The decision of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague to issue arrest warrants for the Prime Minister and former Defense Minister of Israel represents a moral low point. This ruling undermines the very principles the ICC was established to protect. Yet more disheartening than the decision itself is the inability of liberal democracies to acknowledge the bias and politicization inherent in the court's actions.
After World War II, two temporary tribunals, in Nuremberg and Tokyo, were established to try war criminals. Following the establishment of ad-hoc tribunals for Yugoslavia (1993) and Rwanda (1994), the Rome Statute was adopted in 1998, serving as the founding document of the ICC, which officially began operations on July 1, 2002. At its inception, the ICC was perceived as a crucial institution for maintaining the liberal world order led by the United States, even though the U.S. opted not to join. The court is authorized to try individuals for four types of crimes: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Over the years, the ICC has primarily focused on cases in Africa, including in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda, Sudan (Darfur), Kenya, and Libya. Israel is the first democracy to be investigated by the ICC.
In the 15 years leading up to October 7, 2023, Israel faced approximately four major rounds of hostilities against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. Hamas consistently used the civilian population as human shields, operating from hospitals, schools, and UN facilities, particularly those under the auspices of UNRWA. Consequently, Israel conducted its operations against Hamas with one hand tied behind its back. Every offensive action required legal approval to ensure compliance with international law. Israel also adopted warning procedures that compromised operational outcomes. This is hte reason, Israel never fully pursued Hamas's headquarters beneath the Al-Shifa Hospital in Gaza City. This restraint was precisely the cornerstone of Hamas's immunity strategy.
All of this changed with the horrific massacre of October 7. Israel came to the realization that it was engaged in an existential war and had to eradicate Hamas's rule at its core. Damage to civilian infrastructure became inevitable. It is possible and necessary to critique the Israeli government's conduct during the war concerning specific actions (as we ourselves did in regards to Israel's humanitarian policy), and there were certainly professional mishaps and perhaps even ethical failures by IDF forces, but militarily, this war could not have been waged in a significantly different manner. Thus, while the criminal indictment is formally directed at individuals, it effectively puts Israel itself on trial. By equating Israel—a democracy defending itself—with a terrorist organization that employs ISIS-like tactics, the ICC distorts justice and, worse still, provides a powerful tool to terrorist organizations worldwide.
Fifty-five Muslim countries, including 22 Arab states, create a built-in bias against Israel within international organizations. Abba Eban, Israel's first ambassador to the UN and later its legendary Foreign Minister, once remarked, “If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass” Recently, the German newspaper “Bild” noted that even in the year Russia invaded Ukraine, 15 resolutions at the UN targeted Israel, while only 13 addressed the rest of the world combined—"as if everything else in the world is fine regarding human rights," the paper observed. In the UN Human Rights Council, countries renowned as beacons of human rights, such as Iran and Venezuela, pass sweeping resolutions almost exclusively against Israel.
The disappointment in Israel does not stem solely from the prosecutor's unauthorized decision (a topic we won't delve into in this post), but rather from the statements of 'friendly' Western liberal democracies expressing their intent to honor the decision. In this case, it seems likely that Israel is the victim of trends far larger than itself. These countries fear for the liberal world order, with some in near hysteria following Trump's election and his challenge to that order. Admitting to the politicization of the institutions that uphold this order would, in their eyes, be akin to shooting themselves in the foot. And so, once again, Israel pays the price, sacrificed on the altar of preserving the liberal world order.