Before I start, I just want to say that this opinion is based on what I think will actually happen rather than what I think should or wish will happen. Anyways, there are two parts to this prediction.

Part 1: The ICJ will find Israel not guilty of genocide.

I firmly believe that the International Court of Justice (ICJ), is going to rule against South Africa's claims because Israel has a very good defense case. There are few reasons why I think this is the case:

1. The ICJ exists to resolve disputes between nations. In this case, there's no dispute between South Africa and Israel, therefore, Israel could, and probably will, argue that the ICJ has no jurisdiction over the Gaza war.

2. They could argue that South Africa cannot prove intent, since that's a very big part of what makes a genocide, well, a genocide. In order for something to be a genocide, there needs to be clear policy that shows there's an intent to exterminate. Like the Turks wanted to do with the Armenians or ISIS with the Yezidis or the Nazis with the Jews. There's no such policy in Israel. Unless, South Africa somehow managed to get hold of some secret Israeli documents unknown to the public, then they probably have nothing more than random statements of random fringe politicians who don't make decisions on the war. South Africa could, and probably will, provide proof of the Israeli government's negligence, but not genocidal intent. If there's no intent, then there's no genocide case.

3. They could acknowledge the high death toll, but also argue that it is the result of Hamas using civilians infrastructure to launch attacks. They don't need to prove it to be the case every single time, but if they could prove it to be a systematic pattern, then it could offer grounds to disprove the claims of genocidal intent while at the same time explain why the death toll is high.

4. Israel could make a strong case that it is complaint with international law, at least within the context of Gaza. Since Israel was attacked first, Israel could point out that it is fighting a war of self defense in according with the UN charter (chapter 7, article 51), and therefore is not actually breaking international law. Not only that, but Israel could also argue that it has been complying with the provisional measures asked for by the ICJ by allowing for humanitarian aid to go in, launching vaccine campaigns to prevent disease, sending them reports, and so on. If they can show that they are largely complaint, even if the results are questionable, then it'll take a lot of air out of South Africa's case.

5. The ICJ preliminary report had a small, but potentially powerful clause, that demanded that Hamas and other armed groups to immediately and unconditionally release all the hostages... which they have not done until very recently, and they still haven't been able to return the bodies of some of the dead hostages. Israel could use this clause to demonstrate how Hamas and the other Palestinian groups in Gaza hold contempt for the law and their agreements which led Israel to conduct more military operations and therefore prolong the war.

Whether you agree or disagree with any of this is irrelevant, the point is that this case isn't as lopsided against Israel as people think it is. Just as a reminder, Israel usually doesn't participate in international tribunals. If they knew that they were in the wrong, then they simply wouldn't participate... like Russia. Russia knows what it's doing in Ukraine is wrong, and therefore they straight up refused to show up to the proceedings against them. Israel agreeing to break their norms and participate should signal that they're confident in their chances of getting a favorable outcome. Therefore, I'm betting that there's a very good chance that ICJ will favor Israel. Which brings me to...

Part 2: There is going to be a big meltdown from the ruling.

For whatever reason, everybody who's anti-Israel and/or pro-Palestine thinks that the ICJ will rule exactly the way they want it to, which is that the ICJ will rule in favor of South Africa and find Israel guilty of committing genocide. They're all eagerly waiting for this outcome as if it was inevitable... but what if it never comes?

Now this is going to be controversial on Lemmy, but I see the anti-Israel/pro-Palestine crowd as being very MAGA like... which is ironic because MAGA tends to be pro-Israel but I digress. The similarity that I see is in how they both react to seeing results they don't like. MAGA has a fun philosophy to dealing with losing. Whenever they win a court case or an election or whatever, then they will accept the results and their prior proceedings as legitimate, fair, and accurate. However, whenever they lose a court case, election, whatever then they'll reject the results and cry that the prior proceedings were unfair, corrupt, and rigged against them. I expect a similar reaction from the anti-Israel/pro-Palestine crowd.

If the ruling comes out as I expect it to then we're going to witness a 180 from the anti-Israel/pro-Palestine crowd. They're currently very pro ICJ and argue in favor of its authority and legitimacy because they think it'll provide them with the outcome they seek. When that doesn't happen, they'll immediately going to reject the results and call the ICJ corrupt, rigged, incompetent, and compromised by Zionists. I cannot imagine ANY scenario where these people will actually accept the results of the ICJ ruling if it comes out in favor of Israel regardless of validity. You can be sure that they'll meltdowns of cataclysmic proportions on the internet, you'll see frequent acts of vandalism on the court itself in the Hague, the judges who served over the case being attacked, and so on.

Now you could argue that the same could happen the pro-Israel/anti-Palestine crowd if the ICJ rules against Israel, and you would probably be right. I expect similar reactions either way, however, I just doubt that the actual ruling will be in favor of South Africa.