The newly signed bilateral agreement on exporting Malawian workers to Israel is welcomed by both sides as a new chapter in their relationship. Israeli vice minister Haskell emphasized the importance of the agreement as “a partnership from people to people, not just from government to government transactions.”
However, as ink dries under this agreement, deeper and more troublesome questions arise. Is Malawi rooted ethical and moral principles in international law for economic interests? At a time when Israel is accused of committing genocide by the International Criminal Court (ICC), at a time when Israel’s head of state is nominated by the International Criminal Court (ICC), at a time when Israeli heads of state are nominated for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and more importantly, accidental compasses.
Behind the trading: What is your motivation?
Since October 7, 2023, Israel’s agricultural sector has been hit hard by the war as it relied on an estimated 30,000-40,000 foreign farm workers, half of the Palestinians. As highlighted by Israel’s Minister of Agriculture and Food Security in January 2025, “The issue of foreign workers in agriculture is one of the four pillars of Israel’s food security and is important along with water, land and R&D.” The new labor needs sparked by the war in Gaza have launched Israel’s latest recruitment campaign for foreign workers in this sector. Malawi is a key target for this campaign.
The contract is explained in many ways, including skill transfer, but there is economic opportunity for Malawi, which stems from this deal, setting a scene for future collaboration. However, the transaction may offer short-term benefits, putting the country in a moral and legally questionable position. The lawsuit before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) regarding Israel’s violation of the Genocide Treaty is still ongoing, similar to the lawsuit by the ICC against Prime Minister Netanyahu. To be clear, these are not small politically motivated investigations. These charges include publicly available evidence and evidence that UN mandators have gathered. We have all seen collective punishment by Israeli forces by bombing most of Gaza without considering the fundamental principles of international humanitarian law. This raises the question: Should Malawi strengthen its relationship and send workers to countries accused of the most serious crimes under international law?
Silence as acquiescence? Patterns of supporting Israel
Malawi’s alliance with Israel is not limited to the export of workers to Israel. It is becoming increasingly noticeable about how Malawi will vote for UN resolutions related to Israel and Palestine on the world stage.
A closer look into Malawi’s voting record at the United Nations (UN) provides insight into the state’s true intentions. For example, in December 2024, the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly voted for a resolution calling for an immediate, unconditional, permanent ceasefire in Gaza. 158 states supported the resolution, but Malawi abstained from 12 other countries. In September of the same year, when the UN General Assembly voted for a resolution that recognized the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion, it declared Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory illegal, calling on all UN member states and Israel to implement the advisory opinion, and Malawi voted against the resolution “no.” There are many more examples of Malawi voting against or abstaining from the vote. These voting patterns tell the clear narrative of the nations that support Israel, the nation accused of the most serious international crimes, by directly supporting Israel or choosing to remain silent. Sadly, the silence of these issues speaks volumes, particularly about Malawi’s true commitment to international law to the principles of international justice.
The disconnect between a call for accountability and actions that support Israel
Malawi is the signatories of Roman Law, the treaty that creates and governs the ICC. It was a court advocate, reflected in his latest speech by Justice Minister Mbaro at the ICC Legislature in December 2024, where he declared:
“Malawi believes that for a court to succeed, it is necessary for the Party or the UN Security Council to support initiatives that ensure that the courts continue to advance in its activities, including preliminary examinations, investigations, and procedures in various circumstances where either the court or the prosecutor has begun tributes.”
A few months ago, in October 2024, the Justice Minister encouraged African ICC members during his retreat in Johannesburg, South Africa, and even ratified the strengthening of accountability system for attack crimes to approve the Kampala amendment. However, such strong words in favour of international accountability are not consistent with Malawi’s actions at the UN’s global stage and raise serious concerns of hypocrisy.
Thinking ahead, Malawi may not be able to continue dancing at two weddings. If Netanyahu, who has been wanted by the ICC for war crimes and crimes against humanity, comes to Malawi, the authorities will be under a binding legal obligation to arrest and abandon Netanyahu with ICC authorities. But the key question is whether Malawi will continue with such arrest. It is not the first time that Malawi authorities have faced the question of whether or not to arrest the head of state appointed by the ICC. In 2011, when former Sudanian President Omar al-Bashir visited Malawi, authorities failed to implement an ICC request for arrest and surrender. Against the backdrop of Malawi’s support for Israel, it appears unlikely that Malawi will comply with Netanyahu’s demands and thereby become a potential pariah of international criminal justice.
Principles or economic benefits? The decisive moment
This is an important moment for Malawi. Meanwhile, Malawi wants to be seen as a responsible member of the international community by supporting international accountability efforts, observing international law and opposing immunity. Meanwhile, it adopts a voting habit of signing a contract and placing it next to the government accused of humanity of its most serious crimes.
This question doesn’t just choose aspects in the main geopolitical battles. It is about moral and ethical principles and values. It’s about the future of Malawi. If we want to be viewed seriously as part of the international community facing the principles of international law and accountability, we must act accordingly and respond to our own claims about justice.
Sign up for the AllAfrica newsletter for free
Get the latest African news
success!
Almost finished…
You need to check your email address.
Follow the instructions in the email you sent to complete the process.
error!
There was a problem processing the submission. Please try again later.
The system that keeps silent in the face of such serious human rights abuses, dispatches workers to maintain a system that supports illegal occupation of Palestine, and perhaps supports many other international crimes, does not represent principled and responsible members of the international community, but is willing to see other ways whenever convenient. Such actions come at high costs not only in the world stage but also in the local relationships of Malawi.
But it’s not too late. Governments need to decide whether they want to continue the path of prioritizing short-term economic benefits over long-term reliability. As highlighted by the Malawia court in the 2022 decision on Malawi’s obligations of international law,
“As a general principle, the integrity of the state system within the broader state family and other subjects of international law requires that the state should act faithfully and consistently to its obligations and not fulfill a double legal standard.”
International justice does not have room for double standards. If the government is serious about fighting immunity and holding the perpetrators of international crimes accountable, it takes strength and stamina to stand up to stronger states and stand on the side of the law. It is not yet known which route Malawi will choose, but in the near future it will not only determine Malawi’s foreign policy, but also reflect the integrity and credibility of the nation.
Dr. Atilla Kisla is the International Justice Cluster Lead at the South African Litigation Centre (SALC)
