Middle East Crisis: U.N. Court Rejects Request to Halt German Arms Sales to Israel
The International Court of Justice on Tuesday decided against ordering Germany to stop supplying arms to Israel, issuing an interim ruling in response to a request from Nicaragua.
The judges’ ruling pertained to a case brought by Nicaragua against Germany with potentially wide implications on whether suppliers of military aid to Israel share some responsibility for how the weapons are used.
In its case, Nicaragua argued that Germany is facilitating the commission of genocide in Gaza and violating the Genocide Convention by providing Israel with military and financial aid. It had asked the I.C.J., the United Nations’ highest court, to issue an emergency order for Germany to stop providing arms to Israel and to ensure that those already supplied were not unlawfully used. On Tuesday, the judges refused.
Appearing before the judges in early April, Nicaragua, a longstanding supporter of the Palestinian cause, told the court that Germany was not only failing in its obligations to help avoid genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, but was also facilitating crimes with its military assistance. Germany is a staunch ally of Israel and second only to the United States in providing it with military assistance.
The German Foreign Ministry welcomed the court’s ruling.
“Germany is not a party to the conflict in the Middle East — on the contrary: We are working day and night for a two-state solution,” it said in a statement posted on social media. Adding that Germany was also working to ensure that humanitarian aid reaches Gazans, the ministry said Hamas was responsible for setting off a “spiral of suffering” in the region, against which it said Israel had a right to defend itself.
Both Germany and Nicaragua are parties to the 1948 Genocide Convention, which binds them to act to prevent genocide, defined as the intent to destroy a group not only by killing or causing serious bodily or mental harm, but also by inflicting “conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”
Israel has repeatedly denied accusations that it is committing genocide in Gaza, arguing that its military has worked to preserve civilian life and that Hamas has used civilians as human shields.
Earlier this year, the I.C.J. issued separate interim orders requested by South Africa, specifying that Israel must prevent its forces in Gaza from taking actions that are banned under the Genocide Convention, must prevent and punish public statements that constitute incitements to genocide, and must allow more access to humanitarian aid. The judges also called for immediate release of all hostages still held by Hamas.
The court is expected to take at least two years to rule on the question of whether Israel has committed genocide but found a “plausible” risk of genocide.
Germany had strongly rejected arguments that it has been violating international law with its military exports to Israel, saying the shipments are always licensed under German and European rules. But the main thrust of its argument was that in fact, almost all of its recent military assistance to Israel was nonlethal aid.
Unlike Germany, which has given the court full jurisdiction, the United States has shielded itself and on most issues has to consent to a case. It has protected itself even further from the Genocide Convention, signing the convention but exempting itself from any obligations, such as intervening to stop a genocide or paying reparations if it were found to be complicit.
Critics of the Nicaraguan government say that its pursuit of Germany for breaking international law is hypocritical: A recent U.N. report accused Nicaragua of “systematic human rights violations” and increasing repression of government opponents at home.
Erika Solomon contributed reporting.
Source – NY Times
