permit." He expressed Washington's "rejection" of the statements made by Israeli politicians and officials in recent days regarding the displacement of Palestinians out of Gaza.

Blinken described such Israeli statements as “irresponsible” and make the situation more difficult.

Opinion polls in Israel continued to give their back to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as 64% believed that his performance in the war on Gaza was not good. The poll also expected the decline of the Likud Party in exchange for the rise of the state camp led by Benny Gantz.

In addition to the 64% who said they were not satisfied with Netanyahu's performance, 50% of the 600 Israeli respondents said they were completely dissatisfied with his performance.

On the other hand, 63% expressed their satisfaction with the performance of Defense Minister Yoav Galant during the current war, and only 25% believed that Netanyahu is suitable for the position of prime minister.

At the same time, the poll revealed that if parliamentary elections were held in Israel, the State Camp party led by Benny Gantz would be the largest party in Israel, winning 33 seats compared to the 12 seats it won in the November 2022 elections, while the Likud Party led by Benjamin Netanyahu won 20 seats, compared to the 33 he won in the last elections.

55% also expressed their support for the decision of Israeli Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi to form an investigation committee regarding the events of last October 7 (the Al-Aqsa flood), compared to 20% of those polled who considered the decision unjustified.

Gantz outperforms Netanyahu

Another opinion poll published by Maariv newspaper last Friday said that 48% of Israelis preferred Gantz as prime minister over Netanyahu, who received the support of 34% of those polled, while the rest of the participants did not have a specific opinion.

According to Anatolia News Agency, the possibility of holding parliamentary elections does not appear on the horizon in light of the ongoing war on Gaza since the seventh of last October, but Israeli estimates indicate the possibility of returning to the ballot boxes after the war.

Thousands of Israelis demonstrate weekly throughout Israel, demanding the resignation of the current government headed by Benjamin Netanyahu and the holding of early elections.

Since the Battle of Al-Aqsa Flood on October 7, Netanyahu has also been subjected to many criticisms from the opposition and former officials and soldiers, who accused him of failing to manage the government and the war on the Gaza Strip.

#Israel #War on Gaza

The Ministry of Health in Gaza reported that 73 were killed and 99 others were injured in Israeli bombing of the Strip during the past 24 hours.

Eight citizens were killed and dozens injured, at dawn on Monday, after occupation aircraft bombed a house west of the city of Deir al-Balah.

Medical sources reported that 8 dead arrived at Al-Aqsa Martyrs Hospital, in addition to dozens of injured people, including children and women, and the missing, after the occupation aircraft targeted a house west of Deir al-Balah in the central Gaza Strip.

An occupation army drone also opened fire towards the courtyard of the Gaza European Hospital, southeast of Khan Yunis, and occupation aircraft also bombed the buildings of the College of Science and Technology, south of Khan Yunis, south of the Gaza Strip.

Israeli warplanes launched a series of violent raids on Al-Maghazi camp in the central Gaza Strip.

In an infinite toll, the death toll in the Gaza Strip since the start of the aggression on the seventh of last October has risen to 22,835 dead, more than 70% of whom are women and children, and 58,316 wounded, in addition to 7,000 people missing under the rubble. 

Save the Children said that at least 10 children lose their legs every day in the Gaza Strip, which has been subjected to an Israeli war since October 7.

The organization, which is based in Britain, explained in a statement issued on Sunday that reports from the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) indicate that “1,000 children in Gaza have lost one or both of their legs” since the beginning of the Israeli attacks.

The statement added that most of the surgeries performed on children were performed without anesthesia.

In this context, he pointed out the lack of medical personnel and medical equipment in the sector.

The statement devoted space to the statements of the organization's affairs coordinator in Palestine, Jason Lee, who said that "the suffering of children in this conflict is unimaginable."

As of Sunday, the war left 22,835 dead, 58,416 wounded, massive infrastructure destruction and an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe, according to the Gaza Strip authorities and the United Nations.

The Israeli war on Gaza has entered its fourth month. Today, Sunday, with the start of the 93rd day of the aggression against the Strip, Israeli aircraft intensified raids on various areas of the Strip, while Israeli artillery renewed its targeting of residential squares and shelter centers for the displaced.

The Israeli raids were concentrated on various areas in Rafah, Al-Maghazi camp, the Tal Al-Zaatar area, Deir Al-Balah and Khan Yunis, where Israeli aircraft bombed a number of homes and residential communities, killing dozens and wounding hundreds, most of them children, women and the elderly.

The toll of the Israeli aggression since the seventh of last October has reached 22,835killed, in addition to 58,416 injured, most of whom are children and women, according to the latest official data issued by the government media office in the Gaza Strip.

Doha confirmed, on Sunday evening, that the assassination of Hamas leader, Saleh Al-Arouri, in the southern suburb of the Lebanese capital, Beirut, last week, “complicates negotiations on the release of the Israeli hostages” held in Gaza.

The Qatari Foreign Minister, Mohammed bin Abdul Rahman Al Thani, said during a joint press conference with his American counterpart, Anthony Blinken, who is conducting a Middle Eastern tour in light of the continuing Israeli war on the Gaza Strip,“ that the attack against a senior Hamas leader (referring to the assassination of Al-Arouri) complicates negotiations on the release of the hostages.”

He added: "We are going through challenges in the ongoing negotiations regarding the release of the hostages... and try to reach an agreement that leads to the release of the hostages and a ceasefire."

He stressed that "the expansion of the conflict in the region is possible and work must be done to prevent this," adding: "We emphasized the importance of pressure to stop the fighting and allow aid to pass into the Gaza Strip."

He stated that "the recent events, whether in Lebanon or Syria, are condemnable and are a violation of the sovereignty of countries."

He pointed out that "there is no peace in the region except through a just and comprehensive settlement within the framework of international legitimacy."

He added: "Our priority at the current stage is to end the ongoing war in Gaza."

Regarding the Yemeni Houthi attacks in the Red Sea, Al Thani said: “We do not see that the military solution is the correct solution in response to what is happening in the Red Sea,” in reference to the coalition formed by Washington to deal with threats in the Red Sea.

Blinken said, "It is very important that Israel do more to protect civilians in Gaza and provide humanitarian aid."

He added, "The Houthi attacks in the Red Sea caused the disruption of more than 20% of international shipments, and caused harm to people across the world."

“The ongoing conflict could easily spread, causing greater suffering,” he said, adding: “We have an obligation to use our influence to avoid the emergence of new fronts in the current conflict.”

He continued: "We raise with Israel the need to do everything possible to deliver humanitarian aid to Gaza."

He said, "90% of the population of the Gaza Strip faces a severe food shortage," noting that "the immediate increase of aid in Gaza, especially in the north, is essential."

The US Secretary of State stated, "The United Nations can play a decisive role regarding the return of Palestinians to their homes in northern Gaza."

He added: "We reject the statements issued by officials in Israel regarding the displacement of Gaza's residents."

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) said on Sunday, “The pressure on the people of Gaza is enormous, and we do not know how long they will endure these harsh conditions without food, shelter and water.”

This came in an interview conducted by the American channel CNN, with Scott Anderson, Deputy Director of Gaza Operations at the UN agency, and the latter published its content on the “X” platform.

Anderson added, "The situation has become very difficult, especially since we are in the winter, and most of the population is living in tents."

He added, "Gaza has turned into a city of tents, and its residents are doing their best to live their lives and take care of their children."

The UN official stressed, "The pressure on the people of Gaza is enormous, and we do not know how long they will endure these harsh conditions, without food, shelter, water, and any basic amenities."

Last week, the Commissioner-General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), Philippe Lazzarini, said that the residents of Gaza are being subjected to “collective punishment” in light of the scarcity of humanitarian aid.

This came in a blog post he published on the X platform, on Thursday, about the situation in the besieged Gaza Strip, which is suffering under Israeli attacks.

Since last October 7, the Israeli army has been waging a devastating war on Gaza, which as of Sunday left 22,835 people dead, 58,416 wounded, massive infrastructure destruction and an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe, according to the Gaza Strip authorities and the United Nations.

The occupation municipality in Jerusalem announced, this evening, Sunday, its approval of the settlement plan called “Silicon Valley,” which aims to destroy the industrial zone in the Wadi al-Jouz neighborhood in Jerusalem, as well as the approval of the establishment of a garbage dump in northeastern occupied Jerusalem.

The first settlement project, called "Silicon Valley," extends along Wadi al-Jouz Road and Othman bin Affan Street, and buildings ranging from 8 to 14 floors will be built on the ruins of commercial and industrial shops in the Jerusalem Industrial Zone in Wadi al-Jouz.

The plan is located west of Wadi Al-Jouz Road, east and south of Dhu Al-Nourin Street, and north of Othman bin Affan Street.

Lawyer Muhannad Jabara, who submitted the petition against the project on behalf of the affected Jerusalemite citizens, said that the “Silicon Valley” plan is a disastrous plan for Jerusalemites, and it infringes upon the owners of businesses in the industrial zone and their property rights by seizing their shops, despite their need for housing and an industrial zone, and not for a settlement project that aims to remove an entire industrial zone for Jerusalemites. It was originally built before the occupation.

He said that the occupation municipality in Jerusalem is talking about a new neighborhood in the city, forgetting the presence of an Arab Jerusalemite neighborhood in the place, and that the classification of this plan for “high-tech” buildings limits residential projects in the Palestinian land, as Jerusalemites are allowed to build on only 10% of the area of their land in Jerusalem.

The occupation municipality in Jerusalem also approved the establishment of a garbage dump on an area of 109 dunams in a valley near Al-Issawiya, Anata, and Ras Shehadeh, east of occupied Jerusalem, where tens of thousands of Jerusalemites reside.

The plan began in 2012, when the municipality intended to establish the landfill on an area of 520 dunums in the same place, but the people of Jerusalem struggled legally for a full decade against the establishment of this landfill.

The landfill will have an area of 350,000 cubic metres, and will cause environmental damage to the private lands of Jerusalemites, after the occupation demolished 70 residential and commercial facilities to implement this plan.

This evening, Sunday, a citizen was injured in a settler attack on citizens in the northern Jordan Valley.

Moataz Bisharat, the official responsible for the settlement file in Tubas Governorate, said that Red Crescent crews transported a citizen who suffered bruises as a result of the colonists’ attack on residents’ tents in the “Shuwayar” area in the northern Jordan Valley.

He added that a large force of the occupation army rushed to the population center to protect the colonists, and prevented citizens from reaching the area and checking on families there.

This Sunday evening, dozens of settlers attacked the Al-Jawaya community in Masafer Yatta, south of Hebron, searched citizens’ homes, and caused damage to their contents.

Local sources said that dozens of settlers from the “Itzkhar Man” and “Maon” settlements, heavily armed and under the protection of the occupation forces, attacked the gathering, assaulted the citizens, and insulted them with obscene language.

The sources added that the settlers stormed a number of citizens' homes, tents, and their surroundings and caused damage to their property. The owners were known to include Mamdouh Abu Tabikh and Ahmed Nawaja'a, while they threatened the people with persecution and death unless they left the area.

-

Who sees the continuation of the useless war; Whoever sees the extent of killing and destruction in Gaza; Who wants to end the suffering of more than a million people? He must hope, at least in his heart, that next Thursday, the International Court of Justice in The Hague will issue a public interim order to stop the war. It is not easy for an Israeli to support an order against his country, and this could lead to punitive steps being taken against him, but is there another way to stop the war?

It is not easy for your country to be sued by a country that knows its regimes of injustice and evil, and whose leader was a moral role model throughout the world. It is not easy to be prosecuted in South Africa, and it is not easy to be accused of genocide committed by a country founded on the ruins of the largest genocide in the world.

It is not easy to ignore the suspicions hovering over Israel that it is committing the most horrific crimes against humanity and against international law. They are no longer talking about occupation, but about apartheid, transfer, ethnic cleansing, genocide, and what is more dangerous. It seems that today there is no other country in the world accused of these charges.

These charges cannot be refuted by anything, not even anti-Semitism, even if some of them are exaggerated and untrue. The indifference with which these charges are received in Israel, and going so far as to accuse the victim, is perhaps the best way to deny and reject, but this is not enough to clear Israel's name, reform, or heal..

More than 20 thousand dead within 3 months, including thousands of boys and children, massive destruction of entire provinces, which can only raise suspicion of genocide. Preposterous statements by key figures regarding the need to “cleanse” Gaza of its population, or eliminate them, raise strong suspicions of intent to carry out ethnic cleansing. Israel must be judged on both counts.

Israel did not fight this war to commit genocide, I have no doubt about that, but it is committing it, in practice, even if unintentionally. Every day that passes in this war, with hundreds of deaths, every day, this doubt increases. In The Hague, they need to prove prior intent, and they may not find it. Does this exonerate Israel?

The suspicion of planning ethnic cleansing, which the International Court of Justice will not currently examine, is well established. Here the intention is clear and public. Israel's defense of itself that central ministers do not represent the government is ridiculous. There is no doubt that anyone takes this seriously. If Bezalel Smotrich, who is calling for the transfer, does not represent the government, then why is he present in it? If Benjamin Netanyahu does not fire Itamar Ben Gvir, how can he be innocent of the accusation?

But in addition to all of this, it is the atmosphere prevailing in Israel that should worry us more than what is happening in The Hague. The prevailing hostile spirit indicates that the commission of war crimes has been given broad legitimacy. Ethnic cleansing in Gaza, and later in the West Bank, is the subject of the “for and against” debate, and the mass killing of Gazans is not at all discussed in Israeli public discourse.

The Gaza problem was created by Israel in 1948. It expelled hundreds of thousands of people to the Strip, in a complete process of ethnic cleansing of the south of the country. Ask Yigal Allon. Israel has never admitted its responsibility for this. Now, ministers are calling for an end to the task in the sector as well. The disgusting manner of the next day's discussion, based on what Israel will and will not do in Gaza, proves that the spirit of 1948 is not dead. This is what Israel did then, and what it wants to do again.

Whether the International Court of Justice decides that what is happening in Gaza is sufficient to accuse Israel of committing genocide or other war crimes, from a moral point of view, the answer is already known.

In a lengthy CNN report published on Sunday, the network refers to what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said three months ago, “speaking to citizens who were shaken by a horrific day of attacks launched by Hamas, asserting to himself that the Israeli army would be “Immediately deploy all its strength to destroy Hamas’ capabilities and we will destroy them,” but this goal seems far-fetched now, in light of Israeli statements that the Israeli army is moving to a new phase of its war on Hamas in Gaza “amid indications that its goals are changing as well.”

The network quotes Bilal Saab, associate fellow for the Middle East and North Africa at Chatham House, as saying: “The war record does not appear to be very conducive to military campaigns that seek to eliminate Hamas, the deeply rooted military-political movement.”

Saab said: “The Israeli army leadership is well aware that the most it can do is to severely weaken Hamas’ military capabilities.”

The network claims that Israel has witnessed some successes in this regard; Its forces claim to have killed thousands of Hamas fighters, including some high-ranking members, and dismantled some parts of the movement's vast tunnel network under the Strip, but challenges remain, and the endgame (the war) is far from the horizon, as there are few Countries at war setting war deadlines, Israeli officials have warned of a long war that could stretch across all of 2024 and beyond.

It will unfold before an international community increasingly alarmed by the extraordinary humanitarian crisis and mounting civilian deaths in Gaza, “and as international pressure grows, domestic unease with Netanyahu – an embattled prime minister keen to point to tangible victories – may also grow.”

Saab spoke to the network, explaining the main questions facing the Israeli leadership by saying, “There is a race against time. At what price will this tactical success come, and how much time do the Israelis have to achieve this tactical success without being exposed to greater international anger?”

"This type of mission cannot be completed. We have seen it fail over the years many times," Saab said.

Hamas's influence extends far beyond Gaza, meaning that the group's complete defeat is at least a major ambition for Israel, if it can be achieved at all.

It is noteworthy that in a speech he gave on the occasion of the anniversary of the attacks, Netanyahu reiterated his goals for the conflict: “Eliminating Hamas, returning our hostages and ensuring that Gaza will no longer pose a threat to Israel.” These are goals that experts feel are impossible to achieve, especially since it is not clear whether the leadership of the Israeli army is now placing the elimination of Hamas at its top priority. Israeli media have indicated that the head of Israeli military intelligence, Major General Aharon Haliva, did not address the issue of destroying Hamas when he mentioned military targets in a speech he delivered last Thursday (1/4/2024). ).

Also on Thursday, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Galant revealed plans for the next phase of the war in Gaza, stressing a new combat approach in the north and a continued focus on targeting Hamas leaders suspected of being in the Strip's southern territories.

The third phase will include Israeli army operations in northern Gaza, “raids, destruction of terror tunnels, air and ground activities, and special operations,” according to Gallant, and “this phase may be less intense, but it will take more time,” according to the report, which says, “If the goal is What is more realistic is that despite the severe reduction in Hamas' fighting capabilities, many analysts say that tangible progress has been made in the past three months.

The report attributed Yohanan Plesner, president of the Israel Democracy Institute and former Knesset member for the Kadima party, to CNN, saying, “The definition of success will not be to arrest or kill all Hamas activists, but rather to ensure that Hamas is unable to govern the Gaza Strip effectively. Hamas is an organization like "The army, with command and control centers, regiments and brigades. This command structure is being seriously challenged and dismantled."

It is noteworthy that Netanyahu said last week in a press conference in Tel Aviv that the Israeli army “is fighting with force and new systems above and below the ground,” and claimed that it had killed 8,000 Hamas fighters in Gaza, according to Israeli Army Radio (but CNN could not verify this number). .

The Ministry of Health in Gaza says that nearly 23,000 people have been killed in the Strip since the start of the war, and that about 70% of the dead or wounded are women and children.

Israel believed Hamas had about 30,000 fighters in Gaza before the war began on October 7, the Israeli military told CNN in December. The Israeli army told CNN that the fighters were divided into five brigades, 24 battalions and about 140 companies, each with capabilities that include anti-tank missiles, snipers and engineers, and arrays of missiles and mortars.

Israel also claimed some success in targeting Hamas' tunnel corridors, a complex that is difficult for Israeli army forces to penetrate. The Israeli army released a video this week that it said showed the dismantling of one of the tunnels under Al-Shifa Hospital, the largest medical complex in Gaza, which it accused Hamas of digging.

Last month, it published other videos that it said showed a network of tunnels connecting to the residences and offices of senior Hamas leaders, including Ismail Haniyeh, Yahya Sinwar, and Muhammad Deif, “but the larger goal of finding and killing the most important Hamas leaders in Gaza, remained... “Unattainable for Israel so far.”

Saab said: “This is where intelligence is the master of the situation, and organizations like these replace leaders quite easily, and I do not believe that there is anyone who cannot be replaced in the Hamas movement, and if Israel is able to eliminate the symbolic heads of the organization, who knows whether "That could have a trickle-down effect, especially with people who have military responsibilities."

The new phase of the Israeli war seems unlikely to bring relief to Palestinians trapped in Gaza, where the humanitarian crisis has escalated to extraordinary levels.

But Netanyahu may be more inclined to submit in the face of internal pressure, which has escalated in particular due to the continued capture of more than a hundred hostages taken by Hamas on October 7.

Israel believes 25 hostages are dead and still being held in Gaza, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's office told CNN on Friday. That leaves 107 hostages from last year's Hamas attack believed to be alive.

The return of these hostages remains a goal in the new phase of the war, but failure to achieve this would lead to intensifying political pressure on the decisive leader, whose popularity among Israelis has declined since October 7.