16 Feb, 2024 – By Sam Husseini :
Prof. Francis Boyle reacted to the ICJ Decision: ‘It’s not yes or no. This is a formal Decision by the Court. Apparently no dissents. Very helpful language. RSA [Republic of South Africa] asked for a formal Order for additional provisional measures of protection for the Palestinians. They didn’t get that. But they did get a formal Decision by the Court.
It’s important that the ICJ references Rafah and quotes the UN Secretary General saying Israeli actions would “exponentially increase what is already a humanitarian nightmare with untold regional consequences” and referred to Rafah as a “perilous situation” for exponentially increased genocide. Given the proximity to the prior Order, this Decision may be the best RSA could get. RSA can use this ICJ Decision at the Security Council to support the Resolution that Algeria has already circulated there in order to enforce the World Court’s Order of January 26 against Israel.
If the Zionists start driving Palestinians into Egypt, RSA can ask the Court again for new provisional measures of protection. Other nations can also sue Israel for genocide regarding Rafah in particular and Gaza in general, request an Emergency Hearing by the Court, and ask for provisional measures of protection specifically with respect to Rafah and the rest of the Palestinians in Gaza.
The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation got Gambia to sue Myanmar at the ICJ for genocide and there’s no excuse for the ICO not moving to so protect Palestine and the Palestinians. Israel is threatening catastrophic genocide against the 1.5 Million Palestinians at Rafah.
The Biden administration is saying they don’t want Israel to move into Rafah until certain conditions are met. Their plan may be to claim such conditions are met with these camps they are building in the Sinai Desert, effectively facilitating the ethnic cleansing of the Gazans into the Sinai and thus ushering in Nakba II for the Palestinians.’