The Israel-Palestine conflict, characterized by decades of tension and sporadic violence, witnessed a significant escalation on October 7, 2023, when a surprise attack by the Palestinian militant group Hamas targeted southern Israel. In retaliation, Israel launched a series of airstrikes targeting the Gaza Strip, a densely populated Palestinian territory under the control of Hamas. The aftermath of these events saw a prolonged period of continued attacks and counterattacks, resulting in widespread destruction and loss of life. As the conflict persisted, international attention intensified, with many world leaders closely monitoring the situation and evaluating the responses of the parties involved.
Among the global community, criticism of Israel’s defence policies began to mount. The disproportionate use of force and the resulting civilian casualties drew condemnation from various quarters. Despite widespread support from the US and Europe for Israel’s right to self-defence, the BRICS+ nations[1] are gradually standing up opposing the military policies of Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu. This contrast unleashes a new international reality: In today’s multipolar world, the emergence of major powers challenging the Western narrative offers an appealing alternative for nations not aligned with the ideas of the global North. The divergence from the Western stance underscores the shifting dynamics of global power and the increasing influence of non-Western perspectives on international affairs.
South Africa’s decision to bring Israel before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on allegations of genocide against Palestinians in Gaza illustrates this new truth. The case has been widely seen as a provocative gesture challenging the prevailing Western position. The country´s stance as a strong opponent of Israel’s defence policies presents itself as an major dissenting voice amid widespread support for Israel’s right to self-defence from the Global North.
Israel has consistently rejected accusations of genocide based on its commitment to minimizing civilian casualties and its stated objective of targeting Hamas, not the Palestinian people, in its military operations. Nonetheless, the international condemnation directed at Russia following its invasion of Ukraine in 2022, coupled with the perceived passivity of some countries towards addressing the Gaza-Israel conflict, raises suspicions in the global South regarding the impartiality of global western powers. This contrast in reactions to conflicts in different regions underscores concerns about double standards and selective enforcement of international law.
Following South Africa´s steps, Brazil has also stood out for its condemnation of the Israeli army’s actions in Gaza. President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva’s strong words at the African Union summit in Addis Ababa underscored Brazil’s commitment to denouncing the violence in Gaza, drawing stark historical parallels to atrocities like the Holocaust. On February 18th, standing at the press conference, Lula declared: “Brazil has condemned Hamas, but Brazil cannot refrain from condemning what the Israeli army is doing in the Gaza Strip.”[2]
Egypt’s potential suspension of its peace treaty with Israel in response to military actions in Rafah serves also as an indicative of a broader movement challenging Israel’s policies and actions in the region. The Cairo administration issued this warning in response to the possibility of Israel bombing the Rafah region in the south of Gaza.
The possibility of suspending the Camp David Accords, a cornerstone of peace between Israel and Egypt since their inception after the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, is seen as an important departure from the status quo. El Cairo issued this warning in response to the possibility of Israeli bombing in the Rafah region, in south Gaza.[3] Rafah holds special significance as a primary entry point for humanitarian aid into Gaza. Any disruption caused by an Israeli attack would hinder vital supplies from reaching the besieged territory, exacerbating the already dire humanitarian situation for the population. That is why Egypt cannot allow any actions that threaten the stability of its border with Gaza, as it seeks to maintain security and prevent any spillover effects that could destabilize the Sinai Peninsula or broader regional dynamics.
Other big nations of the group have followed a similar approach. At the International Court of Justice (ICJ), China emphasized that Palestinians “must not be denied” justice, highlighting a diplomatic effort to ensure accountability for Israeli actions in Palestinian territories.[4] Similarly, Saudi Arabia’s stance on refusing to establish diplomatic ties with Israel without the creation of an independent Palestinian state is also viewed as a significant demonstration of support for Palestinian self-determination. The kingdom’s call on UN Security Council permanent members to expedite the recognition of a Palestinian state serves as a pressure tool to countries in the Security Council, especially the USA, urging them to reconsider their positions.
Overall, what is increasingly becoming clear is that the BRICS+ bloc is gradually gaining momentum as a credible and influential alternative in shaping the geopolitical landscape. This reflects a notable trend in global geopolitics where small and medium-sized countries, traditionally not aligned with Israel, may shift their positions to align more closely with the stance of the BRICS+ bloc. As Western support for Israel faces increasing criticism for its perceived bias, the BRICS+ countries are seen as offering a more balanced and principled approach to global affairs. This evolving geopolitical landscape will reshape diplomatic alliances, power dynamics, and the trajectory of international relations, forming a new era of global governance and cooperation.
[1] Now composed of Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, and Iran, after ampliation.
[2] “Brazil’s president stirs controversy by comparing war in Gaza to the Holocaust”, Le Monde, https://t.ly/dwvq0, (Accessed: 27.02.2024).
[3] “Invasion of Rafah could threaten key Israel-Egypt peace treaty: Report”, Politico, https://www.politico.eu/article/invasion-rafah-threaten-key-isreal-egypt-peace-treaty-report-gaza-hamas/, (Accessed: 23.02.2024).
[4] “China tells ICJ justice ‘must not be denied’ to Palestinians”, AlJazeera, https://t.ly/BkmTF, (Accessed: 27.02.2024).
