Jim Williams covers the Israel-Hamas war as well as other issues in the Middle East. Be sure to check both his written and video reports daily.
According to reports in several Israeli media and international outlets, the United States is currently involved in a last-ditch diplomatic effort to prevent the International Criminal Court (ICC) from issuing arrest warrants against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders. The concern arises due to the ICC’s jurisdiction extending to territories occupied by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war, potentially allowing the ICC’s chief prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, to open an investigation into Israel’s military actions in Gaza and its settlement activity in the West Bank
While the Prime Minister stated on Friday that Israel “will never accept any attempt by the ICC to undermine its inherent right of self-defense,” there is a straight line being drawn from Israel from to the United States by the court.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an independent judicial body tasked with investigating and prosecuting individuals for serious crimes under international law, including genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.
Let’s break down the complexities of the situation:
- Jurisdiction and Context:
- The ICC operates within a specific legal framework. It has jurisdiction over crimes committed on the territory of states parties to the Rome Statute (the treaty that established the ICC) or by nationals of those states.
- Israel and the United States ARE NOT parties to the Rome Statute, which means the ICC does not have automatic jurisdiction over their actions.
- Hamas, as a non-state actor, is also not a party to the Rome Statute. However, the ICC can exercise jurisdiction if the situation involves crimes committed on the territory of a state party (such as Palestine).
- Complaints and Investigations:
- The ICC can initiate investigations based on complaints or referrals. In the case of Gaza, the Palestinian Authority (which is a state party to the Rome Statute) referred the situation to the ICC in 2015.
- The ICC Prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, opened a preliminary examination into the situation in Palestine, including alleged crimes committed by all parties involved.
- The ICC examines evidence and assesses whether there is a reasonable basis to proceed with a formal investigation.
- Challenges and Criticisms:
- Critics argue that the ICC disproportionately focuses on certain situations, including those involving Israel and the United States, while other conflicts receive less attention.
- The ICC faces challenges in gathering evidence, ensuring cooperation from relevant parties, and navigating complex geopolitical dynamics.
- Accountability and Context:
- While Hamas initiated the conflict on October 7, 2023, the ICC considers the entire context, including actions by all parties.
- The ICC investigates alleged crimes committed by both state and non-state actors. Its goal is to ensure accountability and justice for victims.
The ICC considers jurisdiction, referrals, and evidence when deciding which situations to investigate. While the focus on Israel and the United States has drawn attention, the ICC has yet to address violations by Hamas or any other bad actor involved in the Gaza conflict.
So, the main issue here who really has control over Gaza? The answer is complex because the PLO, Hamas and to an extent Israel all have some authority over Gaza yet the ICC chooses to take the side of the PLO in this legal battle.
How Amnesty International could play a role here.
While Amnesty International does not directly assist the ICC but they do help provide the court background, its documentation and advocacy contribute significantly to the global effort to address war crimes and uphold human rights. While the ICC conducts its own investigations, the evidence provided by Amnesty International plays a crucial role in advancing justice and upholding human rights globally.
A new report from Amnesty International assessing human rights in 155 countries could be used by the ICC against Israel and the United States in any war crimes trial. The report highlights Israel’s assault on Gaza with evidence of war crimes continuing to mount, as well as U.S. failures to denounce rights violations committed by Israel.
In an interview with Democracy Now, Agnès Callamard, the Secretary General of Amnesty International, issued a stark warning: “The international system is on the brink of collapse.” She decried the failure of rights mechanisms and criticized Israel’s top ally, the United States, for not reining in its “unprecedented” assault on Gaza. The situation in Gaza remains deeply concerning, with evidence of war crimes continuing to mount. Amnesty International’s annual report highlights Israel’s actions, while also pointing to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and the rise of authoritarianism in other regions1.
Secretary General Callamard’s recent remarks have drawn attention to the precarious state of the international system and the need for accountability. However, it is essential to recognize that human rights violations are not exclusive to any single party. While the focus has been on Israel’s actions, it is equally crucial to address other instances of violations.
Hamas, too, has faced allegations of human rights abuses. On October 7, 2023, there were reports of their use of innocent Palestinians as human shields. Such actions endanger civilians and violate fundamental rights. It is incumbent upon all parties involved to uphold human rights standards and ensure the safety and dignity of affected populations.
Yet it is Israel and the United States being singled out by the ICC, as we navigate complex geopolitical challenges, a comprehensive approach that acknowledges violations by all sides including Hamas is essential. The protection of civilians should remain at the forefront of our collective efforts.
Let’s delve into this complex situation:
- Hamas and the Geneva Convention:
- Hamas, as an armed group, is indeed not a signatory to the Geneva Convention. Consequently, it is not bound by the specific rules of war outlined in the convention.
- The Geneva Conventions primarily apply to states and their armed forces. These conventions establish humanitarian norms during armed conflicts, emphasizing the protection of civilians, prisoners of war, and wounded combatants.
- However, non-state actors like Hamas are not directly subject to these conventions. Nevertheless, they are still expected to adhere to fundamental principles of international humanitarian law, including the protection of civilians. But since day one of this war on October 7, 2024 Hamas has chosen not to play by any rules.
- Israel and the United States:
- Both Israel and the United States are signatories to the Geneva Conventions. As such, they are legally bound by the rules set forth in these treaties.
- Their actions during armed conflicts are subject to scrutiny based on these conventions. This includes considerations related to proportionality, distinction between combatants and civilians, and protection of civilian infrastructure.
- The international community holds them accountable for any violations of these rules.
- Different Standards and Context:
- The perception of different standards arises from the context and the lens through which actions are evaluated.
- Israel and the United States operate within a framework of international law, which includes not only the Geneva Conventions but also other human rights instruments.
- Hamas, on the other hand, is often viewed through a security lens due to its designation as a terrorist organization. This can lead to differing expectations regarding its conduct and most importantly the total disregard for any rules.
- Complex Realities:
- The situation in Gaza is multifaceted, with historical, political, and security dimensions.
- Civilian casualties, displacement, and destruction of infrastructure occur during conflicts, regardless of the parties involved is certainly a concern. In the case of Israel and Hamas the idea of the ICC pushing for war crimes against the Jewish state and likely the United States seems to be at best hypocritical and at worst irresponsible.
In summary, while the Geneva Conventions provide a legal framework, the practical application of these rules remains challenging in conflict zones. The international community must continue to advocate for adherence to humanitarian norms, but it also means Hamas, not just Israel and the United States must be held accountable.
The situation remains complex, and international pressure continues to mount over the conflict in Gaza. As events unfold, the role of the United States and the actions of the ICC will be closely watched by the global community
As the ICC seeks action against Israel and possibly the United States where does the court stand on Hamas and the case brought against them?
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has taken steps related to the October 7, 2023, attack carried out by Hamas. Here are some key points:
- Complaint by Israeli Families:
- Genocide Accusation:
- Hamas’s Actions on October 7, 2023:
- On that day, Hamas carried out a bloody onslaught in southern Israel, resulting in the deaths of approximately 1,400 people and the taking of 246 hostages.
- The majority of those killed were civilians, many of whom were slaughtered in their homes. Around 260 people were massacred at an outdoor music festival11.
- Evidence and Documentation:
- Legal Assessment:
In summary, the ICC has taken note of the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, and the families of victims have sought accountability through legal channels but there has been no action taken against the terrorist group.
