This one way to headline the ICJ decision. Another would be to recognize that court found it has jurisdiction over the conflict in Gaza under the genocide convention and denied Israelโs request to dismiss the case, allowing it to proceed.
Yes. headlining it that way emboldens Israel supporters who donโt want a ceasefire even though the rulings and evidence against Israel are absolutely devastating and what they show is that anyone advocating for Israel is at least complicit in a genocide.
A judgement stating you should try as far as possible to prevent genocide in your acts of selfdefense (against terror by the freely elected government of a neighboring state who has attacked your soil militarily) is not a ruling deciding you have committed genocide (as was requested by ๐ฟ๐ฆ).
Maybe I'm missing some context but this seems more informative? They wouldn't issue an order of any sort if they lacked jurisdiction or agreed that the case should be dismissed.