Gaza: SA’s bold move against Israel sparks global backlash

The government’s move to lodge before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) a case of war crimes ragainst Israel, calling for the arrest of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on allegations of a genocide against Palestinians, might turn some of SA’s global friends into enemies.

SA needs more allies to back its stance

And SA needs more allies to back its stance, a leading academic warned yesterday.

Already the United States – irked previously by SA’s refusal to condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine – has angrily attacked the judicial move.

The US this week criticised SA for bringing the genocide case against Israel before the UN’s apex court – rejecting accusations against its ally over the war in Gaza.

Kirby described the case as “meritless, counterproductive and completely without any basis in fact whatsoever”

White House National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby has described the case as “meritless, counterproductive and completely without any basis in fact whatsoever”.

ALSO READ: Türkiye, Malaysia, OIC back SA’s Gaza genocide case against Israel

“We have not at this point, seen acts that constitute genocide. Genocide is, of course, a heinous atrocity,” said state department spokesperson Matthew Miller.

The ICJ is next week expected to hold hearings on a filing by SA, alleging “genocidal acts against the people in Gaza” – seeking to order Israel to end its military operation. The court usually takes one or two weeks to decide on emergency measures after the hearings.

University of Johannesburg professor and director of Centre for Social Change, Patrick Bond, said SA needed “to garner support from many more countries to counter the Western governments’ generosity to the genocidaires”.

The ICC and the ICJ are ‘very weak’

Bond said the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the ICJ, were “very weak – as shown by inaction following (Russian President) Vladimir Putin’s prosecution for invading Ukraine two years ago and the Gambia’s attempt to halt Myanmar’s genocide of the Rohingya people last year”.

Highlighting that a possible risk could be faced by SA after lodging the case, Bond said: “One risk is continuing diplomatic lethargy by Pretoria’s new Brics+ allies.

ALSO READ: WHO chief deplores ‘unconscionable’ strikes on Red Crescent in Gaza

“Half of the expanded Brics bloc – India, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Ethiopia – has repeatedly acted in Israel’s interests against Palestine.

“Even Russia’s foreign minister last month claimed that ‘de-nazification’ represented a ‘nearly identical’ rationale for both the invasion of Ukraine and of Gaza. The coherence of Brics on foreign policy has always been chaotic, but never more so.

“Western leaders’ hypocrisy in supporting Israel is at least countered by widespread disgust in the citizenry. Among global civil society, South Africans have restored a degree of prestige in fighting apartheid, once again.”

Reflecting on SA’s moral standing, Bond said: “If the ICC and ICJ efforts fail, there are two further steps: breaking diplomatic ties, as parliament mandated, and embarking on fresh boycott, divestment, sanctions (BDS) efforts.

“The El Al flights and military ties to the Israeli firm, Elbit, by South Africa’s Paramount Group, should be (cut). The main SA export – at $100 million a year – is coal and already a just transition approach to protect affected workers and communities is being developed because of climate change responsibilities.

ALSO READ: WATCH: ‘South Africa will win an order against Israel’ for genocide in Gaza – Expert

“After all, South Africa’s freedom was rapidly enhanced in mid1985 by financial BDS, which crippled the white power structure and forced big business to finally begin negotiations for democracy.

“The moral stance against both the current genocide and longerterm Israeli apartheid, requires an end to diplomatic and economic-cultural-sporting ties.”

On a perception that the ANC was pushing an anti-Israel stance to woo voter support in this year’s national polls: Bond said: “I tend to see South Africa’s foreign policy not in electoral terms, because so few people vote with Palestine solidarity in mind – but instead as a reflection of talk-left, walk-right tendencies deep in the nationalist psyche.”

SA Jewish Board of Deputies has condemned SA’s move

Meanwhile, the SA Jewish Board of Deputies has condemned SA’s move. “Rather than play a positive role, South Africa has chosen to expend its time and energy in filing a case against Israel at the International Court of Justice,” it said in part.