SA-Israel case | Pandor welcomes ICJ order

Summary

The South African Minister of International Relations discusses the recent ruling by the International Court of Justice ordering provisional measures against Israel regarding alleged human rights violations in Palestine. She expresses satisfaction with the ruling to provide humanitarian aid and reduce harm against civilians, though notes the court did not specify a ceasefire. The minister calls on Israel to comply, hoping this moves parties toward a two-state solution. She asserts the focus should be supporting the Palestinian people enduring harm, not South Africa's relations with Israel.

Takeaways

• 😊 The South African minister thanked the ICJ judges for dealing with the case urgently given the need to protect civilians in Palestine
• 😞 The case was about ensuring international bodies exercise responsibility to protect civilians globally
• 🤔 South Africa felt it had to act and report to the ICJ given the large number of Palestinians being killed
• 😠 The minister agrees Hamas should release the hostages they are holding
• 👍 The minister believes negotiations for a two-state solution should happen now to decisively end the conflict
• 😕 The minister would have wanted a ceasefire specifically called out in the ICJ judgment
• 💪 The minister feels the monthly reporting requirement in the judgment is very significant
• 😡 The minister has never been hopeful about Israel conforming but hopes its powerful friends advise it should
• 🤨 The case sends a clear signal and tests whether Israel will respect international law
• 😢 The minister stands with the people of Palestine and tells them to never give up hope

Q & A

What was the significant reaction from the US regarding South Africa's involvement in a case related to Israel and Palestine?

Lawmakers in the US expressed disgust with South Africa's process, calling the case meritless and baseless.

How did South Africa respond to the criticism of their case being meritless?

South Africa defended their case by stating it was based on provisional measures requested, highlighting that even Israel, despite not being obliged to, showed support for the Court's work by presenting its side of the story due to its signature on the genocide convention.

What was the purpose of South Africa's case before the International Court of Justice?

The purpose was to address the urgent need to protect innocent civilians in Palestine and to ensure that humanitarian aid is provided, along with basic services by Israel, the occupier and administrator in Palestine.

Did the International Court of Justice order a ceasefire in the conflict between Israel and Palestine?

The Court did not specifically order a ceasefire, but measures to reduce harm and provide humanitarian aid, which implicitly requires a ceasefire, were emphasized.

What were the views of the South African Minister on Israel conforming to the Court's orders?

The Minister expressed skepticism about Israel's compliance but hoped that Israel's powerful friends would advise it to act according to the Court's directives.

What implications did South Africa foresee if Israel did not conform to the International Court of Justice's orders?

Non-conformance by Israel could set a negative precedent, potentially emboldening abusers in conflicts worldwide, undermining respect for international law.

What was South Africa's stance on the relationship with Israel following the Court's decision?

The focus was not on South Africa's ties with Israel but on the plight of the Palestinian people, emphasizing the need to address their suffering and rights.

What was the South African Minister's hope for the outcome of the International Court of Justice's decision?

The hope was for the beginning of substantive discussions towards a two-state solution and an end to the decades-long suffering of the Palestinian people.

How did South Africa view the role of the International Court of Justice's decision in the context of global community and international law?

South Africa viewed the decision as a practical activation of international conventions to protect global citizens, advocating for a world where conflicts are resolved through negotiation and peaceful means.

What was the overarching message of South Africa to the Palestinian people in light of the Court's decision?

South Africa expressed solidarity with the Palestinian people, encouraging them never to give up hope and drawing parallels with their own struggle against apartheid.

Outlines

00:00

🇵🇸 South Africa Brings Gaza Bombing Case Against Israel to International Court of Justice

Paragraph 1 discusses the reaction to the ICJ ruling in favor of South Africa's request for provisional measures against Israel regarding alleged war crimes in Gaza. It mentions the importance of the win for Palestinians, what happens next being crucial, and criticisms of the case by the US and others as meritless and baseless.

05:00

📜 South African Minister Details Rationale and Hopes for ICJ Ruling Against Israel

Paragraph 2 has South African Minister Pandor explaining the rationale for bringing the case, including the need to protect civilians and ensure Israel provides basic services to Gaza/West Bank residents. She expresses hope but not surprise at potential non-compliance by Israel, though powerful allies may advise compliance.

10:01

😤 Minister Condemns Hamas Actions but Defends ICJ Case as Helping Palestinians

Paragraph 3 features Minister Pandor condemning Hamas' hostage taking while defending the ICJ case as sending a clear signal to Israel to respect international law. She says the implications are for a more hopeful world if Israel complies, otherwise a dangerous precedent. She focuses discussion on helping Palestinians.

Keywords

💡Palestinian people

This refers to the ethnic group living in Gaza, West Bank, and other areas, who have been under Israeli occupation. The script focuses on harm against Palestinian civilians and the need to protect them. Examples include 'win for the Palestinian people' and 'the people of Palestine'.

💡Israeli occupation

Israel has militarily occupied Palestinian territories like Gaza and West Bank since 1967. The script refers to Israel as 'occupier' and calls for an end to the occupation through a two-state solution.

💡Israeli aggression

This means Israel's military attacks and excessive use of force against Palestinians. The script mentions 'Israeli aggression' and actions that cause 'significant harm' to Palestinians.

💡Apartheid

South Africa's former system of institutionalized racial segregation and discrimination. The script draws a parallel with apartheid to convey Palestine's oppression.

💡Genocide

Deliberate killing of a large group of people, based on nationality, ethnicity, race or religion. The script alleges genocidal acts by Israel against Palestinians.

💡International law

Rules and norms that regulate conduct between nations. The script emphasizes respecting international law, and using institutions like ICJ.

💡Hostages

Civilians or combatants held captive by an enemy. Hamas took Israeli hostages, which the script condemns and calls for their release.

💡Ceasefire

Temporary halting of fighting between opposing forces. The script expresses disappointment that ICJ did not explicitly call for a ceasefire.

💡Two-state solution

Plan to resolve conflict by having independent Israeli and Palestinian states existing side-by-side. The script urges negotiations to reach this settlement.

💡Humanitarian aid

Material and logistical assistance provided to people affected by conflict. The script stresses the need to deliver aid to suffering Palestinians.

Highlights

South Africa brought a case before the ICJ to protect civilians in Palestine and ensure Israel addresses the harm occurring there.

The ICJ called on Israel to protect civilians and end the massive harm occurring since Israeli military action began.

South Africa believes international bodies must exercise responsibility to protect global citizens under signed agreements.

The ICJ said it is plausible genocidal acts have been committed, meaning if genocide is proven, states aiding Israel could be liable.

Minister Pandor hoped the ICJ would call for a ceasefire, but is satisfied with the directives given, especially the reporting requirements.

The monthly reporting ordered by the ICJ is significant for monitoring Israel's compliance, according to Minister Pandor.

Minister Pandor believes Israel's powerful allies should advise them to comply with the ICJ ruling.

The case brings the Genocide Convention to life in a practical way by stopping passive observation of harm, says Minister Pandor.

Minister Pandor hopes the case moves parties toward substantive two-state solution negotiations.

The case sends a signal for Israel to respect international law, says Minister Pandor.

If Israel complies, it sets precedent for lawfulness; if not, it enables abuse globally per Minister Pandor.

The focus should be alleviating Palestinian suffering, not judging Israel, says Minister Pandor.

Minister Pandor tells Palestinians to maintain hope, relating to South Africa overcoming apartheid.

The case evidencing the Genocide Convention prevents resorting to arms and abuse per Minister Pandor.

Minister Pandor condemned Hamas' actions but said the priority is freeing their hostages.

Transcripts

I am still in conversation with our

international news editor Sophie MCA and

Shan Bryce piece who joins us from New

York so of course Sophie you saw that

reaction and it is important earlier on

that you said um that you know this is a

huge win for South Africa but more

importantly it's a huge win for the

Palestinian people and of course as Shan

was saying a little bit earlier on what

happens now what happens next is very

crucial as we know the bombardment

continues there in um in in Gaza but

let's talk now about just some of the

utterances that were made by the US and

some members of course um of the Western

countries saying that this case was

meritless that this case was baseless

and I think the the recent um you know

reaction was from lawmakers in the US

writing to Anthony blinkin saying that

they were disgusted by this process of

South Africa but fundamentally what does

this mean I don't understand why they

were talking about the of the case

because it was clear from day one when

South Africa made that presentation that

these were provisional measures that

were requested and secondly even Israel

itself was not obliged to go and present

its side of a story but being the signat

of this genocide convention and because

the genocide was adopted after that

terrible incident where the Jews were

targeted they felt uh to go and show

that they do support the work of the

Court even though they have reservations

and later the Prime Minister making uh

those statements and therefore the US

the Congress men bipartisan making that

statement I think uh uh I think they

were off the mark and I think that is

why the foreign secretary uh made that

statement as you can see the minister of

international relations is about to uh

make a statement perhaps let's listen in

what Dr Nal Pand had to

say uh you want me to give you a minute

are you all right yes you are right okay

so we have uh the minister of

international relations and Corporation

of South Africa Dr n p who's going to

speak to you director General uh of the

foreign Ministry at home Mr Zan

Dango Omar yeah I'm sure you know him um

so the minister is going to speak and

then uh Omar is going to speak as well

uh D will take questions uh you ready

yes good to go Minister over to you my

my name is n lady pandor and I'm the uh

South African minister of international

relations and

cooperation um I wish to begin by uh

thanking the judges of the international

court of justice for for uh dealing with

this matter

expeditiously given uh the urgency of

the need to protect innocent uh

civilians uh in Palestine and to ensure

that the harm that South Africa has

referred to in the case it brought

before the icj that that harm uh is

addressed and that people's lives are

saved the saving of life is not uh

merely with respect

uh to having a ceasefire it's to

ensuring that humanitarian Aid is

provided uh to those who need support as

well as ensuring uh that the state of

Israel uh which is currently uh the

occupier and

administrator in Palestine provides the

necessary basic services that the

residents of Gaza and the West Bank

require this case uh was very much about

International bodies ensuring that they

exercise their responsibility to protect

us all AS Global Citizens all member

states of the United Nations have

attached their signatures to a range of

instruments but when lives are

threatened these instruments are not

brought to bear and South Africa had the

view that we could not stand idly by and

continue to observe the killing of

thousands of Palestinian citizens who

had no role in the awful Act of Hostage

taking and killing that was uh done by

Hamas and therefore we thought it

important that we do report and apply to

the international court of justice that

the measures provided within the

convention for the punishment and

prevention of genocide are brought to

bear and that the state of Israel is

called upon uh by the judges to act to

protect civilians and to end the massive

level of harm uh that we have seen since

the Israeli uh action began and we agree

entirely with the uh judges that Hamas

uh should release uh the hostages that

they're currently holding we also uh in

our various engagements with our

partners internationally believe the

moment is now right for there to be

negotiations for a two-state solution to

end this conflict decisively Minister

you disappointed it wasn't a ceasefire

are you disappointed I believe that uh

in exercising uh the uh order there

would have to be a ceasefire without it

the order uh doesn't actually work I I

would have wanted a they didn't

specifically call are you disappointed

they didn't specify that I'm I have no

way that I'm going to say I'm

disappointed I hoped for it but the fact

of delivering humanitarian Aid the fact

of taking measures that reduce the

levels of harm against persons who have

no role in what Israel uh is combating

for me requires a ceasefire and I

believe Israel would have to attend to

how it conducts its search for the

hostages and for those Hamas individuals

who carried out the October 7 uh attack

the I believe that uh the uh court

judgment needs to be read very very

carefully uh they've given very very

direct instructions uh we are satisfied

uh that the provision measures that we

sought uh to be addressed would be uh uh

addressed by the court and uh I believe

if you read the convention very

carefully uh the matter of uh how uh a

war uh or conflict is conducted is not

elaborated I would have wanted that the

word cessation uh is included uh in the

Judgment but I am satisfied with the

directives that have been given and in

particular a was concerned as uh the

president of the Court was reading the

order uh that reference wasn't being

made to a report because the reporting

is absolutely imperative the monitoring

of action in terms of the order is vital

and so for the fact that uh a monthly

report a report within one month of this

date has been ordered is I believe very

significant Germany and the United

States who have called this case America

well the fact that the court said says

remember that today we're not deciding

about the allegation of genocide what

we're dealing with other provisional

measures it's clear that the court does

say circumstances exist where it is

plausible that genocidal acts have been

committed this of course means once the

Merit case is addressed and if the

finding is that there has been genocide

those states that have aided and ab

bettered become a party to Commission of

an infringement in terms of the

convention do you think Israel will

conform to the orders laid down by the

court today I've never really been

hopeful uh about Israel uh but Israel

has very powerful friends who I hope uh

will advise Israel that they should act

Minister about Israel would would you

say what does it say about Israel as a

country and a government and a military

I think that's for you and the public to

decide what we've said is here's an

international instrument uh let let us

bring it into operation and let's stop

being

observers uh of significant harm let's

act and South Africa has acted and what

the court has actually indicated is that

this convention is being brought to life

in a very practical way and I now think

what we want is that the member states

of the United Nations uh must oversee

the process and ensure uh that we create

a basis uh for a a global community in

which a resort to Arms is no longer easy

a resort to abuse is no longer easy and

that more effort is now directed toward

negotiation and toward seeking peaceful

means of ending

conflict relations with is well as as

far as I understand the convention

states are members states are

signatories and you bring actions uh

with reference to States not to

particular groups but has Hamas behaved

genocid well uh I believe that what has

been done by Hamas is certainly caused

Great harm and I do think that the

hostages should be freed and that's what

we must focus upon mad Minister mad

Minister do you believe that the

decision of the Court will help let's

say in solving the the problem of the

Israeli aggression against the

Palestinian today and in the short term

maybe can help finding a political

solution to the uh conflict between the

Palestinian people and the Israeli

occupation well this is uh this my hope

is that we will begin to move to a

process where substantively a two-state

solution is being discussed the people

of Palestine have suffered harm for many

many decades I don't believe it will end

today or tomorrow but what we've done is

a very clear signal has been sent by the

court and it's now a test for the

government and people of Israel as to

whether they will act in a manner that

says all of us must respect

international law

what the

implications on hello hello just well uh

if if Israel acts in accord with it I

think the implications are for a future

hopeful World should it not then

essentially we are opening up room for

all abusers in many conflicts throughout

the world and I think we'll be setting a

terrible terrible uh precedent so what

we should do what all of us should do is

call on Israel to act in terms of the

decisions separ ties with Israel or are

you preserving ties with Israel I don't

think it's a matter of South Africa and

Israel here the real issue all your

questions are about Israel but the real

issue is the people people of Palestine

who are being killed every day the

people of Palestine who are sleeping in

the cold the people of Palestine who are

denied food water and energy that is the

critical issue that all of us should

focus upon and on that note we're going

to ask the vice foreign minister of that

with the people of Palestine we stand

with the people of Palestine and our

message to them is never give up hope

South Africa got over the apartate

oppression they will overcome