The ICJ Advisory Opinion: Why Context Matters in Assessing Conduct on the Ground
The International Court of Justice’s latest advisory opinion on Israel’s conduct in Gaza has reignited long-standing debates over fairness, context, and credibility in international law. While presented as a neutral interpretation of legal obligations, the opinion overlooks critical national security realities, ongoing humanitarian efforts, and the political motives that continue to undermine trust in global institutions.
Last week the ICJ released a non-binding advisory opinion regarding Israel’s obligations to UN organisations in the Palestinian territories, including Gaza, during its now-ceased campaign against Hamas, a proscribed terrorist organisation.
Disappointing Israel’s critics, the ICJ did not rule that Israel had breached its allegations. In fact it is recognised to have acted in accordance with and beyond the requirements of international law, including in the field of the facilitation of humanitarian aid.
UNRWA’s credibility crisis ignored
The ICJ’s ruling, however, notably did little to quell concerns about the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and its infiltration by Hamas members – which continues to attract the condemnation of international policymakers and commentators alike.
It was little surprise that Israel categorically rejected the non-binding advisory opinion. Supported by the U.S. government, it has been consistent that the UNRWA is in no way fit to operate in the region. It repeated the fact that UNRWA employees were involved in the October 7th attacks. The State Department, responding to the ICJ’s ruling, described it as “corrupt” and called out UNRWA’s “entanglement with and material support for” Hamas.
UNGA’s political intent
The ICJ was acting on the instruction of the UN General Assembly, which called for an advisory opinion in December 2024. UNGA, the majority of its members being hostile to Israel, is seeking to diplomatically isolate the Jewish state as it wins praise for agreeing to and implementing the Trump peace plan.
Humanitarian aid and security realities
On the important matter of aid, any reasonable observer would recognise intense, longstanding efforts in this regard. Israel is recorded to have facilitated more than 2 million tonnes of aid to Gaza since the beginning of the conflict. This facilitation has expanded under the terms of the ceasefire – disregarding the UN’s political machinations.
The need for full context in future proceedings
This context, in addition to the national security imperatives behind, and the unique operational context of, Israel’s campaign against Hamas, seems to have been disregarded by the advisory opinion. It is this full context that must be brought to bear in future proceedings on this conflict, which has proven unprecedentedly complex.