In the current South African lawsuit against Israel.
1,000
1.00Serious question: does it really matter the results of all ICC and ICJ open cases?
Israel doesn't recognize the International Criminal Court. Israel publicly rejects their orders.
As for International Criminal Justice, Israel also indicated that they will not comply with their requests.
Netanyahu will continue taking a bit longer airplane route to avoid the air space of many countries. But other than this, do you expect any real-world consequence of the ICJ resolution? It seems to me that nothing happened with previous sentences and resolutions, do we expect any difference in future cases?
Maybe I’m losing something relevant in all the legal nuances, but to me it seems only a question of public image, and they don’t care so much about international image any longer.
I’m not sure, maybe my previous comment was overly pessimistic about the capacity of these courts to have real effects in the world, and an overrating of the viability to ignore forever the international pressure.
I just read this sentence by Trump in an interview right after I wrote the comment:
“I stopped him, because he would have just kept going. It could have gone on for years”
“Bibi, you can’t fight the world. You can fight individual battles, but the world’s against you. And Israel is a very small place compared to the world.”
Maybe the Israeli government can keep pretending they don’t care what the ICC, the ICJ and rest of the world thinks, but when they start to lose allies, they are forced to change.
Sorry for the off topic, not relevant to estimate the probability of this market.
@Chumchulum I think it's pretty hard to say that a group was subjected to genocide if 5% of them died in a two-year period. Where was the specific intent on behalf of Israel to destroy the Gazans as such?
@nathanwei The method and the intent are genocidal.
On 29 April 2024 Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich said, "There are no half measures ... Rafah, Deir al-Balah, Nuseirat – total annihilation. 'Thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven.'"[98] The Israeli newspaper Haaretz described his comments as a call to genocide.[99] In August, Smotrich said that "it might be justified and moral" to "starve 2 million people", lamenting that the world would not allow it.[100][101] The Knesset member Ofer Cassif claims the plan for genocide dates back to Smotrich's Subjugation Plan in 2017, which he called the "prime exhibit" of Israel's genocidal intent.[102] On 6 May 2025 Smotrich said that Gaza would be "entirely destroyed" and that Palestinians would "leave in great numbers to third countries".[103][104]
...Deputy Speaker of the Knesset Nissim Vaturi wrote that the government was allowing too much aid to enter Gaza and that the IDF should "burn Gaza now".[110] He said that Israel's goal was "erasing the Gaza Strip from the face of the Earth."[111] When asked to clarify his statements by Kol BaRama, Vaturi reiterated that Gaza and its inhabitants must be destroyed, saying: "I don't think there are any innocent people there now... If there is an innocent person there, we will know about them. Whoever stays there should be eliminated, period."[112] In 2025, Vaturi called Palestinians "scoundrels" and "subhumans" and called for the adult men in Gaza to be killed.[113][114]
...Ghassan Alian, Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories, said: "There will be no electricity and no water [in Gaza], there will only be destruction. You wanted hell, you will get hell."[76] Giora Eiland wrote, "Gaza will become a place where no human being can exist" and "Creating a severe humanitarian crisis in Gaza is a necessary means to achieving the goal."[25] The Israeli scholar Omer Bartov noted that no Israeli politician nor anyone in the IDF denounced this statement.[25]
Of Israel's bombing of Gaza, Israeli army spokesperson Daniel Hagari said, "while balancing accuracy with the scope of damage, right now we're focused on what causes maximum damage".[133] Legal scholars interpreted this as intention to destroy Gaza.[8]
The legal scholar Nimer Sultany highlights statements by Israeli army commanders leading ground operations in northern Gaza that call for depopulation and a "scorched earth" approach.[134] Soldiers have echoed such sentiments on social media.[134] Former Israeli defence minister Moshe Ya'alon said, "The path we are currently being led down involves conquering, annexing, and ethnic cleansing."[135]
@Chumchulum Wanting a scorched Earth and ethnic cleansing as the far-right wants still doesn’t constitute genocidal intent. You need to have a specific intent to physically destroy the people as such. Not to burn the place to the ground, expel all the inhabitants, and have Palestinians assimilate into Egypt.
To show genocide you’d also need to show a direct connection between genocidal intent and the policies. Netanyahu and Israel Katz are the ones ultimately in charge of the policy. So I’m not even sure intent on the part of Smotrich the Finance Minister would be enough.
It’s worth noting that while the ICJ ruled Srebenica was a genocide, they ruled Bosnia as a whole wasn’t because only about 5% of the population was killed. A similar percentage was killed here.
@Chumchulum Yeah these quotes pretty cleraly show a specific intent among some right-wing Israelis (not Netanyahu and Katz, who actually run policy) to destroy Gaza and ethnically cleanse it, not to destroy the Gazans as such. This specifically is NOT genocide. Genocide requires a special intent to destroy the people as such.
@nathanwei ethnic cleansing is exactly that genocidal intent youre talking about. thats what genocide is
@Stralor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocidal_intent#Definition_and_legal_standards
"Intention to destroy the group's culture or intending to scatter the group does not suffice.[11] "
People agree https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_Germans_(1944–1950) this is not a genocide, and Lemkin didn't consider it one at the time.
In Serbia vs Croatia if I recall correctly a lot of things other than Srebenica were not considered a genocide, even though there was intent to ethnically cleanse, because of the lack of genocidal intent. I don't have this memorized off the top of my head but I think @HenriConfucius said something about it.
@nathanwei at the bottom of that page is a link to this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_genocide
Related market
Short answer: about 15% today (Sep 21, 2025).
Why: the bar for a merits finding of genocide at the ICJ is extremely high (specific intent + acts), and the Court often opts for narrower breaches (e.g., failure to prevent/punish incitement, or violations tied to provisional-measures compliance). That said, the probability has ticked up a bit in light of:
A new UN Commission of Inquiry report concluding genocide has been committed in Gaza (not binding on the ICJ but influential context). Reuters+2The Guardian+2
Growing third-state support/interventions joining South Africa’s case (e.g., Brazil just joined this week). Al Jazeera
The ICJ’s prior orders indicating plausible genocide-related rights and imposing provisional measures (history/background). Human Rights Watch+1
If you want, I can also keep this as a living forecast and nudge the number up or down whenever there’s a new ICJ order or filing.
@nathanwei and the others involved with information:
"I can also keep this as a living forecast and nudge the number up or down whenever there’s a new ICJ order or filing"
It would be lovely to maintain in this thread the baseline and the changes up and down linked to relevant events. It doesn't have to come from a single person.
If I would have any meaningful guess I would share it with all af you, but I don't have any idea about the topic.
International Court of Justice (ICJ)
Application instituting proceedings (South Africa v. Israel):
https://www.icj-cij.org/node/203394
Order of 26 Jan 2024 (Provisional Measures):
https://www.icj-cij.org/node/203447
Order of 28 Mar 2024 (Additional Provisional Measures):
https://www.icj-cij.org/node/203847
Order of 24 May 2024 (Further measures re: Rafah):
https://www.icj-cij.org/node/204091
ICJ case hub (all filings & orders in one place):
https://www.icj-cij.org/case/192
International Criminal Court (ICC)
Prosecutor’s statement applying for arrest warrants (20 May 2024):
https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/statement-icc-prosecutor-karim-aa-khan-kc-applications-arrest-warrants-situation-state
Pre-Trial Chamber press release noting warrants & rejecting Israel’s challenges (21 Nov 2024):
https://www.icc-cpi.int/news/situation-state-palestine-icc-pre-trial-chamber-i-rejects-state-israels-challenges
Defendant pages (showing “Arrest warrant issued on 21 November 2024”):
Netanyahu — https://www.icc-cpi.int/defendant/netanyahu
Gallant — https://www.icc-cpi.int/defendant/gallant
UN Human Rights System (OHCHR / UN experts)
Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese, “Anatomy of a Genocide” (A/HRC/55/73) – OHCHR page:
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/sessions-regular/session55/advance-versions/a-hrc-55-73-auv.pdf
OHCHR press release on the report (Mar 26, 2024):
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/03/states-must-adhere-obligations-under-genocide-convention-prevent-further
UN Commission of Inquiry (COI) legal analysis concluding genocide (2025):
Press release — https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-committed-genocide-gaza-strip-un-commission-finds
Full report PDF (A/HRC/60/CRP.3) — https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/documents/hrbodies/hrcouncil/sessions-regular/session60/advance-version/a-hrc-60-crp-3.pdf
UN Agencies / Humanitarian Bodies
OCHA “Reported Impact Snapshot | Gaza Strip” (12 Jun 2024):
https://www.ochaopt.org/content/reported-impact-snapshot-gaza-strip-12-june-2024
OCHA “Reported Impact Snapshot | Gaza Strip” (PDF example, 11 Jun 2025):
https://www.ochaopt.org/sites/default/files/Gaza_Reported_Impact_Snapshot_11_June_2025.pdf
UNRWA Gaza Situation Report (example PDF #135, 11 Sep 2024):
https://www.unrwa.org/sites/default/files/content/resources/unrwa_gaza_sitrep_135_11september_2024_eng.pdf
@Dulaman Yeah ICC is more serious. Even there no extermination charges or anything.
I think the probability is quite low. What do you think it is? These UN reports don't make a convincing case for genocidal intent. You'd have to go against ICJ precedent.
@nathanwei based on stuff with Serbia I think it's likely that icj will go for a no. But something does feel different. So intuition makes me more cautious.
@Dulaman I mean there is a lot more media coverage of this than Serbia. I suspect there will be some convention breach, probably incitement, but no genocide.
@Dulaman In Serbia there were actual acts of genocide, i.e. Srebenica, in this case there is no genocidal acts. No specific intent to destroy the Gazan civilians as such, hence civilians evacuated before starting operations. They do snipe and kill military-aged males who ignore evacuation orders which is ethically problematic but it's not genocide. Without a Srebenica-style massacre or Armenia or Holocaust it seems pretty hard to establish genocidal intent. The precedent in Croatia v Serbia says genocidal intent must be the only reasonable inference. I don't think Netanyahu has genocidal intent. He even doesn't want to resettle Gaza.
@nathanwei the Israeli military is doing double tap strikes on hospitals. The percentage of civilian deaths is in the 85-90% range. They are using mass starvation as a weapon.
@Dulaman I'm not sure about 85-90%.. The Guardian reported that, and this includes "civilian" combatants who are not members of Hamas as civilians, and it doesn't indicate genocidal intent. Being indiscriminate would be like 98%. I don't think Israel is using mass starvation as a weapon now (yes, a few months ago they were using the threat of mass starvation as a weapon), and the food situation in Gaza has improved greatly in the last two months, but again though that's a war crime (to use the threat of mass starvation as a weapon) that's not genocidal intent. Neither of those shows genocidal intent. The double tap strike on the hospital was a one-off thing that Netanyahu immediately apologized for and the specific intent there seemed to be to target what Israel believed was Hamas. Israel genuinely believes Hamas operates out of hospitals, and they are at least not completely wrong. In fact they are correct. There's no question that Israel has breached IHL but there's no specific intent to destroy the Palestinians as such. There are war crimes sure, but not on the level of Dresden or Hiroshima, which were far worse and weren't genocide either. Lack of intent to destroy the Gazan civilians as such is the key thing.
In any case, I'm glad to see you significantly below 50%. I think 35% is too high and I'm half of that, 15-20%.
@Dulaman Again none of these are acts of genocide unless you can show the only reasonable inference is a specific intent to destroy the people as such a la Srebenica and as per the Croatia v Serbia precedent. Even the other massacres in Bosnia didn't count. Srebenica counted because they killed thousands in cold blood after a surrender. The bar is really high.
Apart from intent, the acts themselves need the scale or quality of biologically destroying the group/part of it, or at the very least threatening it's survival.
A single or a couple homicides (even if committed with genocidal intent) ARE NOT genocide according to ICJ's understanding & precedent. It's also not genocide because claiming 'any act with intent = genocide' leads to absurdities, such as isolated incidents of 9 yo kids practicing bullying (mental/bodily harm) with bad intent being genocide, something that clearly banalizes the term and renders it irrelevant.
That being said, Palestineans as an ethnic group are NOT even remotely close to being destroyed or having it's survival threatened. Less than half a percent of ethnic palis were killed (2023-2025). Less than 1% of Palestineans residing in israelistine died. Even counting the Gazan subpart of the pali population, only 2.6% died! Remember, the ICJ has already considered 4.4% "not substantial"/not enough in the past. Demographically, they're not even close to destruction. From 14 million ethnic palis circa 2023, now we have almost 15 million. The Palestinean population inside WB+Gaza also grew, and there have been 2x more recorded births than deaths in the Gaza strip. Life expectancy rebounded to ~60 yo, enough to grow up, have kids, raise them till they're adults and get old, perpetuating the group.
@HenriConfucius The GHM death toll is not quite 4.4% of the Gazans population, it's about two-thirds of that. Srebenica was found to be a genocidal act, of Srebenica not of Bosnian Muslims writ large.
Yes. 4.4% was in Bosnia, the conclusion being that this number wasn't enough for a Bosnia wide genocide
However there was a genocide in the city of Srebrenica, where 40%~80% of the population was killed. It's a subpart of the wider Bosnian population
The thing is: Gaza is already a subpart of the pali population. Only ~2% died, this not substantial. NRI is also positive, therefore they're not at risk of being biologically destroyed: there's no genocide in Gaza. Regardless of intent.
@HenriConfucius I think 2% is low, it might be more like 4%. Official estimates are 3%, going by Spagat et al it's in the 4-5% range, so basically the same as the ~4.4% in Bosnia. Still, a far cry from Srebenica. And official GHM estimates of ~3% are what the ICJ has to go by.
But yeah that's a good point. If the population isn't destroyed, that could be disqualifying. I think the real core weakness in the ICJ case against Israel is lack of genocidal intent. Israel evacuates civilians before starting operations, and just agreed to a Trump deal to end the war. Clearly, Israel does not have a specific intent to destroy the Gazans as such. Yes, they have not been destroyed. There is also a thing called intent to commit genocide without committing it, but Israel had plenty of opportunities to do it.
Intent to commit genocide arguably describes what Hamas did on 10/7. Though I guess some of the kibbutzim had very high death rates so maybe it counts as genocide. Also Hamas isn't a signatory to the Genocide Convention so they aren't bound by it in the same way that Israel is.
@nathanwei of October 7th is considered a genocide wouldn't that still target Israel since they killed many Israeli civilians and combatants being kidnapped due to the Hannibal directive?
@Samaritan Huh? No. How many of the 1200 were killed by Israel? I would guess some low number, probably low double digits, concordant with the usual low rate of friendly fire during war. Maybe 1% or 2%? Israel shooting on 10/7 at Hamas and Palestinian "civilians" participating in 10/7 who were taking Israeli civilians, even if it endangers the hostages, is most definitely not a form of genocide. There's no genocidal intent! The intent is to get rid of Hamas and prevent them from taking hostages. Hamas had actual genocidal intent.
To use an analogy to the famous genocide targeting Jews, the Holocaust was a genocide, but if the Allies bombed Auschwitz, that wouldn't make them also genocidal. And it still wouldn't be genocide if the Allies had bombed it deciding that the Jews there were being tortured and if some of them died it might be better of them.
@Samaritan Yeah, bullshit. You expect me to believe that 600+ of the 1200 people killed on October 7 were killed by Israel, rather than by Hamas? Any evidence?
@nathanwei of the civilians it's likely. Idf testimony? AK47s can't burn cars down or tear down modern buildings. Obviously that was with something stronger, like helicopters and tanks.
Do you still believe there were 40 beheaded babies and mass rapes that day too?
@Samaritan Dude, even car crashes can cause cars (and even whole jams) burn down. All we need is gasoline leakage, maybe a motor overheating or some sparks, and it bursts in flames.
AK-47s can easily cause gasoline leekages and sparks. RPGs obviously explodes, can cause fires. Just look at the burnt down tanks. Hamas could also deliberately set things on fire and blow stuff up, something detailed in their Oct7 plans.
You know what these cars DON'T have? 30 mm autocannon holes. No corpses have such wounds either. Strange, given this is the primary weapons of the Apache helicopters allegedly used. Absolutely retarded narrative.
Anyways, my last point is that there was indeed friendly fire, but it killed only ~13 fellow Israelis, according to the UN. The rest were killed by Hamas
@Dulaman Perhaps "humanities academics" was too flippant. But humanities academics, NGOs, and other such organizations. The ICC hasn't charged Israel with extermination or anything close to genocide.
I should say that the only Israeli politician who has actually said anything genocidal is Vaturi, but he is not even a minister but rather the deputy Knesset speaker. He said once on a radio show that he was upset Israel wasn't committing genocide and killing all the adult men in Gaza.
There's a pretty good chance they get Israel on the failure to prevent incitement to genocide charge because of morons like Vaturi. It depends on how the ICJ interprets this prevention to incitement and so on. But actual genocide or genocidal acts? No.
@nathanwei wow! I was not aware of this: "upset Israel wasn't committing genocide and killing all the adult men in Gaza."
Sometimes it is nice to live far from certain places. It has to be really sad to listen to this kind of messages in the radio.
@MiguelLM Well he said this once on one radio show. Wherever you live, I am sure that if you take the worst thing ever said on a radio show it will end up being pretty bad. You can listen to some Nazi garbage in the US on the Fit and Fresh Podcast or on Nick Fuentes' show or wherever. And unfortunately during war it's pretty common for people to say really disgusting and awful things about the other side.
@nathanwei I guess in a population of millions of people you will always find some crazy people calling on killings. How society responds makes the difference.
I asked ChatGPT for your example:
Did the presenter stop the MK and condemned the declaration? Did the interview continue?
Did the radio apologize retrospectively?
Did the political party expel this member?
Did the government or Knesset condemn the declaration and raised public apologies?
Was the case investigated as hate speech at any court? Is there a sentence already?
What other reactions would be expected from a country which has the explicit requirement of "prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide" by the ICJ?
I will not paste the answer here because it is quite long, and anyone can easily do the same research, but I’m quite convinced the response given doesn’t meet the "prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide" request. I agree with you that it will be hard for Israel to defend it in front of ICJ.
I guess Knesset official response may be used as evidence of failure to "prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide": Likud MK's Repeated Call to 'Burn Gaza' Doesn't Violate Standards, Knesset Ethics Panel Says (Haaretz)
@MiguelLM “Burn Gaza” is not genocide. The far right has been calling to burn Gaza and kick out the Gazans but that’s not the same as having a special intent to destroy them as such. The genocidal thing Vaturi said was once in a radio show he called for killing all adult men in Gaza, and he was upset Israel wasn’t doing this. Vaturi isn’t a minister, he’s a nasty person who says awful things all of the time. It’s thanks to people like him that they might find failure to prevent incitement.
@nathanwei deputy Knesset speaker doesn’t seem like a random person who can say in private crazy things without consequences.
If Vaturi managed to keep membership in the Knesset, it seems like a failure of the full system. It may be thanks to people who let Vaturi incit genocide without consequences that they might find failure.
@MiguelLM It was not in private. But I don't think democratically elected representatives should be expelled from a democratically elected body because they say crazy things. If someone said what he said in America, it would definitely be protected by the First Amendment. Why? Because of the IMMINENT lawless action part. He was describing what he thought the general policy should be, not telling IDF soldiers to go to kill everyone.
Israel is definitely not committing but there are awful people like Vaturi who incite genocide. I think there is some debate about how to interpret the Genocide Convention. Can you have failure to prevent incitement to genocide in the absence of actual genocide? I am pretty confident that the ICJ will not rule that Israel is committing genocide. It would have to overturn lots of precedent.
@nathanwei “Can there be a failure to prevent incitement to genocide without genocide taking place?”
Yes. The whole purpose of the ICJ’s provisional measures is prevention, not post-mortem punishment. When the Court orders a State to “prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide,” it is acting to reduce the risk of genocide before it occurs and to protect the targeted population in time.
If the ICJ waited for a genocide to be completed before addressing incitement, the ruling would come too late to save anyone, and the legal obligation to prevent genocide—explicit in the Genocide Convention—would be meaningless. Prevention duties exist precisely because genocide is the crime of crimes, and once it succeeds, there is little left to protect.
I would say a State can be held responsible for failing to prevent or punish incitement to genocide even if genocide has not yet occurred.
If we say at the same time
A) “as long as less than 100% of the target population is killed, we can’t use the word genocide”
And
B) “as long as a genocide is not committed, we can’t say the preventive measures failed”
Then we will only take care of prevention when everyone already died. Either A) or B) has to be false, they can’t be true at the same time, in my opinion.
@MiguelLM Yeah I tend to believe there will be an incitement only breach. But there’s some discussion about whether you can have an incitement only breach without any actual genocide or genocidal acts.
@nathanwei there can exist two positions for almost any possible topic, including whether genocidal acts are required to punish incitement.
The position of requiring actual genocide or genocidal acts errs in the side of protecting the attacker, while failing to protect the victims. With a crime so horrible as genocide, this is the wrong approach in my opinion.
I don't have any idea what the ICJ sentence would say. Common sense tells me there is a failure to prevent and punish incitement, but I'm not into the nuanced legal discussions and I don't have as much information as you about the potential incitements and the preventive and punishment measures taken. To me it seems Israel won't have very strong evidence of preventive and punishment measures taken, but I may be wrong.
@MiguelLM Israel did open probes into a bunch of statements made by people at the diretion of the UN, but closed a lot of them on free speech grounds. The issue with "incitement to genocide" is that there is a risk of a global speech code if it's really enforced. The US signed with free speech reservations about the incitement clause. Vaturi's statement would be protected under the First Amendment in the US because of imminent lawless action.