While advisory opinions of judges at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) are non-binding, they carry weight under international law and Friday’s damning indictment of Israel’s 57-year-old occupation of Palestinian territory is likely to weaken support for Israel on the global stage.
As expected, the Israeli response was extremely critical.
“The Jewish people are not occupiers in their own land – not in our eternal capital Jerusalem, not in the land of our ancestors in Judea and Samaria,” said prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, referring to the Biblical name for the occupied West Bank. “No false decision in The Hague will distort this historical truth, just as the legality of Israeli settlement in all the territories of our homeland cannot be contested,” he said.
Israel’s foreign ministry rejected the ICJ’s advisory opinion, describing it as politically biased and “completely detached” from reality, criticising the ruling for “ignoring” the atrocities committed by Hamas on October 7th.
The ministry also noted that the opinion “contradicts” the principle that peace can only be achieved through “direct negotiations”, accusing the Palestinian Authority of using international tribunals to undermine Israel.
The ICJ has no executive arm to enforce its decisions. However, its member states can appeal to the United Nations Security Council to implement court decisions. Under such a scenario, Israel will expect the US to use it veto power.
The US administration is expected to respond positively to such a request. However, major differences are emerging between Israel and the US over the conditions for ending the Gaza war and bringing about the release of the Israeli hostages. A US veto at the UN Security Council may come at a cost of more Israeli concessions to bring about an end to the conflict in Gaza.
Other western states considered friendly towards Israel are likely to stand by the court’s decision, and some may even consider sanctions on Israel if it disobeys court orders.
The US and western states have recently introduced sanctions against individual settlers and radical right-wing groups, and Friday’s decision is likely to lead to more punitive measures.
The World Court ruling increased Israel’s sense of isolation. It joins the recent decision by prosecutor Karim Khan of the International Criminal Court in The Hague to request arrest warrants for Mr Netanyahu and defence minister Yoav Gallant.
But Israel remains defiant. The day before the ICJ ruling, the Knesset parliament affirmed its opposition to the establishment of a Palestinian state. The declarative proposal was supported by 68 right-wing and centrist members of the 120-member chamber.
Israeli finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, head of the far-right Religious Zionism party, posted on X: “The answer to The Hague: Sovereignty now” (referring to Israeli annexation of the West Bank). National security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, head of the far-right Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Strength), was even more outspoken. “The decision in The Hague proves for the umpteenth time that this is a distinctly anti-Semitic and political organisation,” he said. “We will not accept moral preaching from them, the time has come for governance and sovereignty.”
Israel’s two far-right parties, along with many parliamentarians from Netanyahu’s ruling Likud party, support annexation of the West Bank and Smotrich has been pursuing a policy of de facto annexation since he was given ministerial responsibility for West Bank civilian affairs in the current government.
Many on the right also see the current war in Gaza as an opportunity to renew Jewish settlement in the area. All 21 Jewish settlements were evacuated and destroyed as part of the 2005 disengagement adopted by then prime minister Ariel Sharon.
- Listen to our Inside Politics Podcast for the latest analysis and chat
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date