Interview of Dr. Carlos Argüello Gómez by Don Debar of Radio KFPK
May 1st 2024
Don Debar: Mr Ambassador, we see that the request for intervention by the Court was denied. Could you explain to us what just happened?
Dr. Carlos Argüello: Well the thing is that we began a case and we added to that case a request fro provisional measures, because we considered that it was important that the Court ordered as soon as possible that Germany stop aiding militarily, in particular, aiding Israel and order that it begin refunding the program for refugees the UNRWA, the United Nations program for refugees. And what happened is that the Court decided after the explanations given by Germany, which by way of parenthesis we had no occasion to refute them, because of the procedure that was followed by the Court. We spoke first and then Germany and we had no possibility of responding.
But anyway, what Germany told the Court is that they had stopped... that originally in October they had given a lot of assistance to Israel but then that this has stopped and that now they are complying with all the rules of Europe in supplying weapons of this nature and that all lethal weapons had been stopped. And also that they had announced a few days before that they had reinstated the funding of the refugee program. So what the Court decided was that at this moment there was not sufficient evidence or need for the Court to dictate provisional measures. The case continues. This was obviously only an incidental matter to the case.
Now, what is important to indicate is that the Court pointed out very clearly the obligations of all States. First of all, they said that they recall what was happening in Palestine and then they recall the obligation of all States Parties to the Genocide Convention and to the Geneva Conventions and the Laws of War to obey those rules by helping to prevent what's happening and not abet the situation. So they recalled all the obligations particularly to Germany over what was happening. But the decision of the Court finally was for the moment, they specified that, for the moment, there was no clear evidence or no clear need for provisional measures, for the moment.
In other words, from our point of view, if there is any change in the situation we can go back to the Court and request again the provisional measures, in the same way that South Africa has done with Israel. South Africa has gone three times to the Court for provisional measures. So the case is open for us. The case continues. I should perhaps point out and perhaps I am getting ahead of your questions, but it's an important point that has to be kept in mind. During the hearings, particularly I mentioned in one of my presentations that in the United States there was a discussion in Congress for approval of US$18 billion of aid to Israel, basically military weapons to Israel. And I mentioned that if Germany in the past has been involved in that type of situation, because part of the equipment and ammunition or spare parts or whatever in all that big bundle of money that involves all the military companies which are globalized. They are in Germany, in the United States, everywhere... then if that happens, if that was approved then Germany should take note that they cannot be participating in that type of program.
So for me, now that it has finally been approved, this US$18 billion, then we are going to be very watchful that if Germany is participating in that program then they are violating or they are going against what they offered in principle to the Court saying that they had diminished their help. And this question of the US$18 billion is important because, for example, here in the Netherlands which is the seat of the Court, there was a case, a local case in the local courts against the government of the Netherlands because they were assisting with the spare parts for airplanes, for the military airplanes... being given to Israel, but the military planes, American military planes... as part of a program. So now if Germany is going to participate in this big business, this US$18 billon business as they have been doing in the past then we are going to be very attentive and if necessary we will go back to the Court and tell them this is what is happening right now.
So this is basically the situation. The case continues and we are going to present... the Court now has to call the agents and give us an idea of when we have to present our memorial on the merits, whether Germany is going to discuss whether there is jurisdiction for the Court or whatever... everything that's going to happen... so that's going to be in the near future and the case will proceed normally.
Don Debar: You have an absolute right to make an additional application if I'm correct and the Court actually affirmed that in the order...
Dr. Carlos Argüello: Oh yes, certainly... The Court made it clear, it said practically for the time being, in fact I'll read it, it's just one line, one line of the text of the Court is absolutely clear without any legalese, the Court simply said that it finds that the circumstances, as they now present themselves to the Court are not such as to require the exercise of its power to indicate provisional measures, so this is the state as it now presents itself to the Court and I mean if we have any evidence of anything that is happening then we are going to, obviously we are not going to be bothering the Court if they are going to, which they shouldn't be doing, but if it's a very minor operation.
But we are not talking about a small country. Israel is one of the ten most powerful countries in the world. The military expense of Israel is larger than that of Iran, much larger... it's among the ten largest. So we're not talking about a few hundred thousand dollars of military aid. The aid going to Israel, we're talking about billions. It's a very substantial amount of aid.
Don Debar: One of the things that was addressed in the case that Nicaragua brought also is the fact that in the South Africa case there were instructions to Israel to permit, actually I think the word was actually ‘enable’ humanitarian relief to reach the people in Gaza and immediately the next day, and this was recited I remember in the order yesterday, Germany and the United States, Germany the following day as is germane here, suspended their funding to the main relief agency UNRWA. Are you surprised that the Court didn't address that question other than to throw it out there that this is still a pending condition?
Dr. Carlos Agüello: Well in fact the Court addressed it, not deeply, but it addressed it because what happened was that Germany, a few days before the order of the Court, Germany had reinstated the funding for UNRWA. So they already voluntarily reinstated it.
Don Debar: Oh I see...
Dr. Carlos Argüello: That's what happened. I'm not saying, I can't even be saying that it's so important the case of Nicaragua that this is what provoked Germany to do that. But I mean it's a part, it's a small grain of sand that we are contributing to all this international mobilization of people who are appalled at what's happening in Israel so I've been... whatever happened, whatever the reason, Germany was forced to reinitiate that help.
Don Debar: Thank you Ambassador, I appreciate it... For KFPK, I'm Don Debar.