Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
CNN International: ICJ: Israel Must Take Measures In Gaza With "Immediate Effect"; Hamas-Run Health Ministry: Death Toll In Gaza Reaches 26,000; Intl. Court Of Justice Orders Israel To Take Measures To Prevent Acts Of Genocide In Gaza & Punish Violators; ICJ Imposes Provisional Measures On Israel Over Its Military Operation In Gaza; ICJ Orders Israel To Provide Urgently Needed Basic Services And Humanitarian Aid To Gaza; Israel-Hamas War; ICJ Interim Verdict; Kloop Leaving Liverpool. Aired 8-9a ET
Aired January 26, 2024 - 08:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[08:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
MAX FOSTER, HOST, "CNN NEWSROOM": Hello, and welcome to CNN Newsroom. I'm Max Foster in London. Just ahead, the International Court of Justice says Israel must take measures with immediate effect with regards to its military operation in Gaza. We'll be live outside the court with more in just a moment, plus a staggering milestone in Gaza as the death toll there mounts to 26,000 people. And then, Liverpool manager, Jurgen Klopp says he'll step down at the end of the season, in a shock announcement was shaking fans (inaudible) and players.
The International Court of Justice has imposed emergency measures in the genocide case against Israel. It's ordering Israel to ensure its forces do not commit genocide, punish those who violate the measures and improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza. South Africa brought the case against Israel in the hope that the court would force Israel to suspend its military campaign in Gaza. So far, it's not asked Israel to do that. Israel asked the court to throw out the case altogether, but it didn't.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOAN DONOGHUE, PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE: In the court's view, at least some of the acts and omissions alleged by South Africa have been committed by Israel in Gaza appear to be capable of falling within the provisions of the convention. In light of the following, the court concludes that prima facie it has jurisdiction pursuant to Article 9 of the convention to entertain the case. Given this conclusion, the court considers that it cannot accede to Israel's request that the case be removed from the general list.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Keep in mind, this is not a verdict on whether or not Israel is committing genocide. That verdict is years away. Rather, it's meant as a way to force Israel to pause the conflict, with more or less, bring in CNN's Melissa Bell. She's live in The Hague for us this hour. We're just really making sense of this verdict, aren't we? But South Africa wanted the war to stop effectively. It hasn't got that. But it has managed to convince the court that it has jurisdiction and it can enforce some emergency measures ultimately.
MELISSA BELL, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: That's right. And, in fact, what we've heard and you were just listening there to the ICJ President Joan Donoghue describe that preliminary ruling on the idea of those emergency measures in South Africa and requested because it wanted the war to be paused while the court could investigate those much more substantive claims, allegations that genocide was being committed.
Now, we heard the judge say that, whilst South Africa will not get what it had hoped for, ultimately, which is a call for a ceasefire, it has got, Max, a lot of the rest of what it was requesting, and that is the recognition that it is plausible, according to the court's judges, and there was a great deal of unanimity on a number of the different counts that were read by the judge, and I think that is significant as well, that it is plausible that acts of genocide may be being committed, and that whilst it did not call for an immediate ceasefire, it did a rule that under Article II of the 1948 Genocide Convention, Israel must now ensure that there is every attempt made to prevent the killing or causing of mental or physical harm to what this court has now ruled is a protected group of people, and those are the Palestinians of Gaza.
So, this is a ruling that very much goes in South Africa's favor, even if, Max, it falls short of their hope that there would be a call for genocide. The ruling calls on Israel to report back about the efforts that it is making, and it urges more access for humanitarian aid, for independent voices to be able to get into the Gaza Strip to assess the situation.
The reason this matters, of course, is that this is the UN's highest court, and it carries therefore a great deal of weight. There is what we heard here on the 10th and the 11th of January, Max, when first of all South Africa laid out its case, and then in its three-hour rebuttal, the following day, Israel defended itself.
[08:05:00]
We heard the very forensic examination of the details of what's been happening in these nearly four months of war inside Gaza. Devastating to listen to when you heard the South Africans lay out in chilling detail what they alleged had happened inside the Gaza Strip. Difficult also to listen to the Israeli Defense because they went back to October 7. And because they, from their point of view, were explaining that the South Africans should not be bringing this case at all. It was a corruption, according to them, the idea of the 1948 Genocide Act.
And so, to hear today this very calm ruling over the course of the last half hour or so very much in South Africa's direction that Israel now needs to ensure the end of the killing or the causing of mental or physical harm to the people of Gaza, that is a huge step in the direction of what South Africa was requesting.
All eyes very much now, Max, on how Israel chooses to respond. The fact that they had come to defend themselves was considered a crucial indication of how seriously they believed this court, maybe not just the validity, the legitimacy of its jurisdiction, but the importance in terms of the court and public opinion of how it defended itself, and what might emerge.
How now Israel reacts to what is a ruling demanding these immediate actions will, of course, be crucial over the coming hours and days. But a very strong statement from The Hague here, and I think one that went much further than many of us had expected that it would, Max.
FOSTER: OK. Melissa, thank you so much for that. Let's bring in Alanna O'Malley. She's an Associate Professor of International History at the University of Leiden, and she joins me now from The Hague, because you're much more of an expert on this than many of us.
We're just heading there for Melissa, all eyes now on what -- on how Israel responds to this ruling. I mean, broadly, the ruling is saying that Israel has to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza. But it doesn't accept that it is genocide. So, there's still a disconnect here, isn't there? I mean, what will Israel choose to respond to, effectively?
ALANNA O'MALLEY, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF INTERNATIONAL HISTORY, LEIDEN UNIVERSITY: Well, the first thing to bear in mind, of course, is that this or these orders are binding. So, Israel is obliged to fulfill the obligations that it has as a member of the international community now and to abide by the court's orders.
What Israel chooses, the choices are quite limited here in scope, is that it really must think about the ways in which this military operation has been carried out so far. And now, the whole question and a focus and attention is really on the kind of the -- the court has declared that there's a plausible risk that genocidal acts may be being committed. And there's an urgency so much so around that possibility that they are ordering these provisional measures.
So now, there is even greater pressure, even greater public attention on the Israeli actions, and also on Israel to provide the information of what's happening. And that part of the judgment is also very important that one-month deadline, quite a short turnaround, by which time Israel is required by the court to write a report on situation in Gaza and on how it is taking measures to prevent the possible perpetration of genocidal acts.
So, I mean, this is really quite a high requirement, and this really should make a difference to the way in which Israel perpetrates its military operation henceforth.
FOSTER: Were you surprised that the quite stark picture provided by these very formal judges about actually what's going on in Gaza? It felt like it was going on the record when there's so much disinformation out there, and lack of ability to confirm things that are going on. O'MALLEY: Yeah. We heard quite detailed descriptions of the humanitarian crises and of the difficulty of the conditions on every single respect. And what was striking about the judges' descriptions is that firstly, they relied mostly on the evidence from the various UN agencies, most of which we've heard or is in the public outline before, but they really kind of framed everything very clearly as this is the evidence that they are using to adjudicate the judgment. And I thought that that was very interesting, because oftentimes, those humanitarian reports really don't get the attention they deserve. And in this case, in Gaza, we've had many of them, they just put them really into the context.
The second thing that I think was very important with these descriptions, of course, is that they're all relating to conditions of life. So, it's not just about the military campaign, but the wider conditions of life, access to clean water, access to adequate housing, and the judge laid out the violation of those conditions or at least the difficulty in meeting the conditions of life in Gaza right now.
[08:10:00]
FOSTER: It did stop short, didn't it, the court of ordering an immediate halt to operations and a truce. Was it ever going to be able to do that based on the evidence it had?
O'MALLEY: That's a difficult one, because, of course, under Article 51 of the Charter and as Israel has asserted time and again, it does have the right to self-defense. And so, the courts did not go so far as to adjudicate one of those arguments that South African made about proportionality.
And so, it didn't go that far. But what we did see is that they're ordered very clearly to take all measures with immediate effect to prevent the plausible risk of genocidal acts being perpetrated. And so, the court really also stressed the urgency of the problem. And they really found that the rights requested for protection by South Africa really are linked clearly to the provisional measures sought.
And that's very important, because it means that really what the South African case was quite persuasive on a lot of grounds to the court to show that these rights are being or could possibly be violated under the rights under the Genocide Convention, and that Israel has an obligation as a party to the convention to itself abide by those rights and prevent the perpetration of anything that might violate the rights of people under the Genocide Convention. And this is very -- an interesting ground that the court (inaudible).
FOSTER: It does take years, doesn't it, to have a very clear verdict. But it's interesting how they created a very short-term deadline with this report that Israel needs to come back with within a month. That's probably where Israel is going to feel the pressure here.
O'MALLEY: Yeah. And I think that pressure comes from two sides. So firstly, you have that pressure, because it's now an order from the court. Four weeks is a short time, even though, of course, Israel has sufficient access to everything it needs to examine in Gaza to answer that request.
But the other thing, of course, is that this creates a huge amount of public pressure on Israel and on Israel's allies, including the Western Powers, of course, including the United States. And that's kind of a publicity. And we've -- this is an important part of this crisis as well. That tension is really now kind of ratcheted up another notch. And it puts pressure not just on Israel, but also on Israel's allies, to act to alleviate the humanitarian crisis and to prevent further perpetration of anything that might be classified as genocidal acts.
FOSTER: OK. Well, thank you so much for joining us with your insight there. Let's look into that pressure on the allies then with Nic Robertson, he's our diplomatic editor in Tel Aviv. I mean, we are waiting responses now, aren't we, particularly from the US, but all of the Israeli allies. And do you think this puts more pressure on them to make sure that, A, it gets through?
NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: It does. There is undoubtedly being growing international pressure. It's inescapable. And I think it's very significant when you have a judge with such authority and with such clarity be able to bring together in such a forum a collective summation of all the different UN reports and we interview them, all these UN officials and workers who go to Gaza or in Gaza and experience this, and she was referring to that, and the reports that they have is of an utterly abominably bad situation, a desperate situation --
(CROSSTALK)
FOSTER: OK. I'm sorry, Nic. We're going come straight back to you. But we've got the South African speaking on the Court steps. And they brought this case.
NALEDI PANDOR, SOUTH AFRICAN FOREIGN MINISTER: Given the urgency of the need to protect innocent civilians 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 is addressed and that people's lives are saved.
The saving of life is not merely with respect to having a ceasefire, it's to ensuring that humanitarian aid is provided to those who need support as well as ensuring that the State of Israel, which is currently the occupier and administrator in Palestine, provides the necessary basic services that the residents of Gaza and the West Bank require.
This case 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.
[08:15:00]
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 done by Hamas.
And, therefore, we thought it's 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 by the judges to act to protect civilians and to end the massive level of harm that we have seen since the Israeli action began. And we agree entirely with the judges that Hamas should release the hostages that they're currently holding. We also, in our various engagements with our partners internationally, believe the moment is now ripe for there to be negotiations for a two-state solution to end this conflict decisively.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Minister, are you disappointed there wasn't a ceasefire?
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you disappointed the court --
(CROSSTALK)
PANDOR: I believe that in exercising the order, there would have to be a ceasefire. Without it, the order doesn't actually work.
(CROSSTALK)
PANDOR: I would have wanted a ceasefire.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They didn't specifically call --
PANDOR: No, they didn't.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you disappointed --
PANDOR: But how --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: -- that they didn't specify that --
PANDOR: I've -- 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 is combating, for me, requires a ceasefire. And I believe Israel would have to attend to how it conducts itself for the hostages and for those Hamas individuals who carried out the October 7 attack.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (inaudible)
(CROSSTALK)
PANDOR: I believe that the court judgments needs to be read very, very carefully. They've given very, very direct instructions. We are satisfied that the provisional measures that we sought to be addressed would be addressed by the court. And I believe if you read the convention very carefully, the matter of how a war or conflict is conducted is not elaborated. I would have wanted that the word cessation is included in the judgment.
But I'm satisfied with the directives that have been given. And, in particular, I was concerned that the president of the court was reading the order, 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, the fact that a monthly report or a report within one month of the state has been ordered is, I believe, very significant.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -- in the United States who have called this case (inaudible)?
PANDOR: Well, the fact that the court says -- remember that today we're not deciding about the allegation of genocide. What we're dealing with are the 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 abetted become a party to commission of an infringement in terms of the convention.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (inaudible) to the orders laid down by the court today?
PANDOR: I've never really been hopeful about Israel. But Israel has very powerful friends who I hope will advise Israel that they should act in terms of --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Minister (inaudible) what would you say? What does it say about Israel as a country and a government and a military?
PANDOR: I think that's for you as the public to decide. What we've said is, here is an international instrument, let us bring it into operation, and let's stop being observers 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.
[08:20:00]
And I now think what we want is that the member states of the United Nations must oversee the process and ensure that we create a basis for 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 towards seeking peaceful means of Indian conflicts.
(CROSSTALK)
PANDOR: Well, as far as I understand the convention, states are members, states are signatories. And you bring actions with reference to states, not to particular groups.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But has Hamas behaved genocide (inaudible)?
PANDOR: Well, I believe that what has been done by Hamas has certainly caused great harm. And I do think that the hostages should be freed. And that's what we must focus upon.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Minister, do you believe that --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. So --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: -- the decision of the court will help, let's say, in solving the problem of the Israeli aggression against the Palestinians today and, in the short-term, maybe can help finding a political solution to the conflict between the Palestinian people and the Israeli occupation?
PANDOR: Well, this is -- my hope is that we will begin to move toward 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.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hello, hello?
PANDOR: Well, if Israel acts in accord with it, I think the implications are for a future hopeful world. Should it not, then essentially, we're opening up room for all abusers in many conflicts throughout the world. And I think we'll be setting a terrible, terrible precedent.
(CROSSTALK)
PANDOR: So, what we should do -- what all of us should do is call on Israel to act in terms of the decision.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (inaudible) with Israel or (inaudible)?
PANDOR: I don't think it's a matter of South Africa and Israel, yeah? The real issue -- all your questions are about Israel. But the real issue is the 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.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And on that note, we're going to ask the Vice Foreign Minister of the -- PANDOR: 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 apartheid oppression. They will overcome.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And for -- that will ever be grateful, Your Excellency. Allow me to start by saying that we concur with everything that Her Excellency, Minister of Corporate -- for International Cooperation of South Africa, Naledi Pandor, has stated in front of all of you and to read the message from the Palestinian people on this very important day.
This is a historic day, Palestine welcomes the momentous order by the International Court of Justice. This order means that the Court recognized the gravity of the situation and was convinced by South Africa's compelling presentation that was based on law and fact that there are plausible causes to believe that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.
It means that the cries and suffering of our people in Gaza have been heard in the Great Hall of Justice. Israel failed. It failed to convince the court to dismiss the complaint to prove that it is not deliberately violating Genocide Convention. The ICJ judges assess the facts and the law and issued their order. Israel now will stand trial accused of committing the crime of all crimes.
We call on states that -- to ensure that all provisional measures ordered by the court are implemented. States and governments have clear obligations in light of this order. First and foremost, they must make sure they are not complicit in this genocide. This is a good day for humanity.
[08:25:00]
This ruling is in favor of international system based on law and against exceptionalism and double standards. It should be a wakeup call for Israel and its enablers. The State of Palestine will undertake every endeavor to follow up on this important ruling by the courts towards ensuring the rights of the Palestinian people and ensuring justice.
To this end, and with deep conviction in the rule of law, we will continue pursuing accountability and justice on all forms, including in the few weeks' time when we return here to the ICJ on the 19th of February for the oral hearings and advisory opinion proceedings on Israel's illegal occupation and regime inside the occupied Palestinian territory. This illegal occupation and apartheid regime must be brought to an end.
Palestine will forever be grateful to South Africa for taking this bold step of active solidarity. Together with peace-loving nations, we will continue to work to stop genocide, hold perpetrators to account and work to stop all other atrocities against our people.
Just few words in Arabic and I'll conclude my statement and open the way for questions and answers. (Foreign Language) FOSTER: OK. So, we were hearing initially from South Africa, a minister from South Africa, the government there that brought this case, describing her disappointment that a ceasefire wasn't enforced, but how she did think it's very significant that Israel had to come back in a month with a report back to the court and the minister there saying it's very important that Israel's allies lean on it to enforce that those reports are done properly.
David McKenzie was watching that unfold from Johannesburg. So, there's two sides to this, isn't there, for the South Africans?
DAVID MCKENZIE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think the South Africans will say that they -- well, in fact, what she said, technically speaking, Max, was she can't be disappointed by the fact that they didn't call for a ceasefire. But they will be disappointed that they didn't call for a ceasefire, because that was the very first item that South Africa was requesting from the International Criminal -- International Court of Justice.
I do think that she is highlighting a couple of things that are important here. She says that the South Africans weren't -- couldn't stand idly by and they are indicating that the mechanisms that the world currently runs on at the United Nations, including the UN Security Council and others, is not set up to actually bring these kinds of cases for people to be held to account from the South African perspective.
So, they said they took that significant step to go to the ICJ to ask the court to make these provisions and to investigate whether Israel is committing genocide in its campaign against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, something, of course, Israel has repeatedly denied. I think the South Africans will see this as a victory. She reiterated several times that the key for the South Africans and for others is that the situation for Palestinians on the ground is improved, that humanitarian aid gets in the equip more quickly. And towards the end of the statement saying this is about the Palestinian people and the conditions that they are living in.
It is also important to know she stressed that it was critical that Hamas release the hostages that they've had for all this time that they took from Israel. Max?
FOSTER: OK. Thanks, Nic. We're going to go to -- sorry, David, we're going to go to Nic Robertson now because he has actually got a response from, I think, the Prime Minister.
ROBERTSON: Yeah, it is. It's from the Prime Minister, and this is his initial reaction to what we've all just heard from the ICJ. He says Israel's commitment to international law is unwavering. Equally unwavering is our sacred commitment to continue to defend our country and its people. I'm not going to read the whole statement here, but try to give you some of the highlights as we just go through it.
The charge of genocide, he says, leveled against Israel, not only false, it's outrageous, and decent people everywhere should reject it. Of course, this is something Prime Minister Netanyahu has said. [08:30:00]
And I think to get at the idea of how Israel is going to react and respond on this call for the protection of lives, protection of injury both physical and mental, and the improvement of the humanitarian situation inside of Gaza. The prime minister in this statement says, we will continue to facilitate humanitarian assistance, and do our utmost to keep civilians out of harm's way, even has as Hamas uses civilians as human shields. We will continue to do what is necessary to defend our country and defend our people.
So he's not, in any way, saying there that he is going to go along lock, stock and barrel with everything that the ICJ has just said. He has really, I think, restating Israel's position. And as we know, Israel does continue to say that it is providing humanitarian assistance. So though, the objective reality as recorded by UN officials and the Palestinian people themselves in Gaza witness, the situation in Gaza is utterly appalling, that people are running out of food, the conditions are terrible, the hospitals are closing and collapsing. All of those things we heard -- read out of the ICJ.
So how is -- so this begs the question, therefore, how is Israel going to respond over the coming days and weeks ahead, the letter in a month -- the report in a month at the ICJ has called for, the Prime Minister hasn't rejected sending in that report. It does feel here that this statement from the prime minister is a reiteration of the previous position, not a rejection of what the court is saying. Essentially saying, well, we were doing these things all ready.
I think overall, the pressure will continue to mount on is -- from Israel's friends like the United States, albeit maybe not publicly but behind the scenes. The pressure will continue to mount. This will add to that pressure, which in essence is what the South African foreign minister was saying, Max.
MAX FOSTER, CNN ANCHOR: It does reflect, as you say, on the Americans, doesn't it? Because as key partners to Israel, you know, it's very stark, some of the language coming from the court, and actually, what they see happening there based on all of the expert evidence they've received. But it reflects on the US as well, which is the one country that does have a, you know, some level of power with Israel.
ROBERTSON: You know, it really does. The world has seen these pictures. I mean, number one, the world saw the pictures of a horrible atrocities that Hamas perpetrated on October the 7th and the 1,200 Israelis they killed, and have heard the stories of the hostages have been released to the terrible conditions that the hostages that remained the desperate efforts of their families to get them out.
But they've also witnessed, the world has witnessed, these images coming from Gaza of, excuse me, the physical destruction of buildings, the death toll, the injuries, the calamitous humanitarian situation. But I think when you hear those laid out by a judge, you know, a thousand miles and more away in the formality of this UN, an internationally-empowered legal forum. When you hear them read out there, the letters that she read out, or the other comments that she read out, that were made by, for example, the defense minister on October the 8th from the president of Israel on October the 10th and again, October the 11th.
And the man who is now foreign minister, the comments he made in the days after October 7th, you see them in a separate contrast to the emotion of those days after October 7th, which is what Israeli officials have said. Those comments were made in the time and place of emotion. They're not the government position, per se.
But when you see them read out in this legal forum that is devoid of that emotion that was running at the time, and you hear from the top UN bodies and officials about what they're witnessing on the ground in Gaza. And you hear it in this sort of clinical, professional legal setting, in a court that sitting in Europe, that gives it such a weight and gravitas, that in the immediacy of these events, as they're happening, is perhaps sometimes lost.
And I think that clarity is indicative of what over time we'll hear more often. When the ruling comes, we'll hear more of. And will be a narrative by which Israel will be judged by many countries in the future. And I think that is a thought that will take some time to settle and resonate, and percolate through people's assessments here.
[08:35:02]
This is how Israel will be judged by others in the future. This is a legal benchmark that's being made, however much the government protests, the courts doesn't have the right to judge this. The court has judged that it does make.
FOSTER: OK. Thank you, Nic. Let's get back to David.
What do you think South Africa's next move is here? Or will they leave it, you know, for Israel and, you know, its allies to try to move this forward?
DAVID MCKENZIE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, I think a very important statement that Naledi Pandor, the Minister of International Cooperation in South Africa, said there, which he alluded to. When someone asked her, you know, how does she expect the Israeli government to respond, she diverted that question and said, she hopes that powerful friends of Israel will intervene. And, of course, reading between the lines, she means the US.
Overnight, Pandor had a discussion with Antony Blinken, the Secretary of State in the US. And it's clear that in that conversation based on the State Department, that they were discussing the improving on the humanitarian situation in Gaza.
So the interests here while the US is a staunch ally of Israel, are aligning somewhat, because you have seen increasing pressure from the Americans, according to our reporting from Washington, that they are pushing the situation to improve in Gaza.
FOSTER: We just hearing from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Let's see -- let's listen in. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: Israel's commitment to international law is unwavering, equally unwavering, is our sacred commitment to continue to defend our country and defend our people. Like every country, Israel has an inherent right to defend itself. The vile attempt to deny Israel this fundamental right is blatant discrimination against the Jewish state. And it was justly rejected. The charge of genocide leveled against Israel is not only false, it's outrageous, and decent people everywhere should reject it.
In the eve of the International Holocaust Remembrance Day, I again pledge as Israel's prime minister, never again. Israel will continue to defend itself against Hamas, a genocidal terror organization. On October 7th, Hamas perpetrated the most horrific atrocities against the Jewish people since the Holocaust. And it vows to repeat these atrocities again and again, and again.
Our war is against Hamas terrorists, not against Palestinian civilians. We will continue to facilitate humanitarian assistance, and to do our utmost to keep civilians out of harm's way even as Hamas uses civilians as human shields. We will continue to do what is necessary to defend our country and defend our people.
Israel's commitment to international law is unwavering, equally unwavering. It is our sacred commitment to continue to defend our Benjamin Netanyahu --
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: Benjamin Netanyahu there issuing a statement off the back of that court ruling. He's obviously, you know, that's addressing Israelis. He's under a huge amount of pressure domestically, politically.
Let's go to Nic Robertson in Tel Aviv. I mean, he did say that this result was effectively the court rejecting the accusation of genocide against Israel. But it's not that straightforward, isn't it?
ROBERTSON: I don't think it is. I think, as you said there, there prime minister is under huge political pressure. And maybe that's an understatement. And we -- and it's perhaps not seen really here on the street so much yet, but I think there's an anticipation that the public resentment to the way the Prime Minister has handled some of the current situation, but certainly the events that have led to October 7th. I think that there's a potential to see that modern street.
So yes, the prime minister is here, really speaking to the people of Israel. And this isn't what the court has said per se. The court has said that they're going to continue to look into this. It is a very high bar to for the court to prove if it can, that it is policy of the Israeli government to effectively try to remove all are part of the Palestinian people in this case as the judge identified them.
So I think very much this is the prime minister defending his position, his reputation. And, of course, framing it in the way that this is Israel and Israel's reputation, and absolutely the country will look to him to be the defense of the country and the country's reputation in the face of the International Criminal Court.
[08:40:03]
And I think that there was an expectation here all along that the criminal court, the ICJ rather, would go ahead and follow through with this case. That was the expectation. And perhaps there was even an expectation that their interim ruling that we just heard today might have been even tougher.
This is, you know, this is a short, if you will, perhaps holding statement by the prime minister. We're going into the weekend here. And I think it's unlikely we'll get other strong political comments in the coming 24 hours or so. So the prime minister is really setting that marker down, defender of Israel, defender of the Israeli people and, of course, defending ultimately his own reputation here as well, Max.
FOSTER: OK. Nic, thank you. Ben Wedeman, looking on this from Beirut, I mean, I'm wondering, you know, obviously, we're not in Gaza. But if you've got any sense of how they're looking at this very complicated court case, which is going to go on and on, and on. And, you know, the earliest we're going to get any sort of result appears to be a month away when Israel comes back with that report.
BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Well, we understand there are some who are disappointed in Gaza because, of course, what Gazans need more than anything else at this moment is an immediate ceasefire. And the ICJ did not call for that.
It called for a variety of other things, for instance, that Israel should take measures to prevent the killing of Palestinians, to prevent the infliction of bodily and mental harm that's under by the way. And that it should provide -- allow for the provision of basic urgently needed services in Gaza for.
All of those things to actually happen, it could, in a sense, result in at least a lessening of some of the military activity in Gaza. But really, the devils in the details, how is it going to be implemented? And of course, we heard Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, essentially saying we are already providing basic services or urgently needed items to the Palestinians by allowing limited amounts of humanitarian aid to go in Gaza. He said, we're already trying to minimize civilian casualties.
Now, since the ICJ had its first session, it's worth noting that 2,500 people have been killed in Gaza. As of today, the death toll now exceeds 26,000. So already, as this court has been sitting and deliberating, hundreds and hundreds of people have been killed.
So symbolically, I think many people see, certainly there's a silver lining and simply the listing of all, for instance, the statements by UN officials who have stressed time and time again, about how dire the situation is in Gaza. And also listing the variety of statements by senior Israeli officials, certainly calling for extreme measures, shall we say, against the people of Gaza.
But at the end of the day, in the absence of an immediate ceasefire, it certainly leaves a lot to be desired for the people of Gaza, Max.
FOSTER: In terms of what we actually see happening on the ground, Ben, you've got any sense of what you saw today, which might change things for people in Gaza?
WEDEMAN: No, nothing. Nothing -- nothing has changed. We have seen video of thousands of people who are leaving this area in Eastern Han units, which the Israelis have repeatedly ordered people to leave. Although given that there are active hostilities in the area, many people have been hesitant to actually do that. So the situation on the ground remains unchanged.
Israel continues with its military operations. The death toll mounts every day somewhere on an average of 200. And of course, we know from the United Nations, 70% of the deaths in Gaza are women and children. Hundreds of thousands of people are crammed into the area around Rafah, along the Egyptian border and the Mawasi area, which is one and a half miles square with more than 400,000 people crammed into it, with lacking the most basic of services, running water, sanitation. There's no system for the distribution of food. It's all very random, so no.
In terms of the situation on the ground, it has not changed an iota. It's only getting worse. And of course, we have winter storm Daniela is now hitting the Eastern Mediterranean, which means the situation for people there is only going to get worse. Max?
[08:45:06]
FOSTER: OK. Ben, Nic, David, thank you so much. We'll be breaking this down as we make more sense of it as the day goes on, but we're going to be back in just a moment.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[08:50:20]
FOSTER: Welcome back. We are following the UN's top court ruling that Israel must take measures to prevent genocidal acts in Gaza. No call for a ceasefire, though. And we have heard from the Israeli prime minister, also the South Africans will summarize and bring all that together for you in just a moment.
But we also want to bring you a story out of the sports world because the manager of the English Premier League football club Liverpool has announced he's stepping down at the end of the season Jurgen Klopp says he acknowledges the move will be a shock for fans, and it certainly is. Klopp says he loves the team but this is a decision that he is "convinced" he has to make.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JURGEN KLOPP, LIVERPOOL MANAGER: It is that I'm -- what I'm going to say that I'm running out of energy. I have no problem now. Obviously, I think I know it already for longer, that I will have to announce that at one point. But I'm absolutely fine now.
But I know that I cannot do the job again and again, and again, and again. And after all the years we had together and after all the time we spent together, and after all the things we went through together, the respect grew for you, the love grew for you. And the least thing I owe you is the truth. And that's the truth.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FOSTER: (Inaudible), doesn't he? Liverpool are currently at the top of the Premier League table, which is why it's such a shock that he's going at this point, but it seems like a heartfelt reason.
Now, the International Court of Justice has imposed emergency measures in the genocide case against Israel. It's ordering Israel to ensure its forces don't commit genocide, punish those who violate the Convention on genocide, and improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza.
South Africa brought the case before the ICJ in hopes that Israel will be forced to pause the conflict in Gaza. That didn't happen. But the court has rejected Israel's request to throw out the case, and acknowledge that Palestinians in Gaza constitute a protected group. This is not a verdict that genocide has been committed. Any verdicts on that issue could be years away.
Let's bring in CNN's Nic Robertson in Tel Aviv. I mean, a very -- well, a typically bombastic, I guess, appearance of the prime minister. But there are many parts of this report or this finding that it, you know, is worrying for Israel, frankly, even though it hasn't been asked for a ceasefire or directly at this point being accused of genocide.
ROBERTSON: I think if it had been asked for a ceasefire, that would have been very problematic for the government. It would have shown them that the international pressure would have really ramped up. This is something that could have gone to the UN Security Council and put its biggest partner, its biggest ally and back as the United States in a very difficult position.
Because remember, United States has really been a defender of Israel through the past number of months. And previously, of course, but particularly now, Israel feels that most keenly at the UN Security Council by blocking sanctions against Israel. And had there been a ruling for a ceasefire at the next UN Security Council meeting, where a potentially a resolution around this had been bought up. The United States would have had a very, very difficult decision to take one that it's not had to take so far.
So I think in those terms, Israel, this could have been worse.
FOSTER: OK. Because it's Ben Wedeman as well, he's looking at this from Beirut. What were the highlights for you? Where's the significance, Ben? WEDEMAN: Well, I think the highlight was the fact that, a, they did not call for an immediate ceasefire, which is what the people in Gaza need most. But beyond that, what they did call is for the prevention of the killing of Palestinians, causing them bodily harm, the provision of urgently needed basic needs
If you put all of those together, if Israel to work to carry out those orders or recommendations to the tea, then certainly they wouldn't be able to be fighting at the moment. We're seeing over the last few weeks on average, about 200 Palestinians being killed a day. We're seeing massive destruction, massive displacement going on, and certainly that is what is the on the top of the minds. And obviously the people in Gaza, I think obviously the hope was for an immediate ceasefire.
[08:55:15]
That's not going to happen. I think what we heard from the prime minister of Israel was that they believe that they're already doing what the ICJ has told them to do, which is allow for the provision of basic needs. They are allowing every day 100 or so trucks of humanitarian aid into Gaza. They say they are trying to prevent unnecessary deaths of civilians in Gaza, although people in Gaza would probably debate that.
So perhaps, we haven't really gone anywhere, symbolically just the airing of all the views of senior UN officials about what they see going on in Gaza, certainly probably was not pleasant, listening to Israeli officials in Tel Aviv. But nonetheless, at the end of the day, no ceasefire, nothing really changes for the people of Gaza at the moment.
FOSTER: No. And actually, when we talk about a verdict in the basic allegation of genocide, it hasn't gone away, has it? But it's years away.
WEDEMAN: Yes, it's years away, and we don't know where we're going to be by then. Certainly Prime Minister Netanyahu said perhaps this war is going to begin, rather continue until years and -- but that's something that's far beyond any visible horizon at the moment. But it does provide, it does require Israel to provide a report on to what extent it has implemented all of these recommendations or orders.
But basically, that's a homework assignment that they have to have done in a month. Max?
FOSTER: OK. Ben Wedeman, thanks for joining us from Beirut with your perspective. A lot to take in this year, the shows of this day with this very significant ruling but a very complex one as well. So we'll be digesting it on the other shows as we go through the day.
Thank you for joining me here on CNN Newsroom. I'm Max foster in London. Connect the World with World Sport as well, up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
