Thanks to Netanyahu, the ICC’s equivalence between Israel and Hamas will go global

A Palestinian walking amid the debris as humanitarian aid arrives in Gaza City in March 2024

Anshel Pfeffer writes in Haaretz on 20 May 2024:

Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant will never go on trial at the International Criminal Court in the Hague. Even assuming the pre-trial chamber accepts the request for arrest warrants submitted Monday by ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan for war crimes and crimes against humanity, Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statute that provides the court with its jurisdictional powers. As long as they don’t travel to a country that is a signatory, they are safe from arrest.

But Khan’s statement is a massive blow both to them personally and to Israel as a country. Whether or not this was his intention, he has created a legal and moral equivalence between the Israeli prime minister and defense minister with Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh (against whom he has also requested arrest warrants).

If anything could have further damaged Israel’s international standing and the legitimacy of its war against Hamas in Gaza, this is it.

There will be many, including fierce critics of Netanyahu and his government, who will see an equivalence between the perpetrators of the October 7 massacre – chiefs of a terror organization that has used and exploited its own civilians in Gaza to shield them and their fighters – and the democratically elected leaders of the country that was attacked, as abhorrent and a moral travesty.

Israeli legal officials, who are by no means card-carrying supporters of the government they serve, are convinced that if the case was to be heard before impartial judges, Israel could refute the allegations. But since there’s no prospect of that case ever going forward, it is immaterial.

It is important, however, to read Khan’s lengthy statement.

It starts with the allegations against Sinwar, Deif and Haniyeh, going into detail regarding the locations of the October 7 killings, the taking of hostages, the rape and sexual assault. Khan speaks of his own feelings upon visiting the sites of “unconscionable crimes,” and of how, when “speaking with survivors, I heard how the love within a family, the deepest bonds between a parent and a child, were contorted to inflict unfathomable pain through calculated cruelty and extreme callousness.”

The next section of his statement regarding the allegations against Israel is different in a number of key areas.

First, while the three Hamas targets represent both its political and military leadership, just Netanyahu and Gallant are mentioned in Israel’s case. There was concern in Israel that Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Herzl Halevi and perhaps other senior generals would also be named, but, so far at least, only the two Israeli politicians have.

This is significant because while the list of potential war crimes for which Netanyahu and Gallant could be charged includes “willful killing” and “intentionally directing attacks against a civilian population,” much of the emphasis and detail is in regard to Israel’s policy on humanitarian aid to Gaza during the war.

There are no specific details regarding Israel’s military attacks, and Khan emphasizes that “Israel, like all states, has a right to take action to defend  its population.” However, he repeatedly mentions Israel’s alleged use of “starvation as a method of war.” The ultimate responsibility for this, in his mind, is that of the politicians, not the generals.

Israeli officials have argued, and will continue to argue, that from the very start of the war, they were facilitating the entry of humanitarian aid into Gaza. But even though that is true, for months there were severe restrictions on these supplies and in public, ministers of Netanyahu’s government – including Gallant himself early on – were talking of a “siege” on Gaza and opposing the idea of any supplies going in.

This may have been more a matter of rhetoric than policy, but those statements were made to a receptive public and Netanyahu did nothing to curb or counter such talk.

Israel’s battle strategy in Gaza did not include any detailed plans to keep the civilian population supplied with the bare essentials, even though some senior officers warned early on that such plans were necessary. Even if there was no policy of intentional starvation, the lack of serious preparation to prevent such an eventuality, coupled with the belligerent talk from Israeli politicians, has left Israel vulnerable to these accusations. The government has only itself to blame.

Netanyahu will now try to use the ICC prosecutor’s request for an arrest warrant to present himself as a martyr suffering on Israel’s behalf. That may well work for a short while, and we may even see his polling numbers rise as a result. But this cannot be allowed to obscure what has happened. Israel embarked on a justified war in the aftermath of October 7 – a war that at first had broad international support. But the mismanagement of this war, the callousness and craven stupidity of this government, has transformed Israel into a global pariah that in the eyes of the world is on the same level as Hamas.

This is as much on Netanyahu as on Karim Khan.

This article is reproduced in its entirety