May this contribution of an israelic (lee mirdechai) scientist help to reveal more truth...

https://witnessing-the-gaza-war.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Bearing-witness-to-the-Israel-Gaza-War-v6.5.5-5.12.24.pdf

In depends how do you look at international law. One thing is that other norms of international law are complied with. Can we say that "the" international law is dead because part of its norms are not complied with in a particular situation. Taking in mind that even these norms are complied with in many other situations, which are not in media.

Second, more theoretically, how can you say that something is wrongful or is a crime without referring to a valid system of legal norms? Situation is qualified as wrongful, ergo, there is international law.

Ali Saadi Abdulzahra Jubeir

Did you ask question on international law being dead in the moment when Russia invaded Ukraine? Did your country put heavy sanctions on Russia at that time? If no, then why do you appear surprised that when you don't bother with enforcement of such norms, you subsequently discover that those norms are not being enforced?

If you hope that those rules be enforced by West single handed, there is nevertheless limited capacity. Right now West is kind of busy with still ongoing Russian aggression on Ukraine. The thing is that you (OPEC) were able to stop them by flooding global markets with oil and making Russia unable to finance the war. You had not done it, if anything the support from Middle East has been going in the opposite direction as Iran has clearly provided Russia with Shahed drones, optimized to attack civilian targets in Ukraine. Too add extra irony there is high level of dissatisfaction in Western societies (especially Europe) about tolerating Israel's actions. However as long as there is an ongoing war with relative higher priority it's unlikely that something would be done due to simple technical reasons.

Dear Doctor

I quoted this from " Is International Law Still Relevant after the Carnage in Gaza?" that deals with the genocide and barbaric actions against innocent Palestinians. There should be potent and effective international laws to stop this genocide.

[According to the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), the death toll in Gaza by Israel’s onslaught has passed 34,000 Palestinians, while thousands more are wounded and buried under rubble. Israel’s massive destruction of homes, schools, and hospitals has left 1.7 million Gazans internally displaced, with no homes to return to after the bombing ends. Meanwhile, the Israeli-imposed siege preventing the unhindered entry of food, water, and other humanitarian assistance has resulted in over one million Gazans facing starvation, famine, and disease.

The ICJ order of January 26 to Israel to undertake measures to prevent genocide in Gaza disappointed many in not calling for the ceasefire that South Africa had requested. It would, however, have been difficult for the ICJ to issue such a call since it had jurisdiction over Israel, but not over Hamas. The ICJ did order Israel to stop committing the acts—killing, injuring, creating conditions of life likely to kill—that constitute genocide. It could have gone further, as at least one judge suggested, and called for Israel to withdraw forces from Gaza. That said, what the ICJ did order would have effectively ended Israeli troop operations and aerial bombardment in Gaza, had Israel complied. Another less-understood consideration is that the Chief Justice had to take into account the views of two justices unlikely to join the strongest measures—ad hoc Israeli Justice Aharon Barak and Ugandan Justice Julia Sebutinde—in obtaining the broadest consensus possible to give strength to the Court’s orders.

The weakness of the United Nations in enforcing ICJ orders heightens the need for civil society to play a role. The existence of the ICJ orders is a powerful tool in pressuring governments. Once the ICJ said that prima facie evidence showed that Israel was committing genocide, the narrative about Israel’s incursion into Gaza changed dramatically. Domestic lawsuits—following the precedents in the United States, Germany, and the Netherlands—are likely to grow, along with the protest actions of millions of individuals who have taken to the streets, pressured their political representatives demanding a ceasefire and an end to arms and funds to Israel, and taken innumerable actions to protest the war on Gaza. Future peace is indeed in the balance, and it cannot be left to a tiny minority of global actors to determine the outcome.]