Human rights activists and legal experts have welcomed this Decision of the International Court of Justice Israel is ordered to take “all measures within its power” to prevent actions that could amount to genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.

The United Nations Supreme Court on Friday did not explicitly call for a ceasefire, but acknowledged there was a plausible risk of genocide in the bombed Palestinian enclave and rejected it the case brought from South Africa.

“It’s a huge defeat for Israel – one of the biggest defeats… in the last 75 years,” said Raed Jarrar, advocacy director at Democracy for the Arab World Now (DAWN), a think tank in Washington, DC

But the ruling “goes beyond Israel,” Jarrar told Al Jazeera, as it highlights countries’ legal and political obligations to take action to prevent the alleged genocide in Gaza.

The International Court of Justice’s decision in The Hague also led to renewed calls for a suspension of arms sales to the Israeli government, which advocates said amounted to complicity and violated international law. This also includes arms deliveries from the USA, Israel’s most important supporter.

“It is a turning point where the United States government is being advised that it cannot continue its blank check policy towards Israel,” Jarrar said.

“The US cannot and should not continue supplying arms to Israel now.”

No “gesture of goodwill”

The United States provides Israel with at least $3.8 billion in military aid annually. Human rights activists and a growing number of US lawmakers have been calling on Washington to do this for years Condition that help about Israel’s human rights record and international law.

However, US President Joe Biden has rejected these efforts while increasing aid to the Israeli government.

After Israel started the Gaza war On October 7, following a Hamas attack that killed more than 1,100 people in southern Israel, the Biden administration sent a request to Congress to approve a $14 billion foreign aid package for Israel would largely involve military aid.

Also the US government twice bypassed Congress to provide the country with thousands of artillery shells as it continues to bombard Gaza. Israeli attacks have so far killed more than 26,000 Palestinians and decimated the coastal area.

But despite reports and… Investigations which showed that US weapons were used in Israeli bombings that killed Palestinian civilians in Gaza, attempts to pressure Washington to end the transfers, or determine whether the weapons are used in violations of the law have failed.

“We told the Biden administration that this is not just a goodwill gesture” to end arms transfers to Israel, DAWN’s Jarrar said, explaining that Washington has obligations under international and U.S. law.

“This is something they need to think about very seriously because the United States government is implicated in these war crimes and U.S. officials are also involved,” Jarrar said. “You must accept today’s order [from the ICJ] very seriously.”

International contracts

Rights groups have called Calls on all UN member states to stop supplying weapons to Gaza that “can be used to commit violations of international humanitarian law and human rights.”

Canada and the United Kingdom, among others, were under increasing pressure on Friday following the International Court of Justice’s decision. Both nations are parties to the Arms Trade Treaty, a U.N. agreement aimed at regulating the flow of weapons worldwide and preventing them from being used in violations of international law and human rights.

It prohibits parties from giving the green light to arms transfers “if [they have] At the time of approval, it was known that the weapons or items would be used to commit genocide, crimes against humanity, serious violations of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, attacks against civilian objects or civilians protected as such, or other war crimes.

According to Human Rights Watch (HRW), the UK has licensed more than £474 million ($602 million) worth of military exports to Israel since 2015 and “currently provides around 15% of the components of the F-35 stealth bomber aircraft.” be deployed in the Gaza Strip.”

When Defense Secretary Grant Shapps pressed Britain’s arms exports to Israel in November, he said that “the country’s defense exports to Israel are relatively small – just £42 million”. [$53m] last year.” The weapons “also go through very strict criteria before anything is exported,” Shapps said, according to a parliamentary transcript.

But on Friday, Yasmine Ahmed, HRW’s UK director, said the ICJ’s interim order should prompt the British government to “halt arms exports to Israel with immediate effect.” “There is NO question,” she wrote on social media.

“The court found a plausible risk of genocide and the UK has a duty to prevent genocide and not be complicit.”

There is no question. In light of the judgment on interim measures @CIJ_ICJ🇬🇧 must stop arms exports to Israel with immediate effect @DavidCameron @KemiBadenoch

The court found a plausible risk of genocide and the UK has a duty to prevent genocide and not be complicit

– Yasmine Ahmed (@YasmineAhmed001) January 26, 2024

This obligation arises from the 1948 UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide – commonly known as the Genocide Convention. The United States, Britain and Canada are among the 153 countries that have joined the treaty.

It affirms “that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and punish.”

South Africa invoked this “commitment to prevent genocide” when it took its case to the International Court of Justice, and the court on Friday recognized that it was justified under the Genocide Convention. The treaty also states that “complicity in genocide” is punishable.

“If you supply weapons to a country where you know the weapons could be used for criminal purposes, you could be complicit in those crimes,” said Geoffrey Nice, a British lawyer who led the prosecution of Slobodan Milosevic at the International Criminal headed tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

“And it is very difficult not to be complicit after a certain stage of knowledge is reached and a certain stage of behavior persists,” Nice said in a television interview with Al Jazeera on Friday.

“Weapons suppliers would have to be very, very careful – and some might simply decide that it’s not worth the risk of being caught up in a humiliating, serious, potential criminal investigation.”

“No choice” but to suspend arms exports

Most countries also have their own regulations on arms exports.

For example, Canada’s Export and Import Licensing Act requires the Secretary of State to “reject applications for export and brokering licenses for military goods and technology…if there is a significant risk that the goods would endanger peace and security.”

The minister should also refuse exports if they could “lead to the commission or facilitation of serious violations of international humanitarian and human rights laws” or “serious acts of gender-based violence or serious acts of violence against women and children.”

Last year, Canada exported weapons worth C$21.3 million ($15.7 million) to Israel.

Canadian anti-war group Project Plowshares said in a recent report that Canadian-made components transferred to the United States also end up being supplied to the Israeli military, including components used in F-35 aircraft.

“Because the vast majority of Canadian military exports to the United States are neither regulated nor reported, the exact quantities and values ​​of these exports are not available to the public and remain unknown,” the report said.

Michael Bueckert, vice-president of the advocacy group Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East, said Canada was sending weapons to Israel “despite significant human rights violations and war crimes for many years.”

But the severity of these transfers increased significantly after the ICJ decision, he said.

“There is simply no other option to prevent Canada’s complicity in possible genocide; Canada must halt all exports and completely end the arms trade to ensure it does not support or facilitate these serious crimes,” Bueckert told Al Jazeera.

“From a human rights perspective, there is no such thing as safe exports of military goods in the context of a possible genocide. Canada must do everything possible to ensure that it does not contribute in any way.”

Global Affairs Canada did not immediately respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment on calls to end arms sales to Israel.