Commentary
For a brief moment, it appeared Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had come out against South Africa’s ludicrous genocide case against Israel. Not as forcefully as other countries, but just enough to show our nation stood with its longtime ally.
That sentiment turned out to be fleeting. Let’s examine why.
The Palestinian terrorist organization Hamas attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Israel retaliated and began bombing the Gaza Strip where Hamas officials and Palestinians live.
South Africa used this conflict to initiate proceedings against Israel in the U.N.’s International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Dec. 29, 2023. The 84-page filing, “Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel),” accused Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. South Africa believed this not only violated the Genocide Convention, but was part of a 75-year campaign by Israel against Palestinians.
Public hearings were held on Jan. 11 and 12 in The Hague’s Peace Palace.
South Africa contended on the first day that “the acts and omissions by Israel of which it complains are genocidal in character because ‘they are intended to bring about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial and ethnical group, that being the part of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip.’” They also believed “the relevant acts are attributable to Israel, which has failed to prevent genocide and is committing genocide, and which has also violated and continues to violate other fundamental obligations under the Genocide Convention.”
Israel countered on the second day that “the attempt to weaponize the term genocide against Israel in the present context, does more than tell the Court a grossly distorted story, and it does more than empty the word of its unique force and special meaning. It subverts the object and purpose of the Convention itself—with ramifications for all States seeking to defend themselves against those who demonstrate total disdain for life and for the law.”
It continued: “South Africa purports to come to this Court in the lofty position of a guardian of the interest of humanity. But in delegitimizing Israel’s 75-year existence in its opening presentation yesterday, that broad commitment to humanity rang hollow. And in its sweeping counterfactual description of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it seemed to erase both Jewish history and any Palestinian agency or responsibility. Indeed, the delegitimization of Israel since its very establishment in 1948 in the Applicant’s submissions, sounded barely distinguishable from Hamas’ own rejectionist rhetoric.”
The usual assortment of left-wing and totalitarian countries, including Cuba, Iran, Lebanon, Venezuela, Malaysia, Syria, and Brazil, supported South Africa’s position. Israel was supported by the United States, United Kingdom, Austria, Germany, Czech Republic, Hungary, and Guatemala.
It looked like Canada had joined the group of nations supporting Israel, too.
“Canada is engaged in five cases at the ICJ because we believe in the importance of that as an institution,” Trudeau said at a recent press conference. “But our wholehearted support of the ICJ and its processes does not mean that we support the premise of the case brought forward by South Africa.”
It wasn’t a strong condemnation, but Trudeau had taken a side. His use of “premise” made some people wonder what would happen if the case was either modified or a new one was reintroduced. Nevertheless, his opposition to South Africa’s genocide case against Israel deserved praise.
Or so we thought.
Foreign Minister Melanie Joly’s statement echoed similar sentiments to Trudeau’s, but was notably different. “Under the UN’s 1948 Genocide Convention,” she said, “the crime of genocide requires the intention to destroy or partly destroy a group because of their nationality, ethnicity, race or religion. Meeting this high threshold requires compelling evidence.” While “Canada continues to strongly and unequivocally condemn Hamas’ terrorist attack on Israel” and “Hamas must release all hostages, stop using Palestinian civilians as human shields, and lay down its arms,” Joly also stated that “Canada remains deeply concerned by the scale of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and ongoing risks to all Palestinian civilians. … Canada supports urgent international efforts towards a sustainable ceasefire.”
As the CBC’s Evan Dyer posted on X on Jan. 12, the government’s “intention was to communicate neutrality as to the substance.” It’s a political tactic the Liberals have employed before, including during the Israel-Hamas war. Part of its caucus takes one position, another part takes a different position, and the official government position is smack dab in the middle.
No strength, no courage, no conviction—and no real opinion other than neutrality.
It’s disappointing that the Liberal government wouldn’t stand with other democracies and oppose South Africa’s genocide case against Israel. This needs to change.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
