Interview with ILNA News Agency, January 30, 2024 -
The interview was in Persian and the translation below was done by Ai.
Sasan Karimi, an international affairs analyst, said in an interview with ILNA reporter about South Africa's complaint against Israel at the International Court of Justice: Of course, it should be noted that the ruling that was issued is not a final verdict in the judicial sense. Rather, firstly, it is a declaration of the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice to handle this issue and secondly, it is a statement about the current situation. It is as if the principle of raising the issue and declaring the jurisdiction of the court has a legal meaning and legal uses can be made, especially from the published text, but we know that issuing a final verdict in this regard sometimes takes several years.
He added: South Africa's initiative, especially due to the meaningful history of that country and the support of other countries in this matter, has been noteworthy and worthy in a similar issue, and it especially indicates a new dimension in the Palestine-Israel issue, which, ironically, can gradually diminish the support and support of countries allied and supporting Israel.
In response to the question of how Iran can continue this process with South Africa, Karimi said: The reality is that first of all, Iran is wary of entering into a dispute at the state level due to its non-recognition of Israel. Entering into a dispute at the International Court of Justice, which is the authority for handling disputes between states, is, in a sense, a later step towards recognition. Of course, there are precedents at the level of the National Oil Company and others in this regard, but it can still be seen at the level of companies and not governments.
He added: Another issue is that if Iran intervenes, some countries that currently support the issue might stop supporting it. Therefore, perhaps, in the light of Iran’s move today, it would be a better decision, so that a country like South Africa can advance its legal position. Given the history of the issue, Iran’s entry may, first, override the political aspect over the legal aspect and send activists on a different path, and secondly, basically provide Israel with a basis for portraying itself as the oppressed, raising the issue of existential danger, and discussing self-defense, which can somehow escape the issue of the court.
In response to the question of whether it is possible to hope that the court’s outcome will stop the genocides in Gaza and Palestine and establish a ceasefire, Karimi said: “In my opinion, no. The court, of course, has ordered, in its strictest sense, that Israel take mandatory security measures regarding the implementation of the court’s orders, including to prevent actions leading to genocide. It is as if the court’s decisions have more legal and then political burdens than guarantees of execution. The decisions of the International Court of Justice are of course binding on governments, but ultimately their implementation is required through the UN Security Council, which, at least due to the presence of the United States, is unlikely to put such pressure on Israel in the current and foreseeable future.
In response to the question of how Israel can comply with the court's ruling and implement the ruling, this international affairs expert said: Israel has announced that it does not consider itself committed to implementing this opinion or any other ruling or ruling from the Court. Because, at least for now, it feels absolutely secure from the Security Council that it will not be subjected to any pressure. Therefore, it seems that this path will help the political pressures of foreign governments as well as domestic pressures on the Israeli government. In addition, the most important aspect of the issue of breaking the habit of the international environment regarding Israel is the elimination of its apparent victimhood and the new normalization in this regard, which will have an effective impact on the equations of this issue in the medium term.
In response to the question of whether we will witness a reduction in regional tensions and military conflicts if the genocide in Palestine stops, Karimi said: Yes. Of course, I think that if the will to reduce tensions prevails over the will of the Netanyahu government, today the major international and regional players (except Russia) do not see the tension in the region as beneficial and it is not a priority for them. Therefore, it seems that everyone is potentially ready to reduce tensions. The Netanyahu government is fanning the flames for reasons we know, but others need to take the initiative to manage the issue and reduce regional tensions as much as possible. In principle, however, this new legal event paves the way for a new procedure and path in the Palestinian issue, which may be said to benefit Palestine and the region in the future or help their position.
ILNA Link
File
