RSS
The International Criminal Court Reveals Its Moral Bankruptcy
International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan speaks during an interview with Reuters in The Hague, Netherlands, Feb. 12, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Piroschka van de Wouw
The shocking announcement by the International Criminal Court (ICC) that it has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant is more than a perversion of international justice. It is an outrageous assault on the global order, and an attempt to destroy the leadership of free nations from within.
Never before has the international criminal system pursued the leaders of democratic countries in such a manner, as they are generally presumed to police their abuses through an independent judicial system. After these unjustified prosecutions, the world has taken a significant step backward from the diplomatic order that emerged after the Second World War.
In the first place, the issuing of these arrest warrants is a grotesque twisting of justice in the simple sense. Can anyone have forgotten why Israel found itself at war with the terrorist group Hamas in the Gaza Strip in the first place?
Israel unilaterally withdrew from the territory in 2005; two years later, in 2007, the terrorists of Hamas seized control from the internationally recognized Palestinian Authority by force in a brutal coup. After years of biding their time, on October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a massive, Iran-armed invasion of Israeli territory, in which they butchered 1,200 Israelis and foreign nations, committed grotesque acts of rape and torture, and took 251 living and dead victims (including 12 Americans) back to Gaza as hostages.
Israel launched a war against Hamas in response; it is a defensive war, meant to ensure that the events of October 7 — the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust — can never happen again.
Prime Minister Netanyahu’s office rightly compared the ICC persecution to the Dreyfus Affair, a 19th century incident in which France falsely accused a Jewish army officer of being a German spy, leading to his long-term imprisonment and an outburst of antisemitism.
The disgusting reality is that the ICC emerged out of a process that began with the world community’s resolute decision to prosecute the Nazi war criminals who slaughtered most of European Jewry. Now, the ICC has perversely used its mandate to attack Jews seeking to prevent another genocide against our people.
Now that they have been issued, the warrants have real and deleterious consequences. The ICC itself has no enforcement power, and indeed, there is still an unenforceable outstanding ICC warrant for the arrest of Russian President Vladimir Putin. However, many nations have already agreed that they will arrest Netanyahu and Gallant if they land on their territory, which limits Netanyahu’s ability to travel and represent the Jewish State abroad. Notably, Vice President of the European Commission, Josep Borrell, stated that the ICC ruling applied to all member states of the European Union.
More importantly, it makes Netanyahu and Israel itself seem guilty — although all objective evidence points in the opposite direction.
The United States, thankfully, has maintained a firm response, with a White House National Security Council spokesperson saying that the US “fundamentally rejects the Court’s decision to issue arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials [and is] deeply concerned by the Prosecutor’s rush to seek arrest warrants and the troubling process errors that led to this decision.”
Similarly, President-elect Donald Trump’s incoming National Security Advisor, Florida Congressman Mike Waltz, opined that “Israel has lawfully defended its people & borders from genocidal terrorists,” and pledged a “strong response to the antisemitic bias of the ICC & UN come January.” Incoming US Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) warned that the Senate would pursue sanctions against the ICC and Khan if they “do not reverse their outrageous and unlawful actions to pursue arrest warrants against Israeli officials.”
This bipartisan US response has been echoed by a few other clear-sighted leaders around the world, who understand the stakes.
The foreign minister of one EU state — Peter Szijjártó of Hungary — recognized that the ICC’s “shameful and absurd … decision disgraces the international judiciary by equating leaders of a country attacked by a heinous terror attack with the leaders of the terrorist organization responsible.” Argentina’s president, Javier Milei, noted his “deep disagreement” with the decision, which he pointed out “ignores Israel’s legitimate right to self-defense against the constant attacks by terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah.” However, these brave voices are few and far between.
What would the consequences be if these warrants were universally enforced? Israel would come under a state of siege, its leaders unable to leave the country for fear of being incarcerated in a foreign land, in contradiction to the ordinary rules of diplomatic immunity. There would be many other consequences — but this symbolic one is very important. As in the not-so-long-ago days when Jews could not leave their area of many cities at night without breaking the law, the ICC is trying to raise a new ghetto wall around Israel.
As usual in history, the destruction of civilization may start with the targeting of Jews, but does not end with them. Just imagine if Iran were to successfully seek arrest warrants against the US president, or North Korea against the leaders of South Korea and Japan — and leading democracies vowed to uphold them. Now is the time for the US and other responsible powers to push back, and hard, ensuring that the ICC never again has the power to commit such abuses of justice.
Lizzy Savetsky works with numerous non-profit and philanthropic movements as an outspoken advocate for Israel and the Jewish people. You can find her on Instagram @lizzysavetsky.
The post The International Criminal Court Reveals Its Moral Bankruptcy first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
‘We Didn’t Provide Aid to Nazi Germany’: US Sen. Tom Cotton Defends Israel’s Decision to Block Aid Into Gaza
US Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) speaks during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, March 11, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Julia Nikhinson
US Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) defended Israel’s decision to pause aid deliveries into the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, pointing out that the United States did not provide humanitarian assistance to Nazi Germany during World War II.
“We didn’t provide aid to Nazi Germany during World War II. The idea is preposterous. Why should Israel be forced to provide aid to Hamas-run Gaza?” Cotton posted on X/Twitter on Sunday night.
The White House also expressed support for Israel’s decision.
“Israel has negotiated in good faith since the beginning of this administration to ensure the release of hostages held captive by Hamas terrorists,” National Security Council spokesperson Brian Hughes said in a statement. “We will support their decision on next steps given Hamas had indicated it’s no longer interested in a negotiated ceasefire.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced earlier in the day that Israel would block humanitarian aid transfers into Gaza.
Netanyahu’s announcement came after his government presented the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas with a proposal for a six-week extension of the ongoing Gaza ceasefire and hostage-release deal. The proposal would mandate that Hamas release half of the remaining Israeli hostages who were kidnapped into Gaza at the beginning of the extension. The rest of the hostages would be released at the end, if Hamas and Israel can agree on a permanent ceasefire deal. Israel would retain the right to restart the war in Gaza if negotiations are unsuccessful by the 42-day mark.
According to Jerusalem, the ceasefire extension proposal was the brainchild of US President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff.
Hamas has refused to extend the first phase of the ceasefire deal, claiming that the Jewish state has violated the terms of the original agreement.
The Netanyahu government reportedly believes that pausing aid transfers into Gaza will pressure Hamas into accepting the ceasefire extension. Hamas, which started the Gaza war when it killed 1,200 people and abducted 251 hostages during its Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of southern Israel, dismissed Israel’s decision on Sunday as “cheap blackmail.”
“Unfortunately, Hamas rejected the proposal. As the first phase of the framework has ended, we have halted the entry of trucks into Gaza,” Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said in a statement.
Israel’s decision to block aid deliveries into Gaza was met with widespread backlash, with some observers accusing Jerusalem of committing “genocidal acts” and violating “international law.”
However, others have pointed out that over the past few months, Gaza has experienced a surge of humanitarian aid.
“In the last six weeks, Israel has flooded Hamas Gaza with 25,000 trucks of aid,” noted former Israeli government spokesman Eylon Levy. “The enemy territory whose government is committed to permanent jihad against Israel is amply stocked for months.”
Cotton, the chairman of the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has staunchly defended Israel’s defensive military operations in Gaza. In October 2024, Cotton wrote a letter to then-US President Joe Biden, condemning his administration for threatening an “arms embargo” against Israel.
In December 2024, Cotton introduced legislation to mandate the US federal government refer to the West Bank as “Judea and Samaria” — terminology preferred by Israel. Cotton has also lambasted the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNWRA) for allegedly diverting funds intended for humanitarian aid into the hands of the Hamas terrorist group.
The post ‘We Didn’t Provide Aid to Nazi Germany’: US Sen. Tom Cotton Defends Israel’s Decision to Block Aid Into Gaza first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Israel Cut Off Aid to Gaza After Hamas Rejected Ceasefire Deal — And That’s Completely Legal
Trucks carrying aid move, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip, Feb. 13, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Hussam Al-Masri
In what may be perhaps the most significant single strategic move since the start of the war in Gaza, the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office announced this weekend that, “the entry of all goods and supplies into the Gaza Strip will be halted.”
Contrary to claims of “war crimes” and “starving civilians,” this new approach to Gaza is not only completely consistent with international law — but is likely to save civilian lives on all sides and bring the war to a close far more quickly than any other approach.
The massacre of October 7, 2023, saw the largest murder of Jews since the Holocaust. The internationally-designated Hamas terror organization, along with Palestinian civilians and UN staff, invaded Israel, killed over 1,200, took 251 hostage, committed mass torture and mass rape, and brought about 16 months of war.
As I wrote the other day, Israel and Hamas completed “Phase 1” of a three stage ceasefire agreement, which resulted in the release of some of the Israeli hostages. However, the parties have so far failed to negotiate the terms of “Phase 2.” US Special Envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, presented a framework for continuing negotiations, which Israel accepted but Hamas rejected.
In response, Israel made this weekend’s announcement, and closed Gaza to aid deliveries.
Israel maintains a legal weapons blockade on Gaza, which is governed by the Geneva Conventions, The Hague Conventions, and the San Remo Convention. Under these agreements, a legal blockade is permitted as a defense against armed attack. Israel’s blockade of Gaza, which began in 2007, fits this requirement, as it is a response to Hamas’s ongoing rocket barrages on Israeli civilians.
Under these same international rules, the blockading party may not intentionally starve civilians as a tool of warfare. This effectively means that the blockading power is required to transfer humanitarian aid into the blockaded area — a requirement that Israel has fulfilled at a massive scale.
However, the aid that enters into Gaza is typically not transferred to civilians. To the contrary, Hamas, habitually steals international aid, as well as torturing and killing civilians who attempt to take the aid for themselves.
This reality has been confirmed by multiple international sources including the United Nations, and has been caught on camera numerous times.
Hamas uses stolen aid supplies to fuel its rockets, equip its troops, and sells some of what’s left to civilians as a way of raising funds for its war effort. Indeed, many of the resources Hamas used on October 7, and in the months since, were taken from aid supplies, including the tunnels where Israeli hostages are currently held, which were built with cement funded by America’s USAID agency.
In effect, Israel has been fighting a war of survival while also funding both sides: a strategy doomed to fail. This kind of national suicide is absolutely not required by international law.
To the contrary, Article 23 of Geneva Convention IV specifically states that a power is not required to allow the passage of humanitarian aid unless it is satisfied that the aid will not be diverted to enemy combatants. Therefore, not only is Israel not required to transfer aid under the present circumstances, but pressuring Israel to do so is, in itself, a war crime.
International law is structured this way for good reason: funding both sides of a conflict only serves to prolong hostilities and thus increase completely avoidable harm to civilian populations on all sides.
In this case, aid to Gaza ends up almost exclusively in the hands of an internationally -designated terror organization that is also an enemy combatant. The international community has had 18 years since the beginning of the blockade in 2007, and 16 months since the October 7 massacre, to find a solution to this particular war crime, yet has both failed and refused to do so. The consequence has been to prolong the current war, the captivity of the Israeli hostages, and also war’s deleterious impact on the lives of both Israeli and Palestinian civilians.
For the moment, this war crime of compelling Israel to provide aid to enemy combatants, in violation of Article 23 of Geneva Convention IV, has come to an end. This can only result in a quicker defeat of Hamas, and a quicker end to the current war. Such a result will, in turn, provide immeasurable benefits to Israelis, to Palestinians, and to the entire world at large.
Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.
The post Israel Cut Off Aid to Gaza After Hamas Rejected Ceasefire Deal — And That’s Completely Legal first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Pro-Palestinian Activists Blame Bibas Children for Their Own Murders
Kfir Bibas. Photo: Hostages and Missing Families Forum.
The confirmation of the murders of the red-haired Bibas boys was a gut punch for Israelis. For some pro-Palestinian activists, it was an opportunity to blame the victims.
Last Tuesday, the South African-based Gift of the Givers, the self-described “largest disaster response, non-governmental organisation (NGO) of African origin on the African continent,” decided to share a short video justifying the kidnapping of Shiri, Ariel, and Kfir and blaming Israel for their deaths.
It was bizarre for a supposed human rights organization to share this pro-Hamas propaganda. Some of this mystery can be explained by Gift of the Givers’ alleged membership in a Hamas funding network. The United States sanctioned the charity umbrella group Union of Good in 2008 for funding Hamas. The union’s website in the early 2000s listed Gift of the Givers as a South African-based member.
The South African government’s anti-Israel hostility may also help explain why Gift of the Givers felt comfortable sharing the victim-blaming material. The South African government has been one of Israel’s most vocal critics and a key player in Hamas’ strategy of using Palestinian suffering to isolate the Jewish State.
Six weeks after Hamas’ October 7 atrocities, South Africa’s leader had already accused Israel of war crimes “tantamount to genocide.” A month later, the government in Pretoria initiated an International Court of Justice (ICJ) case based on this false accusation. Pretoria’s Hamas cheerleading has caused friction with Washington, with Trump citing the ICJ case as part of his decision to cut aid to South Africa this February. South African President Cyril Ramaphosa is trying to reset relations with the United States, but hasn’t declared his intention to reset his approach to Palestinian terrorism.
The clip that Gift of the Givers shared began with a gunpoint recording of a ragged Yarden Bibas, Ariel and Kfir’s father, in Hamas captivity, blaming Israel’s prime minister for the death of his wife and children.
The seemingly coerced condemnation was intended to prove Israel’s guilt — and Hamas’ innocence.
The video then justified Shiri’s abduction by claiming that Palestinian terrorists “arrested” the “soldier,” and that she worked for the army and had been a member of Israel’s intelligence services. A Gazan fighter in the video even attempted to portray the kidnapping of children as a humanitarian gesture, saying, “upon her arrest, we allowed her to take her children out of mercy for them.” If those terrorists had an ounce of mercy, they would not have kidnapped babies into Gaza.
The video also repeatedly claimed that the “Nazi Israeli army” killed the Bibas family in one of its “indiscriminate airstrikes.” That fact was completely disproved by the Israeli government in forensics evidence it shared around the world, but no one seemed to care.
The attempt to draw comparisons between Israel and the Nazis is both an inversion of reality and employs the antisemitic tactic of delegitimizing Israel by claiming that the victims of Nazism have now become its perpetrators. Much like the erroneous charge of genocide, this absurd accusation erodes an important definition related to human rights.
Gift of the Givers has had other antisemitism controversies of late, with leaders declaring, “Zionists … run the world with fear. They control the world with money.”
October 7 was a “mask off” moment for many, including Gift of the Givers. The humanitarian organization and its leaders have been increasingly bold in their support of antisemitism and pro-Hamas propaganda. And why shouldn’t they, when their government serves as Hamas’ lawyer at the ICJ and accuses Israel — the victim of genocidal acts — of being the perpetrator?
David May is a research manager and senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a Washington, DC-based, nonpartisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy. Follow David on X @DavidSamuelMay. Follow FDD on X @FDD.
The post Pro-Palestinian Activists Blame Bibas Children for Their Own Murders first appeared on Algemeiner.com.