Scribd
Upload
8 views

Introduction

The document examines the evolving role of international law, particularly the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and International Criminal Court (ICC), in the context of the Gaza crisis following Israel's October 2023 assault. It highlights the mixed perceptions of international law as both a potential means for justice and a tool constrained by political limitations, while also addressing the broader implications of legal discourse in global conflicts. Ultimately, it raises critical questions about the effectiveness of these institutions in delivering justice amidst entrenched power dynamics.

Uploaded by

Ariz Abu Qais
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
8 views

Introduction

The document examines the evolving role of international law, particularly the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and International Criminal Court (ICC), in the context of the Gaza crisis following Israel's October 2023 assault. It highlights the mixed perceptions of international law as both a potential means for justice and a tool constrained by political limitations, while also addressing the broader implications of legal discourse in global conflicts. Ultimately, it raises critical questions about the effectiveness of these institutions in delivering justice amidst entrenched power dynamics.

Uploaded by

Ariz Abu Qais
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

Introduction

The international community has been increasingly drawn to the legal


institutions housed in The Hague, particularly the International Court of
Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC), in the wake of
significant geopolitical events. One such event that has brought these
institutions to the fore is Israel’s assault on Gaza in October 2023, an
episode that has ignited widespread calls for accountability and justice. In
this context, the language of international law—specifically the concepts
of "illegality" and "justice"—has dominated discussions regarding the
rights and wrongs of the conflict. This trend is not entirely new, as similar
appeals to international law were made during the 2003 Iraq invasion
when global opposition was framed as a legal critique of the war’s
legitimacy. However, the post-October 2023 moment appears to have
generated an unprecedented groundswell of interest in The Hague's
potential to deliver justice for the people of Gaza and Palestine.

This project will explore the evolving role of international law and the legal institutions based
in The Hague, focusing particularly on the ICJ and ICC. It will analyze the
optimism and skepticism that have emerged in response to their involvement in global
conflicts like Gaza. Moreover, this paper will critically assess whether international law can
live up to its promise of justice or whether it remains constrained by political, institutional,
and structural limitations. Through this discussion, we will interrogate the efficacy and
ethical implications of turning to legal institutions in the face of deep geopolitical injustice.

International Law, The Hague, and the Gaza


Crisis: A Critical Reflection
The International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) have
emerged as central institutions in the ongoing debate surrounding the conflict in Gaza,
particularly in light of the devastating October 2023 attacks. Public discourse has
increasingly turned to these international legal bodies, invoking their authority to address the
violence and injustices unfolding in the region. This renewed interest in international law
mirrors a broader trend wherein legal discourse, especially in the form of appeals to
international law and its institutions, has become a dominant frame for understanding and
addressing political and humanitarian crises. A similar dynamic occurred in 2003, when
opposition to the Iraq War was framed within the language of legal argument, condemning
the invasion as an illegal act of aggression, while calling for accountability in The Hague.

However, as history has shown, such appeals to international law often yield mixed results.
The critical legal community, despite its vocal opposition to the Iraq invasion, has been
consistently torn between skepticism and hope regarding the potential of international law to
deliver justice in cases like Gaza. The unflinching reliance on institutions like the ICJ and
ICC has prompted critical scholars to reassess the limits and consequences of this approach.

International Law and Gaza: A Double-Edged Sword


The current moment highlights a sharp divide in how international law is perceived and
invoked in response to the situation in Gaza. On one hand, there are those who view
international law, particularly in the form of the ICJ and ICC, as the ultimate means to
condemn Israel’s actions and seek justice for the Palestinian people. Some scholars argue that
these legal institutions represent the best hope for peace and legitimacy in the international
system, emphasizing their potential to uphold human rights and restore order to global
politics. For example, John Quigley suggests that international law could be mobilized for the
broader cause of world peace, while Ruti Teitel points to the possibility that these institutions
could restore legitimacy to the international legal order, despite their limitations.

On the other hand, there is growing disillusionment with the idea that international law alone
can bring about meaningful change. Critics like Nora Jaber argue that unless international law
is coupled with a broader anti-imperialist struggle, it will remain powerless to address the
deep-rooted injustices, including the ongoing Nakba. Similarly, Sophie Rigney warns against
relying too heavily on the carceral system of international criminal law, which risks
prioritizing individual accountability over systemic change.

The Limits of International Law: Critiques and Alternatives


The disillusionment with international law, while not entirely dismissive of its potential,
highlights its inherent limitations. Critics point to a tendency within the international legal
framework to address conflicts primarily through criminalization, which often oversimplifies
complex political and social issues. As Outi Korhonen suggests, focusing exclusively on legal
cases—such as war crimes or crimes against humanity—may obscure the underlying causes
of conflict, such as settler colonialism or the supply chains that fuel arms trade. In this vein,
several contributors to the ongoing discourse advocate for new legal categories, like settler
colonialism, to address these structural injustices.

In parallel, others question whether the ICC and ICJ are the most effective forums for justice.
Sara Kendall and Clare da Silva, for example, argue that international law may be more
impactful if it moves away from the exclusive focus on criminal trials and towards addressing
systemic issues such as the arms trade, which plays a key role in perpetuating conflict. The
focus on criminalization may not capture the complexity of the situation and often overlooks
the role of states and multinational corporations in perpetuating violence.

International Law and Public Discourse: A Shifting Narrative


The language of international law has become a dominant mode of discourse in the wake of
the Gaza crisis. Legal arguments are frequently invoked to protest Israeli actions, reflecting
both a genuine desire for justice and a broader shift in global public opinion towards a more
legalistic interpretation of international conflicts. Yet, this increased invocation of
international law raises important questions about its place in the political and intellectual
landscape. As David Chandler observes, the growing emphasis on international law may
signal an exhaustion of international politics, where the legal framework serves as a substitute
for more direct political action.

This shift in public discourse also reflects deep tensions within the critical legal community
itself. Some scholars, like Ntina Tzouvala, see recent calls for international legal action as a
break from the Iraq War era, while others, like Michael Fakhri, emphasize the historical
significance of the moment, suggesting a reconfiguration of global alliances and networks in
international law that will never be the same.

A Global Perspective on International Law


One of the key issues raised by the current situation is whether the global enthusiasm for
international law is truly universal, or whether it is shaped by regional, political, and
historical contexts. Scholars from diverse geographical and intellectual backgrounds have
examined how international law is interpreted and applied in different countries. For
example, Alaa Hajyahia and Reshard Kolabhai reflect on how legal appeals to the ICJ might
be understood differently in South Africa and Palestine, given their unique histories and
aspirations. Similarly, other contributors examine how countries like Portugal, Brazil, and
Argentina engage with international law, noting the complexities of public opinion and media
coverage in these regions.

This global perspective underscores the ways in which international law is not a neutral or
uniform system, but is shaped by the geopolitical interests and historical experiences of
different nations. As Francisco-José Quintana notes, shifts in domestic politics, such as the
election of right-wing leaders like Javier Milei in Argentina, can also influence the country's
stance on international legal issues.

International Law: A Moment of Reckoning for Academia


As the discourse surrounding international law continues to evolve, critical scholars are
grappling with their role in this broader conversation. Some, like Ihab Shalbak, reflect on the
tensions between tactical and constitutive investments in international law, while others, such
as Justina Uriburu, see the present moment as one of ethical reckoning, forcing scholars to
confront the consequences of their involvement in legal academia.

This intellectual struggle is compounded by the larger political context, where international
law is increasingly seen as a tool for both resistance and conformity. The challenge, as
Gleider Hernández puts it, is finding a balance between the ideals of justice and the realities
of legal practice. As critical scholars continue to engage with international law, their
contributions will shape not only the academic debate but also the future trajectory of
international legal institutions.

Conclusion: The Role of International Law in a Divided World


The international legal response to Gaza raises fundamental questions about the effectiveness
of institutions like the ICJ and ICC in addressing contemporary global injustices. While some
see international law as the best hope for justice, others remain deeply skeptical, questioning
its ability to bring about meaningful change in the face of entrenched power structures. The
tension between these perspectives highlights the complexities of international law as both a
tool for progress and a reflection of broader political dynamics.

In the end, the question of whether international law can deliver justice for Palestine—and for
other conflicts around the world—remains an open one. What is clear, however, is that the
ongoing debate over Gaza underscores the centrality of law in contemporary global politics,
and the critical role that international legal institutions will continue to play in shaping the
future of international relations.

You might also like