Latest news with #FrankvanBeek
IOL News
11-07-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
The Global South Fights Back in Bogotá
The mass mobilisation of people against the genocide in the West has been critically important. So too has South Africa's case at the International Court of Justice, writes Imraan Buccus. Image: UN Photo/ICJ-CIJ/Frank van Beek Imraan Buccus The decision by the United States to sanction Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, is a direct attack on international law and multilateralism. The world is in a perilous place. The ongoing genocide in Gaza, as well as recent unlawful military strikes on Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, and Iran, are a profound threat to peace, justice, and the integrity of international law. In this context, some of those who have taken a stand for international law have, like Albanese, faced intense pressure. But the tide is now clearly turning. The mass mobilisation of people against the genocide in the West has been critically important. So too has South Africa's case at the International Court of Justice. It was met with widespread international acclaim by progressive forces across the world and many governments in the Global South — but also considerable hostility from the United States. After months of threatening talk, punitive tariffs have now been imposed on South Africa by the US home, South Africa's position at the ICJ has won wide support from within society, including popular organisations outside of the ANC like NUMSA, Abahlali baseMjondolo, and SAFTU, as well as the ANC-aligned trade union federation COSATU. The ANC's support is in steep decline at the polls, but its principled position on Palestine places it in tune with the sentiments of the vast majority of South Israel and the United States have received vociferous support from a small but strident white-dominated pro-Western lobby at home. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ That lobby has attempted to isolate and smear those who have stood up for justice. There have been character assassinations of a number of decent people, and considerable peddling of conspiracy theories, such as the entirely un-evidenced claim that Iran bribed the ANC to take Israel to the ICJ. With growing pressure abroad and an aggressive pro-West lobby at home, South Africa needed a smart and effective diplomatic strategy to ensure that it could hold the line on its principles without being isolated. In January, South Africa convened the first meeting of what is now called the Hague Group — a new bloc of states committed to the defence of international law. That meeting brought together nine countries from across the Global South, including Asia, Africa, and Latin America, that share a deep concern about what is now widely termed the genocide in Gaza. One of the most important immediate consequences of South Africa's ICJ action has been the widespread uptake of the term 'genocide' to describe what is happening in Gaza. For months, this word was taboo in diplomatic settings. Now, it is shaping how states and publics frame the conflict. That linguistic shift marks an increasingly effective challenge to the Western domination of the moral and legal Colombia and South Africa are co-convening the next high-level meeting of the Hague Group in Bogotá on 15–16 July. This is a major diplomatic coup for both countries. Colombia, under the leadership of Gustavo Petro, is home to one of the most progressive governments in the world. Together, these two countries are building a new axis of international cooperation, rooted in justice, legality, and human rights. The countries that have already confirmed participation in the meeting in Bogotá include: Algeria, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Namibia, Nicaragua, Oman, Portugal, Qatar, Serbia, Spain, Türkiye, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay, and Palestine. More countries are currently discussing participation. The Hague Group is not simply reacting to the crisis in Gaza. It is attempting to build the institutional foundations for an enduring Global South capacity to intervene in multilateral processes. It is the crowning achievement of what has been an extraordinarily successful diplomatic strategy by South Africa. While our country is confronting serious domestic challenges — unemployment, mass impoverishment, crime, and out-of-control corruption — its stance in the international sphere has shown that a principled foreign policy, rooted in the traditions of the anti-apartheid struggle, still has the power to resonate globally and to win global support. As Ronnie Kasrils recently argued, the Hague Group carries the spirit of Bandung into the 21st century. In 1955, leaders of newly independent Asian and African nations gathered in Indonesia to affirm their commitment to sovereignty, non-alignment, and cooperation outside the Cold War binary. That historic conference laid the foundation for the Non-Aligned Movement. From the 1960s onwards, newly independent states sought to use the UN system to push for economic redistribution, anti-colonial enforcement, and disarmament. That effort was eventually thwarted by Western powers. But the memory of that unfinished project remains—and informs this new the end of the Cold War, the moral and legal authority of the international system set up after World War II has been held hostage by a small group of powerful states. The Hague Group insists that international law must apply consistently—to all countries, regardless of their power. It is this insistence that rattles Washington and its allies. The same international legal system that was brazenly ignored by the West during the invasions of Iraq, Libya and the bombing of Yugoslavia is now being invoked by the Global South to demand accountability and role in this process should not be underestimated. Once a key ally of US regional strategy in Latin America, Colombia has undergone a dramatic realignment under President Gustavo Petro. As I wrote in the Mail & Guardian earlier this year, Petro's government, which brought together students, workers, environmentalists, and Indigenous communities, is one of the most progressive in the world today. It has been outspoken in its support for Palestinian rights, regional peace, and climate justice. By co-convening the Bogotá meeting, Colombia is placing itself firmly in the camp of internationalist, law-based diplomacy. This marks a departure not only from past governments, but from the cynical realism that still defines so much of Hague Group's credibility also rests on the fact that it is not just the product of elite diplomacy. In South Africa, Colombia, and many other countries that are participating in the meeting in Bogotá, there is tremendous popular support for Palestine. This alignment between state policy and popular movements is rare—and it gives the group an authenticity that cannot be dismissed as political posturing. Moreover, the Hague Group has been warmly received by many Palestinian organisations, who see it as a rare and concrete gesture of solidarity in an era of global abandonment. Inevitably, the Arab states that have 'normalised' ties with Israel have been conspicuously silent, but others—like Iraq, Lebanon, and Qatar—have chosen to engage. Taking this stance is not without risk. Countries that challenge the West's narrative have faced the threat of aid withdrawal, diplomatic isolation, and investment flight. South Africa, Colombia, and many other countries that are taking a stand in support of international law and justice have pro-West blocs at home that do all they can to escalate the sense that standing up for principle is risky.
IOL News
11-07-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
The Global South Fights Back in Bogotá
The mass mobilisation of people against the genocide in the West has been critically important. So too has South Africa's case at the International Court of Justice, writes Imraan Buccus. Image: UN Photo/ICJ-CIJ/Frank van Beek Imraan Buccus The decision by the United States to sanction Francesca Albanese, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories, is a direct attack on international law and multilateralism. The world is in a perilous place. The ongoing genocide in Gaza, as well as recent unlawful military strikes on Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, and Iran, are a profound threat to peace, justice, and the integrity of international law. In this context, some of those who have taken a stand for international law have, like Albanese, faced intense pressure. But the tide is now clearly turning. The mass mobilisation of people against the genocide in the West has been critically important. So too has South Africa's case at the International Court of Justice. It was met with widespread international acclaim by progressive forces across the world and many governments in the Global South — but also considerable hostility from the United States. After months of threatening talk, punitive tariffs have now been imposed on South Africa by the US home, South Africa's position at the ICJ has won wide support from within society, including popular organisations outside of the ANC like NUMSA, Abahlali baseMjondolo, and SAFTU, as well as the ANC-aligned trade union federation COSATU. The ANC's support is in steep decline at the polls, but its principled position on Palestine places it in tune with the sentiments of the vast majority of South Israel and the United States have received vociferous support from a small but strident white-dominated pro-Western lobby at home. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ That lobby has attempted to isolate and smear those who have stood up for justice. There have been character assassinations of a number of decent people, and considerable peddling of conspiracy theories, such as the entirely un-evidenced claim that Iran bribed the ANC to take Israel to the ICJ. With growing pressure abroad and an aggressive pro-West lobby at home, South Africa needed a smart and effective diplomatic strategy to ensure that it could hold the line on its principles without being isolated. In January, South Africa convened the first meeting of what is now called the Hague Group — a new bloc of states committed to the defence of international law. That meeting brought together nine countries from across the Global South, including Asia, Africa, and Latin America, that share a deep concern about what is now widely termed the genocide in Gaza. One of the most important immediate consequences of South Africa's ICJ action has been the widespread uptake of the term 'genocide' to describe what is happening in Gaza. For months, this word was taboo in diplomatic settings. Now, it is shaping how states and publics frame the conflict. That linguistic shift marks an increasingly effective challenge to the Western domination of the moral and legal Colombia and South Africa are co-convening the next high-level meeting of the Hague Group in Bogotá on 15–16 July. This is a major diplomatic coup for both countries. Colombia, under the leadership of Gustavo Petro, is home to one of the most progressive governments in the world. Together, these two countries are building a new axis of international cooperation, rooted in justice, legality, and human rights. The countries that have already confirmed participation in the meeting in Bogotá include: Algeria, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Chile, China, Cuba, Djibouti, Honduras, Indonesia, Iraq, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Namibia, Nicaragua, Oman, Portugal, Qatar, Serbia, Spain, Türkiye, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Uruguay, and Palestine. More countries are currently discussing participation. The Hague Group is not simply reacting to the crisis in Gaza. It is attempting to build the institutional foundations for an enduring Global South capacity to intervene in multilateral processes. It is the crowning achievement of what has been an extraordinarily successful diplomatic strategy by South Africa. While our country is confronting serious domestic challenges — unemployment, mass impoverishment, crime, and out-of-control corruption — its stance in the international sphere has shown that a principled foreign policy, rooted in the traditions of the anti-apartheid struggle, still has the power to resonate globally and to win global support. As Ronnie Kasrils recently argued, the Hague Group carries the spirit of Bandung into the 21st century. In 1955, leaders of newly independent Asian and African nations gathered in Indonesia to affirm their commitment to sovereignty, non-alignment, and cooperation outside the Cold War binary. That historic conference laid the foundation for the Non-Aligned Movement. From the 1960s onwards, newly independent states sought to use the UN system to push for economic redistribution, anti-colonial enforcement, and disarmament. That effort was eventually thwarted by Western powers. But the memory of that unfinished project remains—and informs this new the end of the Cold War, the moral and legal authority of the international system set up after World War II has been held hostage by a small group of powerful states. The Hague Group insists that international law must apply consistently—to all countries, regardless of their power. It is this insistence that rattles Washington and its allies. The same international legal system that was brazenly ignored by the West during the invasions of Iraq, Libya and the bombing of Yugoslavia is now being invoked by the Global South to demand accountability and role in this process should not be underestimated. Once a key ally of US regional strategy in Latin America, Colombia has undergone a dramatic realignment under President Gustavo Petro. As I wrote in the Mail & Guardian earlier this year, Petro's government, which brought together students, workers, environmentalists, and Indigenous communities, is one of the most progressive in the world today. It has been outspoken in its support for Palestinian rights, regional peace, and climate justice. By co-convening the Bogotá meeting, Colombia is placing itself firmly in the camp of internationalist, law-based diplomacy. This marks a departure not only from past governments, but from the cynical realism that still defines so much of Hague Group's credibility also rests on the fact that it is not just the product of elite diplomacy. In South Africa, Colombia, and many other countries that are participating in the meeting in Bogotá, there is tremendous popular support for Palestine. This alignment between state policy and popular movements is rare—and it gives the group an authenticity that cannot be dismissed as political posturing. Moreover, the Hague Group has been warmly received by many Palestinian organisations, who see it as a rare and concrete gesture of solidarity in an era of global abandonment. Inevitably, the Arab states that have 'normalised' ties with Israel have been conspicuously silent, but others—like Iraq, Lebanon, and Qatar—have chosen to engage. Taking this stance is not without risk. Countries that challenge the West's narrative have faced the threat of aid withdrawal, diplomatic isolation, and investment flight. South Africa, Colombia, and many other countries that are taking a stand in support of international law and justice have pro-West blocs at home that do all they can to escalate the sense that standing up for principle is risky.
IOL News
12-06-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
South African government criticises US sanctions on ICC for undermining the rule of law
The South African government has strongly slammed the United States for imposing sanctions on judges of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Image: UN Photo/ICJ-CIJ/Frank van Beek The South African government has expressed deep concern over United States sanctions targeting judges of the International Criminal Court, calling it a 'direct affront to the principles of international justice and the rule of law.' 'These measures, in addition to those imposed earlier on the Prosecutor, represent a direct affront to the principles of international justice and the rule of law,' said Chrispin Phiri, spokesperson for the Minister of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco), Ronald Lamola. Phiri stated that these punitive actions against judicial officers fulfilling their mandated duties are regrettable, as they undermine the independence of the ICC and jeopardise the integrity of international legal institutions. 'They furthermore hinder the Court and its personnel in the exercise of their independent judicial functions.' He said South Africa, as a founding member of the ICC, views these sanctions and previous threats as an attempt to intimidate and obstruct the Court's efforts to hold perpetrators of the most serious crimes accountable. 'The ICC operates under the Rome Statute, to which 125 states are parties, and its mandate is to prosecute individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression when national jurisdictions are unwilling or unable to do so.' Phiri said the imposition of sanctions on ICC judges sets a 'dangerous precedent' that could embolden those who seek to evade accountability for egregious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. 'It also poses a significant challenge to the global fight against impunity and the enforcement of international norms.' 'South Africa reaffirms its commitment to the principles enshrined in the Rome Statute and will continue to work with like-minded nations to safeguard the integrity of the international legal institution,' he added. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ According to Phiri, this highlights the country's participation in the Hague Group, a coalition of countries dedicated to defending the rulings and authority of the ICC and the International Court of Justice (ICJ). 'The pursuit of justice for victims of the gravest crimes must not be compromised by political considerations.' 'Upholding the rule of law and ensuring accountability are essential for the maintenance of international peace and security as well as a rules-based international order based on international law,' Phiri added. Meanwhile, IOL News previously reported that Dirco said it was not fazed by reports that the US may impose sanctions on the ICC, an independent global judicial institution dedicated to combating impunity for the gravest crimes against humanity. The US sanctions package is designed to target individual ICC personnel, judges, and prosecutors, classifying them as an organisation threatening the interests of the US government. According to reports, these measures aim to create conditions allowing the court to independently withdraw its arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.
IOL News
06-05-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
South Africa's moral leadership on Palestine must not be betrayed
Amidst a national crisis, South Africa stands firm in its moral leadership on Palestine. This article critiques calls for rapprochement with Israel, arguing that abandoning this stance would betray the principles of justice and solidarity that define our history, argues the writer. Image: UN Photo/ICJ-CIJ/Frank van Beek Imraan Buccus South Africa is in deep crisis. The scale of unemployment, the collapse of public services, the precipitous decline of major cities, and pervasive corruption have left many people disillusioned. The ANC, once the bearer of our democratic hopes, has squandered much of its legitimacy. It would be naïve to deny these failures. But amid this bleak domestic reality, there is one area where South Africa has stood firm and offered rare global moral leadership: its unwavering support for the Palestinian people. That principled stance, culminating in the genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice, has resonated across the globe and reminded many of what ethical internationalism can look like in an age of cynicism. Why Normalising Ties with Israel Is Morally Indefensible It is precisely because of this moral clarity that William Gumede's recent call in the Sunday Times for rapprochement with Israel is so alarming. In his piece, Gumede argues that the Government of National Unity should reinstate ties with Israel, drop its genocide application at the ICJ, and learn from countries like India and China that have maintained economic relations with Israel despite ongoing atrocities. But this position is morally indefensible. At a time when the Israeli state is executing a campaign of mass slaughter in Gaza — described as genocide not just by South Africa but by leading legal scholars, UN experts, and global human rights organisations — to advocate normalisation is to capitulate to power over principle. The Hidden Networks Behind the Call for Rapprochement Gumede couches his argument in the language of pragmatism. He invokes trade, technology, and economic growth. But there are moments in history when pragmatism, stripped of principle, becomes complicity. The brutal reality unfolding in Gaza — the killing of over 50,000 people, the use of starvation as a weapon, the targeted bombing of hospitals and schools — is not a sideshow to be politely ignored while we talk commerce. It is the central question of our moral standing in the world. For South Africa, a country whose freedom was won with the solidarity of the world's peoples, to turn its back on another people facing annihilation would be a betrayal of our history and of the very idea of justice. Gumede's article fails to disclose his deep entanglement in Western-funded networks that are aggressively hostile to South Africa's stance on Palestine. His NGO, the Democracy Works Foundation, has received substantial support from actors including the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), the Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD), and the International Republican Institute (IRI). USAID and the IRI are part of a wider ecosystem of 'democracy promotion' that drives the foreign policy objectives of the US. Exporting Democracy — or Engineering Regime Change? For decades the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was one of the central institutions in this ecosystem. USAID, operating under the guidance of the U.S. State Department, allocated billions annually to advance what it called development and democratic governance. But it did so in ways that reinforced U.S. economic and geopolitical interests. In November 2023, Democracy Works Foundation (DWF) was awarded a $4.5 million cooperative agreement by the US Mission to South Africa. This funding directly tied the DWF to a foreign government with a long record of shielding Israel from international accountability. Of course, Donald Trump's presidency took an axe to USAID, as part of a broader shift in US foreign policy away from multilateralism and soft power diplomacy toward a more openly coercive and transactional posture. However, this retreat from traditional 'democracy promotion' strategies does not fundamentally alter the ideological infrastructure that organisations like Democracy Works Foundation are part of. In fact, in the context of declining funding, there is now a strong incentive for organisations like DWF to show their commitment to US foreign policy in order to compete for a shrinking funding pool. The National Endowment for Democracy (NED), created in 1983 by the US Congress, is another key player. It was designed to take over many of the political functions once carried out by the CIA, under the more acceptable banner of civil society support. As the NED's first president Allen Weinstein openly acknowledged, "A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA." The NED operates through four core institutes: the International Republican Institute (IRI), the National Democratic Institute (NDI), the Center for International Private Enterprise (CIPE), and the Solidarity Center. It has funded projects across the world that align with U.S. strategic interests. While it promotes itself as an NGO, the NED is funded and supervised by the US Congress and plays a strategic role in US foreign policy. As leading academics have repeatedly shown, the NED has played a significant role in many US-backed coups and attempted coups against elected governments around the world. Among the NED's grantees, the International Republican Institute (the IRI) has played a particularly prominent role. Founded in 1983 and closely linked to the US Republican Party, the IRI has an extensive history of interventionist programming under the banner of "party development" and "democratic reform." It has supported regime change efforts in Haiti, Venezuela, and Honduras — all countries where left-wing governments or movements challenged US power. In South Africa, the Democracy Works Foundation has partnered with the IRI to build the capacity of political parties across Southern Africa. These initiatives may seem innocuous, but they must be read against the backdrop of the IRI's ideological commitments and political history. An organisation like the IRI does not give money for projects that it does not deem to be ideologically aligned to its core mission. When an NGO long embedded in these kinds of structures begins calling for rapprochement with a state accused of genocide, it would be naïve in the extreme to think that it is not acting as a part of a broader ecosystem of Western imperial power. It is a real political alignment that should be a matter of public concern.
IOL News
29-04-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
South Africa presents its arguments against Israel at the ICJ over human rights violations
South Africa's legal battle against Israel at the ICJ: A call for accountability and justice Image: UN Photo/ICJ-CIJ/Frank van Beek South Africa is taking to the international stage on Tuesday, presenting its case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) at The Hague, challenging Israel's aggression and genocide in the Palestinian territories. South Africa's government has accused Israel of violating international law through its ongoing occupation of Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem and Gaza, where the Israeli forces have allegedly killed more than 52,000 people. The country alleged that Israel's settlement expansion, restrictions on movement, and military operations amount to violations of human rights and international humanitarian law. Central to South Africa's argument is the claim that Israel's actions amount to a form of apartheid—systematic segregation and discrimination—reminiscent of South Africa's history of institutionalised racial segregation. South Africa is calling for the ICJ to hold Israel accountable, demanding an end to what it describes as illegal occupation and urging the international community to enforce measures that uphold Palestinian sovereignty and human rights. South Africa's Arguments and Diplomatic Stance In its presentation earlier on Tuesday, the South African delegation emphasised the importance of international law in safeguarding human dignity. They cited numerous UN resolutions condemning settlement activities and military actions deemed disproportionate or punitive. South Africa also highlighted the suffering of Palestinian civilians—including children, women, and the elderly—caught in the crossfire, with reports of destruction of homes, restricted access to essentials, and ongoing violence. South Africa's government has continuously reiterated its stance that the Israeli government must be held accountable for actions that violate international norms. They called for an immediate halt to settlement expansion, unrestricted humanitarian access to Gaza, and renewed efforts for a peaceful resolution based on a two-state solution. International Condemnation and the Global Response Numerous international organisations have strongly condemned South Africa's legal challenge. The United Nations has issued multiple statements condemning Israeli policies. The UN Human Rights Council's recent March report described Israeli settlement expansion as 'a violation of international law and an obstacle to peace,' calling on Israel to cease such activities immediately. 'The ongoing destruction of Palestinian homes and the displacement of families constitute serious violations of international humanitarian law,' UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk stated. The Arab League and several African nations have vocally supported South Africa's stance, with the Arab League fully rallying behind the country's efforts to restore peace in Gaza. 'Israel's actions in Palestinian territories constitute a blatant violation of international norms and human rights. We stand with South Africa in seeking justice.'
