For some reason, the journalists at Associated Press think that the recent International Court of Justice (ICJ) hearings on genocide in Gaza strike “at the heart of Israel’s national identity”. In what way, we are not told. Presumably, this has the same logic as claiming that raising concerns about the Sri Lankan military’s conduct towards the end of the separatist war constituted a threat to Sri Lanka’s national identity, as opposed to, say, the interests of its Government.
If charges of genocide strike at the heart of Israel’s identity, then does that mean that genocide has become the raison d’etre of that country’s identity? Does it thrive on genocide, on the systematic subjugation and extermination of the people of Gaza and Palestine?
Israel does not seem to see it as genocide, but half of the world does. They have been careful enough to draw a line between the people of Israel and the actions of the most right-wing Government that has ever been elected to power in the country. But there are an awful lot of people who think that, come what may, the actions of the current Government should be justified at all costs, since they feel that it justifies Israel’s right to exist also.
Tectonic shifts
The Global South, for the most, does not see things that way. The US does. But the US has always been content in playing Israel’s public relations front. The West in general toed this line and played that role, but recent developments have pushed several Western countries to move away and adopt independent positions, more in line with the Global South. It is in light of these tectonic shifts, these changing tides of global opinion, that one must comment on South Africa’s impressive case against Israel at the ICJ.
If the ICJ hearing doesn’t actually achieve what South Africa and its supporters intended, it at least showed the world that international law need not be the preserve of the West, the so-called international community. Much of the West is now all but silent on the question of Gaza: for them it does not exist, and if it does, it is peripheral to Israel’s right to bombard the people living, or more correctly suffering, there.
The hypocrisy is so clear and out there that Sri Lankans of all political inclinations are calling it out. When the Ambassador of a Western country tweeted one of those obligatory messages about the freedom of the press and the rights of journalists on the occasion of Lasantha Wickrematunge’s death anniversary, there was a cascade of comments critiquing it and denouncing the selectivity of that particular country’s Government in the face of deaths of so many journalists in Gaza. Clearly the West has lost the plot, and even its most fervent supporters in Sri Lanka, who once regarded it highly, no longer do so.
Genocide
In response to the ICJ hearings, the Israeli Government has accused South Africa of being hypocritical. “This is an upside-down world,” its statement runs. “The State of Israel is accused of genocide while it is fighting genocide.”
But what genocide is it fighting? It frequently invokes the 7 October attacks, which left more than 1,200 Israelis dead. Yet no one critical of the Israeli Government’s reaction to those attacks are even remotely condoning what Hamas did.
Hamas is a terrorist outfit, the rival of a much more secular outfit, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), which Israel’s intelligence services did their best to undermine. Hamas came in the aftermath of Mossad’s efforts at weakening the PLO; in the end, the PLO and its political arm, Fatah, had to yield place to a more intolerant and less secular outfit. The only genocide one notices here is the genocide that has been playing out in Gaza since 1967. It is this that has provoked one outfit after another to take up arms or violent struggle against the Israeli State.
Fine line
To understand the actions of these outfits is not to condone them – a point that the Israeli Government seems to have conveniently left out, as they accuse one country after another of being quiet in front of Hamas atrocities and being open to only the Israeli Government’s actions. Israel here seems to think that the world has chosen to ignore Hamas’s attacks. But there is a line, and a fine one, between the excesses of a terrorist outfit that sees no calling higher than themselves and a government bound by international legal norms. The balance that must be struck here is between a state’s legitimate right to self-defence and the nature and scale of its response to terrorist attacks.
On all fronts, in Israel’s case, that response has been disproportionate. But the West does not see it that way. The West is busy condemning Houthi rebels for disrupting international trade and freedom of navigation. Yet the Houthis are responding to Israel’s occupation of Gaza: an occupation now being openly criticised as illegal, as an even worse contravention of international law.
The US Government has, predictably, dismissed these accusations, claiming that Israel committed no genocide. But the rest of the West, and regions like Oceania, have now abandoned the US’ position. Even Ukraine, which could once be counted on to support the US, abstained at the last UNGA resolution on Gaza.
Sri Lanka
For its part, Sri Lanka seems to be trying to have the cake and eat it too. On the one hand, it has voted consistently for Gaza and Palestine at the UN. At the same time, the President convened a meeting of several Middle East leaders and restated his belief in a two-state solution, even though several months ago he spoke of a four-state solution. On the other hand, his Government has finalised plans to deploy vessels to the Red Sea, to join the US-led ‘Operation Prosperity Guardian’ in its campaign against Houthi rebels.
What all this means for Sri Lanka’s future in the Global South, no one can tell. But we are living through a historical moment, a turning point if ever there was one. Sri Lanka, and the rest of the Global South, would do well to heed it, to make sure that what it does is not construed as contradictory to where we are heading now. What happens in the Hague will thus have a bearing on countries like ours. We can only watch and wait.
(The writer is the Chief International Relations Analyst at Factum, an Asia-Pacific focused foreign policy think tank based in Colombo and accessible via www.factum.lk. He can be reached at uditha@factum.lk.)