Experts: ICC Arrest Warrants is Start For More Israeli Sanctions

CrossFireArabia
Analyses
November 25, 2024

The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant could open the floodgates for more legal challenges for other Israeli officials, as well as Western nations supporting the ongoing genocide in Gaza, experts say.

On Nov. 21, ICC Pre-Trial Chamber 1 issued warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant accusing them of using starvation as a method of warfare in Gaza, along with the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution and other inhumane acts.

Israeli academic and law professor Neve Gordon believes this could be the tip of an iceberg of cases and warrants against other top Israeli military officials and leaders.

“It is clear that while Netanyahu and Gallant were at the very top of the decision-making and policymaking apparatus, but there are several other high-ranking politicians and military personnel that are implicated in the starvation and in the systematic attacks on health care,” Gordon, an international law professor at Queen Mary University of London, told Anadolu.

“I will not be surprised if in the coming months or even coming years, there will be warrants against the chief of staff, maybe some other generals, the current defense minister, and maybe other ministers.”

Legal expert Michael Becker pointed to ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan’s statement and reference to ongoing lines of inquiry as an indicator of what could come next.

“It could mean additional charges sought against Netanyahu and Gallant. It could also mean new requests for arrest warrants against other potential defendants,” he said.

“There’s probably no shortage of possible candidates that the court might be interested in pursuing.”

For the initial stage, he said the ICC made “a concerted effort to focus their efforts on the leadership, and those people most responsible for making policy decisions about how to conduct the operation in Gaza.”

“It is, of course, possible that other people could end up being the target or the subject of arrest warrants,” Becker, assistant professor of international human rights law at Trinity College Dublin, told Anadolu.

Also, he added, the warrants issued do not cover all the charges sought by the prosecutor, most notably the crime against humanity of extermination.

“We might see the prosecutor try to challenge that determination as the process goes on, in order to get that charge included,” he explained.

Legal troubles for Israel’s allies

Experts say the ICC warrants could also lead to legal troubles for Western governments that are selling arms to Israel and supporting it militarily.

“The pre-trial chamber has opened an avenue for a whole series of other legal petitions in domestic courts, particularly in Europe, where countries continue to send arms to Israel,” said Gordon.

Given the ICC’s charges against the Israeli leaders, these countries are violating their own laws because most of them have a memorandum of arms trade setting out certain conditions, he explained.

Each country “legally restricts itself from trading arms with entities that carry out serious violations of international humanitarian law.”

“There is a high possibility, according to the ruling by the pre-trial chamber, that Israel has carried out crimes against humanity,” he continued.

“Therefore, by continuing to trade arms with Israel, these countries are in danger of being complicit with crimes against humanity, and that is against their own laws.”

This gives human rights organizations and NGOs in these countries the space to file cases against their governments in domestic courts, he said.

“This can actually lead to an arms embargo on Israel, not by the US, but by Germany, Italy, UK, Spain and France, which are the major European countries that trade arms with Israel,” said Gordon.

As opposed to the US and Israel itself, most of Tel Aviv’s European allies are members of the ICC, part of 124 countries around the world that are now legally obliged to arrest Netanyahu and Gallant should they set foot on their territory.

Most of Israel’s European allies, such as France and Italy, have said they would uphold international law and execute the warrants. Other European nations that have said the same include Ireland, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Belgium.

The UK has also vowed to “always comply with its legal obligations as set out by domestic law and indeed international law,” but has not explicitly said it would arrest the duo.

Germany has pledged continued support for Israel, with a government spokesperson saying the country generally supports the ICC, but it has not yet decided whether it would actually implement the arrest warrant for Netanyahu and Gallant.

Parallel investigations in West Bank, East Jerusalem

In his statement on the warrants, ICC Prosecutor Khan said his office is also “taking forward additional lines of inquiry in areas under the Court’s jurisdiction, which include Gaza and the West Bank, including East Jerusalem.”

Palestinians in the occupied West Bank have been subjected to ever-escalating Israeli violence and repression in parallel to the genocide in Gaza, with at least 797 killed and more than 6,000 wounded since last October. According to the Israeli advocacy group Peace Now, there are more than 720,000 illegal settlers in the occupied West Bank, including East Jerusalem.

“I think that one of the things that we have been witnessing particularly since October 2023 is the kind of efforts to displace communities in the West Bank from their ancestral lands, particularly in the South Hebron Hills and in the Jordan Valley, not far from Ramallah,” said Gordon.

“I think there is a chance that the prosecutor will look at the kinds of efforts to displace Palestinians and replace them with Jewish settlers, which is part of the settler colonial logic of cleaning the land from its indigenous inhabitants.”

Earlier this month, Israel’s far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich openly called for annexation of the occupied West Bank, drawing worldwide condemnation.

Smotrich, defying international law, declared that “the only way to remove the threat of a Palestinian state from the agenda is to apply Israeli sovereignty over the settlements in Judea and Samaria (West Bank),” vowing that 2025 will be the year for Israeli sovereignty over the occupied Palestinian territory.

Impact on ICJ case

Becker, a former staffer at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), pointed out the interplay between the ICC charges and those in South Africa’s genocide case against Israel at the ICJ.

He said the ICC prosecutor’s decision to focus on the war crime of starvation when he filed for warrants in May arguably was encouraged or facilitated by the ICJ’s provisional measures order in March.

“Out of the three different provisional measures, the risk of starvation and famine was really the focus of that March order. So, it was interesting to see that was what the prosecutors seem to be focused on,” he said, adding that starvation was again a focal point in the warrants.

While any concrete progress at both courts could take years, the ICC warrants could impact the ICJ case in other ways, he said.

The language used in the pre-trial chamber’s decision to justify the warrants “tracks exactly some of the language from the Genocide Convention, even though the charges that the prosecutor has sought are not charges of genocide,” he explained.

“That’s important in the sense that it might give the ICJ further grounds, or the ICJ might find themselves operating on firmer ground, if they also find that Israel’s actions in Gaza have created conditions of life intended to destroy a part of the population, because that’s the language we see in the pre-trial chamber and that tracks language from Article II of the Genocide Convention.”

‘Disincentive for Israel to de-escalate’

On the question of whether the ICC warrants or threat of more legal troubles could stop Israel’s assault on Gaza, Becker fears it could end up having an “opposite effect.”

“If Israel’s defense all along, as it has been, is that we’re not doing anything wrong and we are complying with international law, Israeli officials might say we actually now have no incentive to change our tactics,” he said.

The thinking there could be that if they do make changes, they would “risk that being framed as some kind of admission that what we were doing before was wrong.”

“So, perversely, I think that the ICC arrest warrants might actually be a disincentive for Israel to de-escalate,” he added.

Since last Thursday, Israel has killed at least 150 Palestinians as it continues its relentless attacks on Gaza, raising the overall death toll to nearly 44,200, most of them women and children.

More than 105,000 Palestinians have also been wounded in Israeli attacks, while a crippling siege on water, power, fuel, and all humanitarian essentials has left more than 2 million Palestinians facing death and starvation.

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Analyses

Saudi Arabia Plays Host to Superpower Politics

CrossFireArabia
February 18, 2025

By Maksym Skrypchenko

Diplomatic efforts to end the Russia-Ukraine War are once again in the spotlight, as US and Russian officials meet in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday. In a sharp contrast to the previous administration’s strictly defined red-line policy, representatives from the newly formed US President Donald Trump-aligned diplomatic team—Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, and Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff—are set to engage with their Russian counterparts in discussions that many fear may sideline Ukraine’s own interests.

The stakes in this conflict extend far beyond territorial disputes. For Ukraine, the war is an existential struggle against an enemy with centuries of imperial ambition. Every defensive maneuver is a stand for sovereignty and self-determination. Yet recent diplomatic moves suggest that Ukraine’s central role in negotiations may be diminished. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s absence from the Saudi meeting underscores the deep-seated concern in Kyiv that their security concerns might be marginalized in a process dominated by transactional interests.

https://twitter.com/canon75gaz81/status/1891836717696450562

Under the previous administration, Washington’s policy was driven by a clear set of red lines designed to deter any actions that could provoke a nuclear-armed adversary. That approach was predicated on a belief that excessive support for Ukraine might lead to a dangerous escalation. However, the new strategy, as signaled by Trump’s team, appears less encumbered by these constraints. Instead, the focus seems to have shifted toward a pragmatic resolution—a process that prioritizes ending the war at the expense of Ukraine’s moral imperatives underpinning their fight for survival. This shift represents not only a departure in tone but also in substance. While the previous policy imposed strict limitations to avoid provoking Moscow, the current approach appears more willing to concede Ukraine’s positions if it serves the broader goal of ending the fighting.

Trump’s affiliation with Saudis 

The decision to hold talks in Saudi Arabia is far from arbitrary. The Saudi Kingdom provides a neutral venue and a longstanding trusted mediator especially for figures like Steve Witkoff and Donald Trump, whose longstanding business and diplomatic ties in the region are well known. This credibility is further reinforced by Saudi Arabia’s recent announcement of a $600 billion package with the US, comprising investments and procurement agreements from both public and private sectors.

Moreover, Saudi Arabia’s position outside NATO shields it from the obligations that compel Western allies to enforce international legal mandates, including the ICC arrest warrants issued against top Russian officials, notably Putin. In such an environment, Saudi Arabia offers a secure venue for direct negotiations with Moscow, free from the pressures of external legal mandates.

Meanwhile, high-ranking European officials express growing concern over their exclusion from the process. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer has even suggested the possibility of deploying British troops to enforce any resulting peace deal, a move that underscores the importance European leaders give to Ukraine’s future. The concerns are not merely about the cessation of hostilities, but about the long-term security guarantees that Ukraine desperately needs. European officials argue that a peace process that excludes Kyiv from the initial stages could lead to an agreement lacking the robust assurances necessary to prevent future Russian aggression.

Russian approach

Russia, for its part, is approaching the negotiations with its signature long-game strategy. Recent reports suggest that Kremlin officials are assembling a team of seasoned negotiators well-versed in securing maximum advantage. Their method is well known—ask for a shopping mall when all they need is a cup of coffee. Just one day before the talks, Russian diplomats are already staging a narrative of victory, asserting that the EU and the UK are entirely non-negotiable parties to any future agreements on Ukraine. According to the Russian representative at the UN, Ukraine has irretrievably lost key territories, and any new arrangement should force Kyiv into accepting a demilitarized, neutral state determined by future elections. This approach is designed to create the illusion of strength while ultimately settling for concessions that heavily favor Russian interests.

Meanwhile, for Ukraine, the principle that “nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine” is more than just a slogan—it is a critical security principle. Ukrainian leaders are rightfully wary of any agreement negotiated without their active participation. With the current US strategy favoring swift and transactional outcomes rather than comprehensive negotiations, there is a real danger that Kyiv’s position could be compromised. The absence of Ukraine from these early discussions may result in a peace agreement that fails to address the existential risks the nation faces. Without strong security guarantees built into any deal, Ukraine remains vulnerable to renewed incursions and a potential destabilization of the entire region.

In this evolving diplomatic landscape, the contrast between the old and new approaches is stark. The previous risk-averse strategy sought to maintain clear boundaries to prevent escalation, whereas the current approach appears more willing to blur those lines in the hope of bringing an end to the bloodshed. Yet by doing so, there is an inherent risk: the very nation fighting for its survival might be reduced to a bargaining chip in a broader geopolitical deal.

It is imperative that Ukraine’s interests remain at the forefront of any negotiations. The war in Ukraine is not just a regional conflict—it is a struggle that speaks to the fundamental principles of sovereignty and self-determination. Any peace settlement that fails to incorporate Ukraine’s security concerns is likely to be unstable at best, and catastrophic at worst.

Maksym Skrypchenko is the president of the Transatlantic Dialogue Center

Analyses

Hebrew Media: Israel Fails to Achieve Goals of Gaza Onslaught

CrossFireArabia
February 17, 2025

Israeli media outlets discussed Tel Aviv’s failure to achieve the goals of the war now ongoing for more than a year on the Gaza Strip. Hebrew newspapers stressed that the army is unable to eliminate Hamas, while disagreements are increasing regarding the future of military operations and the ceasefire agreement.

Yitzhak Brik, former commander of the Southern Corps said Israel has not been able to eliminate Hamas despite the war, now in its 15th month. He asked, “If we have failed throughout this period, how can we achieve it now?”

Brik pointed out that Hamas possesses a huge arsenal of weapons, and has developed its combat methods with its fighters exiting the underground tunnels and returning to them easily, making it difficult for the Israeli army to eliminate them.

He added Hamas has regained its strength, and that the Israeli army has destroyed no more than 10% of the tunnels of the Islamist organization, according to Israeli military sources. He also acknowledged that the military operations have not achieved their goals, and that the war has drained the army more so than at the beginning.

The army is a tool of an extremist government

For her part, Yifat Gadot, from the “Families of Soldiers Cry Enough” organization said the Israeli army has become a tool in the hands of an extremist government that is working to prolong the war to achieve its political and ideological interests.

Gadot added that there is a growing conviction among the families of soldiers that the war has become a means of maintaining the government coalition, not achieving security.

As for attorney Yair Nahorai, an expert in religious Zionist movements, he confirmed that the ongoing conflict is not just a war against Hamas, but part of an extremist religious vision that seeks to occupy Gaza, noting that some parties in the Israeli government consider the “sanctity of the land” more important than human life, which complicates the Israeli position even more.

In the same context, political analyst Ben Caspit considered that the real reason behind the slowdown in implementing the second phase of military operations is the political considerations of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

He explained that the pressure exerted by right-wing ministers, such as Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir, is obstructing the making of decisive decisions regarding the war, as Netanyahu seeks to maintain the stability of his government coalition instead of focusing on recovering the prisoners.

A Joke in the Middle East

For his part, Ben Gvir attacked the government, describing it as lacking courage, and missing a historic opportunity to impose its conditions on Hamas, adding that Israel has become a “joke in the Middle East” due to what he described as weak and hesitant decisions in managing the war and negotiations.

In contrast, Gil Dickman (a relative of one of the Israeli female prisoners killed in Gaza) responded to Ben Gvir’s statements, accusing him of politicizing the issue of prisoners, and called on him to support Netanyahu in his efforts to return the kidnapped, criticizing his withdrawal from the government due to recent agreements.

In another context, political analyst Dana Weiss stated that the Israeli political crisis escalated after statements by US President Donald Trump, who pressured the government to expedite the release of prisoners, threatening decisive responses if Israel did not respond to his demands.

Weiss confirmed that the Israeli government found itself between internal pressures from the extreme right and American and international pressures pushing towards diplomatic solutions, which further complicates the internal Israeli scene in light of the ongoing military operations in Gaza.