On November 11, 2024, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israel’s prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, its former defense minister Yoav Gallant, and the deceased Hamas military leader Mohammed Deif. It failed to issue a warrant for Syrian president Bashar al-Assad who butchered over 300,000 Syrians and used nerve gas against civilians. Or CCP leaders involved in the genocide and forced labor of the Uyghurs. Or the North Korean dictator committing mass starvation, or Iranians who persecute women and execute dissidents and protestors by the thousands, or any number of leaders engaged in real atrocities. The ICC did issue a warrant for Russian president Vladimir Putin, but Putin invaded Ukraine, Hamas invaded Israel. The ICC’s decision is baseless and counterproductive. It strengthens Israelis who argue the futility of trying to appease hopelessly biased international bodies. It also strengthens Hamas by handing it a clear, albeit Pyrrhic diplomatic victory against Israel.
The ICC’s obvious bias degrades its credibility. The practical importance of the ruling is limited because the United States, the leader of the free world and Israel’s most important backer, is not party to it. The current US administration might sanction the organization in response and the incoming Trump administration is almost certain to. The ruling’s only material impact is to prohibit Netanyahu and Gallant from traveling to about 120 countries. They can still travel to the US and dozens of friendly countries, but much of Europe is now off the table. If Bibi and Gallant want to be attacked by mobs of angry Islamists, they will have to go to Silwan. Amsterdam is off the table.
ICC warrants do nothing to end the fighting in Gaza or boost Palestinian statehood. Their core impact on Israel is strengthening the arguments of its hawks. According to John Spencer, chair of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point, Israel has implemented “more measures to prevent civilian casualties than any other military in history.” Numerous Israelis with powerful political representation decry how Israel’s outsized humanitarian efforts are ignored by international bodies and endanger its soldiers and the mission.
Consider this logic; Assad’s war crimes created over six million Syrian refugees. Israel’s most right-wing politicians could imagine solving Israel’s problems with iron-fisted campaigns creating a comparable number of refugees from Gaza and the disputed territories. Assad faced no ICC reprimand for his brutal campaign, while Israel faces arrest warrants in its absence. If you will be charged and convicted without committing a crime, why not commit the crime and solve the problem?
The ICC accused Israel of deliberate starvation and faults Israel for failing "to ensure that the civilian population in Gaza would be adequately supplied." This argument is flawed for the following reasons:
First, international law stipulates that and occupying power must ensure food, medical aid, and other “supplies essential to the survival of the population.” However, Hamas’s ability to hijack and distribute aid (at extortionary prices) demonstrates that Israel is not an occupying power in Gaza.
Israel is the only country in the world that provides power and water to an entity ruled by a self-professed sworn enemy intent on its eradication. Israel has done so since it withdrew and continues to do so after it was invaded on October 7.
Apparently, Israel’s alleged reputation for brutal disregard of international law did not spur Gaza’s leaders to provision their own essentials as they planned to rape, massacre, torture, and kidnap the citizens of the country that sustains them. Hamas understands what the ICC pretends not to; that Israel is so exceedingly humanitarian that Hamas can use billions of dollars of international aid to build a military infrastructure to attack Israel, and Israel will provide for the needs of Gaza’s citizens.
Second, international law stipulates that parties to a conflict provide humanitarian zones and corridors. Israel has done this since the launch of its ground operation. Countries have the right to “geographically restrict the freedom of movement of humanitarian personnel.”
Israel killed and captured thousands of Hamas terrorists in combat zones like Jabalya. It is not required, nor would it make sense, to provide aid to zones actively being evacuated. While Israel risks its soldiers’ lives to defend humanitarian corridors, Hamas fires at fleeing civilians to prevent their evacuation. Hamas does this because it understands that Israel respects international law. Therefore, the presence of civilians provides them with human shields.
Third, Hamas purposefully creates impediments to Israel’s admission of aid. Ostensibly humanitarian organizations turn a blind eye to egregious violations. Organizations like UNRWA are permeated with terrorists. Their facilities are used for terrorism. Their members have even held Israeli civilians hostage. Aid convoys are used to smuggle arms and other contraband. Furthermore, they are often captured by Hamasand used to sustain its fighters and fuel its war effort through the extortion of its civilians. Gazan civilians have decried this on video. Clearly, the footage has yet to reach the eyes, ears, or hearts of the vaunted ICC.
The ICC arrest warrants, like the January 26, 2024 ICJ rulings against Israel, reveal these bodies to be shamelessly prejudice. In Kafkaesque fashion, Israel was destined to be found guilty regardless of the facts. These institutions continuously fail to prevent actual war crimes. Their preoccupation with Israel enables brutal actors to persecute without consequence. This ruling makes a mockery of international law. The result will be that those who already flaunt these laws will continue to do so, while those who adhere to them, yet are still found guilty in international kangaroo courts, may start to ignore them.
Israel should rebut this liable while continuing to ensure the security of its citizens and the return of its hostages. Israel alone does not have the global power and prestige to turn the tide of insanity back to reason. With determined effort the incoming US administration can lead more countries toward justice. In time, these self-besmirched international bodies might even become instruments of justice as intended.
