51 Countries Sent $885.6 Million in Military Goods to Israel After ICJ Genocide Warning
Updated
Updated · Al Jazeera English · May 23
51 Countries Sent $885.6 Million in Military Goods to Israel After ICJ Genocide Warning
3 articles · Updated · Al Jazeera English · May 23
Israeli customs data reviewed by Al Jazeera shows 2,603 military-related consignments worth 3.22 billion shekels ($885.6 million) entered Israel from 51 countries and territories between October 2023 and October 2025.
About 91% of that value was recorded after the ICJ’s January 26, 2024 order warning of a plausible genocide risk in Gaza, and imports rose rather than fell, led by munitions.
The US supplied more than 42% of the declared value and India about 26%, while Romania, Taiwan and the Czech Republic rounded out the top five; several states with embargoes or suspension policies still appeared in the data.
Al Jazeera found post-restriction shipments linked to countries including Spain, Canada, France, Italy, Germany and the UK, where officials said some exports were halted, limited or subject to existing licences and indirect supply chains.
Legal scholars told Al Jazeera that states continuing transfers after the ICJ warning could face complicity claims under the Genocide Convention and Arms Trade Treaty, underscoring how Gaza was sustained by a global arms network.
Why did 51 nations continue arming Israel after a court warned of plausible genocide?
Is Israel now using its 'Gaza model' of destruction in the new US-backed war on Iran?
After the ICJ Warning: Global Military Exports to Israel, Legal Risks, and the Erosion of International Accountability (2024–2025)
Overview
After the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued a warning in January 2024 about possible violations of international law, many countries continued to export military equipment to Israel. Some nations even supplied arms despite publicly supporting the ICJ’s position, exposing a clear gap between legal warnings and actual actions. This ongoing flow of weapons raised serious ethical and legal concerns, especially as United Nations experts warned that arms manufacturers and businesses involved in these transfers could be complicit in violations if they failed to show proper human rights due diligence. Public and legal challenges soon followed, highlighting the growing pressure for accountability.