Hurricane Cleveland: ICJ’s Humanitarian Obligations Decision and Israel’s Genocide in Gaza

25 October 2025

On 20 December 2024, United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres requested the International Court of Justice to issue an advisory opinion regarding Israel’s obligations as an occupying power to provide essential and necessary humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian population, particularly in Gaza. This submission was filed more than a year after Guterres' statement on 6 November 2023 that Gaza has become a graveyard for children and South Africa’s case before the same court regarding Israel’s perpetration of the crime of genocide, which has been delayed twice upon Israel’s request.[1] Since the beginning of Israel’s genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes in Gaza on 7 October 2023, Israel either totally blocked the entry of humanitarian aid or allowed an insufficient fraction under American appeals pressed to do the contrary by the Israel lobby.[2] 

Israel objected to the measure taken by the U.N. Secretary General amid growing tense relations, resulting in the bombing of United Nations facilities in Gaza as well.[3] Contrary to its longstanding tradition of not cooperating with international investigations and legal procedures, Israel provided information to the ICJ on 27 August 2025 reiterated on 8 September 2025. Israel presumed that it had a right to protect its territory, not commenting on the request for the advisory opinion that identified it as an occupying power. Israel referred to an internal legal procedure purportedly pending before the Israeli Supreme Court to highlight its commitment to adequate humanitarianism. Yet, this court determined on 27 March 2025 in the referred legal procedure by Israel that it is not an occupying power, it has no special duty to provide humanitarian assistance to the civilian population of Gaza, and that whatever aid that Israel claimed was entering the besieged area was in compliance with unspecified obligations.

Israel has not complied with two existing ICJ advisory opinions of 9 July 2004 regarding the illegality of constructing a wall in the 1967 occupied territories, including East Jerusalem, and of 19 July 2024 that determined that Israel’s occupation in these territories is illegal and forms an apartheid. It should be noted that the wall was constructed in the aftermath of sadistic accusatorial terrorism applied by Israel that led to the devastating Operation Defensive Shield in March 2022.[4]

Many U.N. Security Council and General Assembly resolutions have repeatedly affirmed for decades the illegality of settlements in East Jerusalem, the West Bank, and Gaza, and lauded Palestinians' right to self–determination among others, only to be snubbed by an America-supported Israel, followed by the European Union, particularly and embarrassingly Britain.

The United States' submission of 28 February 2025 implicitly disagreed with the notion that Israel is an occupying power, highlighting its security requirements as an exception to any relevant humanitarian obligation. The United States also contended that states have an obligation to cooperate with United Nations humanitarian agencies only in the context of a legally binding U.N. Security Council resolution, not a United Nations General Assembly resolution.

The ICJ rejected Israel’s arguments and America’s allegations holding unanimously, inter alia, that as an occupying power Israel has an obligation under international law: to provide essential supplies of daily life and it has failed to do so; to allow United Nations and other international agencies to assist (Judge Sebutinde delivered a separate opinion on this issue and several others); to respect and protect all relief and medical personnel and facilities; to respect the prohibition on forcible transfer and deportation in the Occupied Palestinian Territories; to protect the prohibition on the use of starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. Israel and the United States denounced the ICJ's decision.

Judge Sebutinde wrote a separate opinion, and four other judges issued declarations. Unsurprisingly, Judge Sebutinde from Uganda reiterated some of Israel’s arguments not related to the substance of the advisory opinion’s request, about the difficulty of adjudicating before the International Court of Justice. Four other judges preferred more elaboration on the obligations of third states under the United Nations Charter to cooperate with humanitarian agencies.

The ICJ has erred in its advisory opinion at paragraph 58, as did Judge Cleveland in her second lone declaration. In both, Israel’s version of the events was noted. Israel’s arguments are an exercise in factual and legal fallacy. However, there was no discussion under international law about the right to resistance from an occupied and besieged territory. Gaza’s conditions before Israel’s genocidal onslaught demanded taking action against its intended suffocation policy[5] carried out by Israel’s army and its security agency, the Shin Bet. Indeed, many Israeli soldiers and Shin Bet officials were killed by the resistance operation of 7 October 2023, and others were taken captive. There is no reason in law, morality, or logic to condemn this event. Moreover, most of the Israeli civilians who died that day were killed by the intentional shooting of their incompetent security forces, according to a special directive.[6] Israeli military and government censorship maintain strict censorship on clear reporting of this fact.

Judge Cleveland’s unwarranted comments legally and factually seem to echo the public pronouncements of key figures in the American administration, namely President Biden and his Secretary of State Blinken, premised on their domestic and international interests as well as stemming from severe misrepresentations in the American media, particularly the New York Times and Fox News.

The central objective of the resistance operation for anyone with decent knowledge of law and history was to contest the occupation and siege of Gaza and hopefully to capture soldiers to release Palestinian political prisoners who have endured torture and framing by the Israeli investigative and legal system regularly. The declaration by Judge Tladi of South Africa emphasizing that Israel’s illegal occupation is the reason for the current situation in Gaza and the limits of international law and the International Court of Justice resonates with ordinary decent people[7] more than the legal acrobatics that may lead to absolving Israel from the established guilt of committing genocide.   

[1] Nir Cohen, “Israel erred in Submitting to ICJ jurisdiction, says Alan Dershowitz”, Ynet, 24 January 2024.

[2] See, for example, Abbie Cheesman et al, “Israel must give U.N. full access to Gaza to halt starvation, allies say”, Washington Post, 12 August 2025;  Jason Burke, “Israel closes the most direct route for aid to Palestinians in Gaza”, The Guardian, 28 June 2025; Shira Rubin, “Netanyahu says ‘minimal’ aid will go to Gaza to preserve U.S. support”, Washington Post, 19 May 2025; Humeyra Pamuk et al, “Over 1,000 USAID officials call for Gaza ceasefire in Letter”, Reuters, 10 November 2023; Mark Landler, “Viewed Warily by Democrats, a Netanyahu Ally Is Key Conduit to U.S.”, New York Times, 7 November 2023. See also, Peter Beaumont, “What is Unrwa and why has Israel’s parliament voted to ban it?”, The Guardian, 28 October 2024; Patrick Wintour, “Israel insists it is going ahead with Unrwa ban – what it may mean for Palestinians”, The Guardian, 27 January 2025.

[3] Chloe Cornish, “Israel – UN relations plunge to new low as Gaza war rages”, Financial Times, 27 December 2023.

[4] See Joel Brinkley, “Bomb Kills at Least 19 in Israel as Arabs Meet Over Peace Plan”, New York Times, 28 March 2002.

[5] See OCHA, Humanitarian Needs Overview 2022, December 2021; Hazem Balousha, “The U.N. once predicted Gaza would be ‘uninhabitable’ by 2020. Two million people still live there”, Washington Post, 2 January 2020.   

[6] Aaron Reich, “’All means are kosher’”: A look at the IDF’s controversial Hannibal Directive – explainer”, Jerusalem Post, 27 February 2025.

[7] See Marti Koskenniemi, “The Laws that Rule Us: The Legal Infrastructure of Global Capitalism”, 154 New Left Review (Jul/Aug 2025); Perry Anderson, “International Law of the Strongest”, Le Monde Diplomatique, March 2024.