U.S. President Donald Trump made it clear this week that he sees no merit — or future — in South Africa’s high-profile case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), brushing off the matter with a wave of indifference.
“I don’t expect anything to come of it,” Trump said bluntly when asked during a press briefing about South Africa’s legal challenge accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza.
“It’s just talk.”
The comment, delivered with characteristic dismissiveness, underscored Trump’s unwavering support for Israel and his deep skepticism of international legal mechanisms, especially those critical of U.S. allies.
A Chilly Response to a Bold Move
South Africa’s case at the ICJ, filed in late 2023, alleges that Israel’s military actions in Gaza — particularly in response to Hamas attacks — violate the Genocide Convention. President Cyril Ramaphosa’s administration has positioned the case as a moral and legal stand for international justice and human rights.
But Trump, never a fan of multilateral institutions or global oversight bodies, sees the effort as political theater rather than a credible legal challenge.
“It won’t go anywhere,” he added. “Israel’s defending itself — that’s what countries do when they’re under attack.”
Diplomatic Tensions Simmer
Trump’s dismissal puts further strain on already tense U.S.–South Africa relations, which have been tested by differences over the Israel-Palestine conflict, Russia sanctions, and narratives around domestic issues like crime and land reform.
While Ramaphosa has framed the ICJ case as a necessary stand against impunity, Trump’s comments suggest the U.S. will not only withhold support but may actively discredit the legal process — a stance likely to deepen divisions between the two nations on the global stage.
South Africa Holds Its Line
Despite Trump’s remarks, South African officials have indicated they will not be deterred. Pretoria has reiterated its commitment to pursuing the case on humanitarian and legal grounds, insisting the ICJ is the appropriate venue to determine whether international law has been breached.
The South African presidency has not yet formally responded to Trump’s comments, but insiders say Ramaphosa is expected to address them publicly in the coming days.
Conclusion: Dismissal Meets Determination
Trump’s offhand rejection of South Africa’s ICJ case against Israel highlights the chasm between his administration’s realpolitik stance and Pretoria’s appeal to international law. Whether the case gains traction or not, one thing is clear: the symbolic and diplomatic weight of the filing matters far beyond the courtroom — even if the former U.S. president refuses to see it.
