Since 7 October, 2023, the Israeli government has received immense financial, military, diplomatic, and political support from many Western powers. The Austrian Government especially has supported the government of Israel at almost every turn, being one of only 10 United Nations (UN) members to vote against a ceasefire at the UN general assembly on 12 December, 2023. Given the scale of destruction in the Gaza Strip, along with International Court of Justice (ICJ) decisions and UN reports describing the actions of the Israeli military as genocidal, it is time to not only re-evaluate Austria’s position on this issue but also discuss potential legal consequences.

The ICJ case accusing Israel of genocide was brought by South Africa. Although it will take years until a final ruling is made, the court has already taken some steps. By taking up the case and issuing provisional measures, it has effectively indicated that there is a plausible genocide being perpetrated in the occupied Palestinian territories. This should have been a wake-up call to all allies and friends of Israel to not only reign in their ally but also to reexamine their own positions and actions so as not to be complicit in a genocide.

The ICJ was sufficiently concerned about the risk of breaches to the Genocide Convention occurring before a final ruling. As a result, a set of provisional measures was issued on 26 January 2024. These range from broad orders to not breach the Convention to more specific orders to prevent and punish calls for genocide within Israel. Instead of using the issuance of preliminary measures as an opportunity to apply pressure on the Israeli Government, many Western governments chose to defund the most important provider of aid to Palestinians in Gaza. By the end of the month, multiple UN member states (Austria, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Netherlands, Romania, Sweden, the United States, Iceland, UK, Japan, Canada, and Australia) had decided to suspend payments to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA).

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East is the UN body responsible for Palestinian refugees. Its importance can hardly be overstated. UNRWA provides health and education to a people who would otherwise have access to neither. UNRWA ran almost 300 schools in Gaza, employing more than 10.000 Gazans before many were destroyed by Israeli bombs. Almost 1,000 health staff facilitated 6.9 million patient visits per year in Gaza before much of the health system was destroyed by Western munitions. It is by far the most capable, expansive, and essential aid organisation in the Gaza Strip.

So why was its funding suspended? The Israeli government accused 12 UNRWA employees of being involved in the 7 October attacks. When one considers that 12 out of 13.000 UNRWA workers in Gaza would hardly constitute an indication of a systematic problem, that no evidence was provided publicly, and that this accusation came hours after the ICJ provisional measures were announced, this accusation looks like a purposeful lie. It could be seen as an attempt to control the narrative and justify attacks on and the defunding of one of the Palestinian people’s last lifelines.

The following is one of the provisional measures issued by the ICJ on the 26 January, as mentioned earlier:

THE COURT FURTHER CONSIDERS THAT ISRAEL MUST TAKE IMMEDIATE AND EFFECTIVE MEASURES TO ENABLE THE PROVISION OF URGENTLY NEEDED BASIC SERVICES AND HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO ADDRESS THE ADVERSE CONDITIONS OF LIFE FACED BY PALESTINIANS IN THE GAZA STRIP.

Whether or not the ICJ rules if Israeli actions in Gaza constitute a breach of the Genocide Convention is a decision that will take years. However, this should not stop us from evaluating our own government’s potential complicity. The legal basis for this also lies within the four pages of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. As the title suggests, the point of this convention, drafted as a direct response to the horrors of the Shoah, is not only to punish and prohibit but to prevent genocide from taking place. Inaction on its own could be seen as a breach of this. Furthermore, Article 3 of the convention lists complicity in genocide as a breach of the convention.

What is complicity? Legal definitions of complicity in international law vary, but primarily centre around a state’s responsibility for being involved in or supporting a criminal act – one which they themselves do not directly commit.
Assuming the ICJ rules in favour of South Africa, what could this mean for States who have supported the Israeli Government’s actions? The US and Germany, being by far the main suppliers of weapons to Israeli forces, might be seen as complicit because, put bluntly, it is their bombs which have destroyed the health care system, the universities, and the lives and bodies of Gazans. Meanwhile, the UK has flown countless reconnaissance missions over Gaza from their base in Cyprus, presumably providing the intelligence for Israeli bombings. Without their assistance, the Israeli government may not have been able to wage war on the scale that it has.

Even Austria, like many other European nations, could find that certain actions taken by its government could be ruled as complicity in genocide or even genocide itself. Article 2 of the Genocide Convention states that actions “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;” is a breach of the convention. Could the withholding of vital aid funding during an ongoing genocide be considered a breach of this article? Many UN experts appear to be of that opinion, having expressed the following in a press release published on 2 February, 2024 – which is still available on the website of the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights – only days after Austria joined other countries in declaring that it would suspend its UNRWA funding:

“With the ICJ alerting the international community to the risk of genocide in Gaza and ordering immediate and effective action to ensure the provision of humanitarian assistance to civilians, states must do more, including to avoid legal consequences for aiding and abetting, or possible complicity in acts of genocide,”

On 18 May, 2024, the Austrian Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying that it would resume UNRWA funding, following an investigation that seemingly found no evidence to support Israeli government claims of UNRWA employees being involved in the 7 October attacks.

In addition to the ICJ, the ICC has now also become involved, issuing arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu among others. The reasons for this include, according to the ICC website:


“… intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity, from at least 8 October 2023 to 20 May 2024.”

Many Western governments now face a legal obligation to arrest Netanyahu for alleged war crimes they may be complicit in. How they balance this contradiction between support for Israel and upholding international law in the long term remains to be seen.

Photo Credit: “Crowd Protesting for Palestine at Night” by Mohammed Abubakr (2023, November 19) on Pexels.