The International Criminal Court’s tactics tarnish the reputations of America’s allies

In the upcoming days, an unprecedented attempt will be made.

A British prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, named Karim Khan, is planning to bring a war-crimes case against an American ally.

Specifically, Khan aims to file individual cases against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and a senior figure in the Israeli army, likely the chief of the general staff. 

If this unfolds, it will add fuel to an already volatile international situation.

And it will heighten tensions domestically as well. 

The actions of those targeting Jews on American campuses will likely escalate.

This move will embolden antisemites who have emerged in recent months.

Moreover, it will unjustly tarnish the reputation of Israel. 

Netanyahu is an elected leader of a democratic nation.

Gallant and the IDF leadership oversee a citizen army.

Thus, any charges against them would essentially be indicting the state of Israel and its people as a whole.

It would be a significant overstep by the ICC. 

Yet, Khan is pushing forward without conducting an investigation or gathering evidence.

His actions are driven by political motives and bias. 

Political Motives 

Prior to moving forward, Khan — and the American public — should take a few things into consideration. 

The ICC presents itself as a global court, but in reality, it is susceptible to corruption and politicization like any other court.

Khan’s actions may highlight this vulnerability. 

Historically, the US has rejected the legitimacy of the ICC.

And for good reason.

Back in 2002, the Bush administration enacted the American Service-Members’ Protection Act (known as “The Hague Invasion Act”).

This was to prevent US officials and military personnel from being tried by a foreign court that the US is not a part of. 

It was a necessary measure.

There were already attempts to arrest American officials and bring them to The Hague.

An extreme Spanish judge sought to arrest former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in Europe.

There were also efforts to have former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and American soldiers taken to court.

Fortunately, those attempts failed.

The US administration rightly defended American service members against foreign prosecution. 

Interestingly, the Hague Invasion Act also warned that any US ally participating in the arrest of an American or American ally would face consequences from the US.

This stance was justified. 

However, in recent years, there has been a shift in the American position.

Both Democrats and Republicans, such as Mitch McConnell, have seen the ICC as a tool to hold Vladimir Putin accountable.

They hope to see Putin and his associates answer for their actions in Ukraine. 

While this may have been well-intentioned, both parties could soon realize the mistake of engaging with the ICC. 

No Chance to Capture Vlad 

There was never a likelihood of bringing Vladimir Putin to The Hague.

It is unrealistic to think the Russian leader would surrender himself.

Does Khan have the authority to enter the Kremlin and arrest him?

No, he does not.

What may have seemed like a strategic political move could backfire. 

Instead of going after Russian leaders, Khan seems inclined to target Israeli officials first.

If he proceeds, it is likely that after US allies, American leaders and military figures will be next in line. 

In 2021, Khan succeeded Fatou Bensouda from Gambia as the ICC prosecutor.

During Bensouda’s tenure, she attempted to prosecute American soldiers for “war crimes” in Afghanistan. 

The Trump administration rightfully sanctioned Bensouda for this effort.

However, the current administration lifted those sanctions in 2021. 

This entire situation represents a moral inversion. It is not Israel that is committing war crimes.

It was Hamas that committed war crimes, which were captured on camera on Oct 7. 

Will Khan pursue charges against Hamas leadership?

It will be a challenging endeavor.

It is improbable that the terrorist group will willingly come out of hiding to appear in court. 

One thing is certain about Hamas – they do not abide by the laws of war.

And attempting a citizen’s arrest would likely be unsuccessful. 

Naturally, Vladimir Putin would benefit from this situation. It would serve as a validation if he could point to the ICC’s actions against the Israeli PM as a precedent.

Moreover, it would undermine the efforts of internationalists seeking a legitimate international court. 

If Khan proceeds, he risks damaging this fledgling global initiative and making both Republicans and Democrats its adversaries. 

Such a drastic move would not resolve the conflict in Gaza.

The Israeli government is committed to achieving a complete victory.

This entails the defeat of Hamas and the release of all remaining hostages.

If the ICC and others want to halt the conflict, they should focus on these goals.

Their inability to do so reveals their bias and ineffectiveness. 

If Khan and the ICC pursue charges against the Israeli PM and others, they will not delegitimize Israel as they intend to.

Instead, they will delegitimize themselves.

This will affirm the belief of patriotic Americans across party lines that the US should not participate in the charade at The Hague.