By Prem Thakker\Zeteo
Photos: YouTube\Video Screenshots\Wikimedia Commons
The US on Thursday quickly rejected the International Criminal Court’s decision to issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant – a response that stands in stark contrast to its embrace of such warrants against Russian President Vladimir Putin last year.
From the White House to Congress, US politicians are striking a largely different chord as international law now catches up to its ally and largest benefactor of military aid. Here are some examples:
The Biden White House
The White House immediately issued a statement on Thursday, making its stance clear on the ICC warrants against Israeli leadership.
“The United States fundamentally rejects the Court’s decision to issue arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials. We remain deeply concerned by the Prosecutor’s rush to seek arrest warrants and the troubling process errors that led to this decision,” a White House National Security Council spokesperson said. “The United States has been clear that the ICC does not have jurisdiction over this matter. In coordination with partners, including Israel, we are discussing next steps.“
Last year, President Joe Biden welcomed the ICC’s decision to go after Putin for alleged war crimes in Ukraine, saying it was “justified,” and that “it makes a very strong point.”
It’s worth noting that while the US condemned the “rush” for arrest warrants against Israeli leaders, they come 13 months into Israel’s war on Palestine; the ICC’s warrants against Putin came 13 months after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
The State Department
After canceling Thursday’s press briefing, a State Department spokesperson echoed the White House statement to Zeteo.
Last year, Secretary of State Antony Blinken urged all members of the ICC to comply with the warrants against Putin.
“I think anyone who’s a party to the court and has obligations should fulfill their obligations,” Blinken said at the time.
GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham
On Thursday, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham said he’d introduce legislation to put “other countries on notice” that if they support the ICC after their warrants, they “can expect consequences” from the US.
“If we do not act forcefully against the ICC after their outrageous decision to issue arrest warrants for the duly elected Israeli Prime Minister and former Minister of Defense, we are making a huge mistake, and I fear the United States is next,” he warned. “We cannot let the world believe for a moment that this is a legitimate exercise of jurisdiction by the Court against Israel because to do so means we could be next.”
When it came to Putin, however, Graham welcomed the ICC warrant, calling it “a giant step in the right direction for the international community,” that was “more than justified by the evidence.”
“To forgive and forget Putin’s war crimes – that are occurring on an industrial scale – would irrevocably damage the Rule of Law-based world order established at the end [of] World War II,” he said at the time. “I hope the international community will continue to support the ICC in their endeavors to hold Putin accountable for the brutal invasion of Ukraine.”
It wasn’t just congressional Republicans condemning the Netanyahu and Gallant arrest warrants. Democratic Sen. John Fetterman – a staunch Israel supporter – was curt on Twitter: “No Standing, relevance, or path. Fuck that.”
‘Weird Fantasy Land’
Matt Duss, of the Center for International Policy underscored the “undeniable hypocrisy” of the moment. “The discussion about Israel and Palestine exists in this weird fantasy land where Israel can simply do no wrong,” he told Zeteo.
“It’s just, to anyone outside the United States, it is absolutely bizarre,” Duss said. “And it’s just devastating to America’s credibility, to say the very least, but especially because of the stark, you know, undeniable hypocrisy of welcoming warrants against Putin – which are deserved – and, you know, an attack in the ICC when they’re issued against America’s friends.”
As the US isolates itself further and further for an ally that it pumps billions of US tax dollars towards, all for more war, nations across the world – from France and Ireland and the European Union itself to Turkey and Jordan and Canada – announced their respect for the warrants.
The 124 countries that are signatories of the Rome Statute, which established the ICC, are obligated to now arrest Netanyahu, Gallant, and Hamas military commander Mohammed Deif – whom the court also issued a warrant for. Notably, the US and Israel have not signed onto the ICC.
Hague Invasion?
Some US broadsides against the ICC harken back to 2002, when President George Bush signed the American Service-Members’ Protection Act. Also known as “The Hague Invasion Act,” the bipartisan bill authorized the US to use “all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained or imprisoned by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court.”
Such “allied personnel” included those from several allied nations, including Israel.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer was among the Democrats who supported the bill. While he has yet to comment on the official issuance of the warrants, he called the idea “reprehensible” in May. On the other hand, one month after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Schumer celebrated the Senate passing legislation to support ICC investigations by the International Criminal Court into Russian war crimes.
Some are already appealing to the decades-old bill. “The ICC is a kangaroo court and Karim Khan is a deranged fanatic. Woe to him and anyone who tries to enforce these outlaw warrants,” Republican Sen. Tom Cotton tweeted Thursday. “Let me give them all a friendly reminder: the American law on the ICC is known as The Hague Invasion Act for a reason. Think about it.”
With such bubbling and bipartisan hysterics against the ICC, one may wonder whether the US is primed to activate the Hague Invasion Act on behalf of men who have helped kill tens of thousands of Palestinians and numerous Americans.
For the incoming Trump administration’s part, Donald Trump’s national security adviser, Mike Waltz, said the ICC “has no credibility and these allegations have been refuted by the U.S. government.”
“You can expect a strong response to the antisemitic bias of the ICC & UN come January.”
Watch Mehdi break down why the ICC warrants are not antisemitic:
