Lol, de uitspraak van het hof is zo opgesteld dat Israël de oorlog in Rafah moet stoppen, enkel als het een echte genocide zou veroorzaken, anders niet.
https://www.theguardian.com/global/a...j-rafah-ruling
The ruling, passed by 13 votes to two, said Israel should: “Immediately halt its military offensive, and any other action in the Rafah governorate, which may inflict on the Palestinian group in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”
That language reflects the 1948 Genocide convention, and much immediate media and diplomatic reporting interpreted the order as a blanket directive to end the offensive in Rafah.
But soon afterwards, the Israel foreign ministry suggested it was being directed to stop its offensive only if it was inflicting conditions that might lead to the physical destruction of the Palestinian population.
In a statement, the foreign ministry said:“Israel has not and will not conduct military actions in the Rafah area which may inflict on the Palestinian civilian population in Gaza conditions of life that could bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”. In effect, Israel argues that the court ruling does not apply because the Israeli military is not carrying out the prohibited actions.
That interpretation was supported by one of the dissenting judges, Israel’s former supreme court president Aharon Barak, who served as an ad-hoc judge on the ICJ bench. In his opinion, he wrote that the majority decision “requires Israel to halt its military offensive in the Rafah governorate only in so far as is necessary to comply with Israel’s obligations under the genocide convention”.