RSS
What You Need to Know About the ICC Arrest Warrants for Israeli Leaders
You may have heard that the ICC (International Criminal Court) is on a path toward issuing arrest warrants against Israeli leaders. But you may not know how this came about, where we are in the process, and what it could mean for Israel, America, and the entire free world.
To help you cut through the disorganized reports, sensationalism, and widespread misinformation, here is a thorough and clear update — from a lawyer.
The ICC is distinct from the International Court of Justice (ICJ). At the ICJ, South Africa is attempting to make a case against Israel for genocide, which will take years to complete. However in the meantime, South Africa has repeatedly presented emergency motions for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire, including an attempt just last week which does not technically accomplish that goal, but comes perilously close.
Separately, but in parallel, the ICC prosecutor, Karim A. Khan, has brought a request to the ICC to issue international arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, as well as several Hamas leaders.
If granted, these arrest warrants will make it impossible for Netanyahu to leave Israel and enter any of the 124 countries that are members of the ICC (approximately two thirds of the world), as well any additional countries that have mutual law enforcement agreements, such as all Interpol countries.
The United States is not an ICC member, and would be unlikely to enforce the warrant, however most European countries are either ICC or Interpol members (or both), as well as much of South America and some of the Asia-Pacific.
So how did this all come about?
The ICJ has jurisdiction over Israel because Israel signed the Genocide Convention of 1948. In fact, Israel helped draft the document, which is meaningfully connected to the very soul of Israel, as the whole concept is an outgrowth of the Holocaust. It is therefore a cruel irony that Hamas and its allies would weaponize the ICJ against Israel. Paradoxically the ICJ does not have jurisdiction over Hamas, so if they do issue a “ceasefire” order, it will be one in which Israel ceases, but Hamas fires.
By contrast, the ICC does not have jurisdiction over Israel, except insofar as the Court unilaterally decided that it does.
Specifically, the ICC is charged with enforcing an international treaty called the Rome Statute, which was ratified by 124 countries but notably, not by Israel or the United States. How then did the ICC come to the conclusion that it can enforce a treaty over a country that never actually agreed to it?
The ICC’s rules hold that the Court may exercise jurisdiction over any events that occur inside the borders of a member state. The ICC recognizes a Palestinian state, and includes it as a member of the ICC. Although the “state” of Palestine has no recognized borders or territory, the ICC nonetheless ruled in 2015 that events occurring inside the West Bank and the Gaza Strip count as being “inside” the “borders” of the “State of Palestine,” and are therefore subject to the Court’s jurisdiction.
In recent days, the ICC prosecutor accused Israel of a number of violations of the Rome Statute, which is paradoxical on several levels at once: for one, Israel never agreed to be bound by the Rome Statute, and secondly, the specific accusations are patently untrue.
For example, the prosecutor accuses Israel of preventing the flow of humanitarian aid, even though according to well verified data, Gaza has received enough aid to feed every man, woman, and child twice over. (There is nonetheless an apparent food shortage as both Hamas and UNRWA employees steal much of the food.) The prosecutor accuses Israel of closing the crossings by which aid enters the Gaza Strip (the crossings are actually open and active despite Hamas’ frequent bombings of the crossings) and, of course, Israel stands accused of genocide, despite taking historic measures to protect civilians, and producing the lowest civilian to combatant casualty ratio for a conflict of this type in human history.
Moreover, by requesting arrest warrants against both Israeli leaders and Hamas terror operatives, Prosecutor Khan has effectively drawn an astonishing moral and legal equivalence between Israel, a modern Western democracy with a famously independent judiciary, and one of the world’s most notorious terror groups — and a parallel between the October 7 terrorist massacre, and the self defense of the very victims of that massacre.
To be clear, the arrest warrants have not yet been issued, but are currently being presented to the ICC’s panel of 18 judges for approval. Yet this arrest approval process is not a trial in which both sides present evidence and make arguments. To the contrary, the prosecutor needs to show merely that there are “reasonable grounds” for the arrest warrants, but without the accused having a right to reply or to present evidence as part of that decision. This process is roughly comparable to what American courts call a “Grand Jury hearing,” and American lawyers have an old joke that in such hearings the evidentiary requirements are so low that, “a Grand Jury will indict a ham sandwich if you ask them to.”
So in a cruel paradox, by the ICC’s own rules, evidence is irrelevant, truth is irrelevant, and even reality itself is irrelevant. It is enough that the ICC prosecutor makes an accusation, and then world leaders who never even agreed to the Court’s jurisdiction can find themselves subject to its arrest powers. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that Khan will stop with Israeli leaders — by Khan’s logic, as expressed in this prosecution, it is possible that IDF soldiers and former IDF soldiers (in other words, most Israelis) could eventually face international arrest as well.
So what happens now?
It is not clear how long it will take the judges to approve the arrest warrants — deliberations could take anywhere from days to months. It is rare that the ICC judges would refuse to approve an arrest warrant, but this case may be different because the United States has announced that it will take action.
Fearing that America’s enemies could use the ICC as a weapon against American leaders and soldiers, the US not only refused to join the ICC, but also passed a bipartisan law in 2002 affirming that America would protect American service people and allies against a weaponization of the Court. A bipartisan bill currently working its way through Congress envisions placing sanctions on the ICC prosecutor, the judges, and their families. This would limit their ability to travel, and also may shut down their bank accounts and other access to basic day to day life necessities — in other words, this is a powerful diplomatic tool.
Although it is not clear what will happen in the coming days and months with respect to the ICC, one thing is clear: Hamas, which cannot defeat the IDF on the battlefield, is attempting to weaponize international law to defeat Israel off the battlefield. Whether they will succeed, and whether other terror organizations use such weapons in the future, depends on how Israel and America respond in the days to come.
An important additional note: many throughout the world, including some Israelis, blithely say that some Israeli leaders are “criminals” and deserve to be arrested (a common refrain in politics). Yet the specific claims against Israeli leaders in this case do not relate to normal domestic political issues, such as corruption, judicial reform, or the like. To the contrary, the case against Israel relates to issues on which almost all Israelis agree — specifically the performance of the IDF and Israel’s self defense.
In fact, it is notable that the Israeli prime minister is not the “Commander in Chief ” of the armed forces as the US president is. Rather, that role belongs to the war cabinet, which is composed of Israeli representatives from the right, left, and center, and enjoys broad public support. In other words, a criticism of the IDF or of Israel’s self defense in Gaza is not merely a criticism of Netanyahu as some like to claim, but rather of the entire State of Israel and the broad consensus of the Israeli people.
Daniel Pomerantz is the CEO of RealityCheck, an organization dedicated to deepening public conversation through robust research studies and public speaking.
The post What You Need to Know About the ICC Arrest Warrants for Israeli Leaders first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Canadians who moved to Israel celebrate the ongoing hostage releases—amid caution that the deal remains fragile
Thursday saw the release of eight more hostages, including five Thai nationals, and three Israeli citizens who were held for 482 days: Gadi Mozes, 80, Arbel Yehoud, 29, and 20-year-old Agam Berger, who was one of seven soldiers kidnapped by terrorists from the Nahal Oz military post on Oct. 7, 2023.
Berger’s name resonated around the Jewish world thanks to images of her life, like a video of her playing violin in her bedroom. Stories abound of the young woman’s adherence to a life of service and faith, who was reported to frequently engage in prayer in captivity and showing defiance to her captors when asked to perform chores on Shabbat, while comforting her fellow captives by braiding their hair.
Agam Berger’s cousin Ashley Waxman Bakshi is an Israeli-Canadian online influencer who has been a vocal advocate for the hostages. She slammed the Canadian government last March over the motion to halt arms sales to Israel and resume funding for UNRWA.
“We’re obviously overjoyed,” she told The CJN from Israel just hours after Berger’s release. “It’s just hard to believe when you want something so bad, that it actually happened.”
Like many, she was appalled at the staged display by Hamas during the release, and had a message for Canadians who “still don’t get it. If everyday Canadian citizens can’t see the difference between the Gazan mob surrounding the hostages and the absolute farce of this terrorist organization dressing up Agam in a fake IDF uniform, when she was kidnapped in pyjamas, and parade her by herself in front of a crowd as some sort of victory while all of Gaza around them is completely destroyed; if they can’t see the difference between good and evil, then there’s some serious moral work that needs to be done in our country.”
While elated that her cousin is home, Waxman Bakshi warned about the fragility of the entire process, not only negotiations but actual timing and procedure involved. She noted that just a few days ago she intervened to put the brakes on a viralsocial media campaign to have all girls braid their hair for today.
“While these kind of things sound like they help and make people feel good, they actually endanger the hostages and the deal if it gets back to the terrorists holding her that what she did may have been a signal of life. We don’t want to endanger her by giving her increased value to the terrorists keeping her.”
That’s an important distinction she says, between listening to family members and just wanting to do good. “That’s what we mean when we say everything is so fragile, we can’t breathe until they’re home. We don’t want anything to draw attention.”
***
Zina Rakhamilova, a Tel Aviv resident raised in Toronto, has spent a lot of time in Hostage Square with the hostage families. The digital marketer—who specializes in Israeli non-governmental organizations and political causes—agrees that everyone “must try to be as discreet as possible not to endanger their status.”
Hours before the Thursday morning release, the mood she said, “like always is very mixed, because on the one hand we’re very excited that Agam and Arbel are on their way home,” but added people were very worried about Gadi Mozes’ status, given confusion over unofficial, unsubstantiated claims about who was alive and who was not.
“It’s definitely part of Hamas’ psychological campaign of terror” she told The CJN, “because we know they’re supposed to release the living hostages first.” It’s important to note says Rakhamilova, that this comes “not even days after back-to-back terror attacks in Tel Aviv, so beyond the emotional torture all of this is taking on everybody, just being outside feels harrowing. We’re continually on edge; we have to watch our backs and we’re doing the best we can.”
As a Canadian she said, “the truth is I’m more concerned for friends and family in Canada than my own status here in Tel Aviv, watching how antisemitism has grown in Canada since Oct. 7, with kosher restaurants and schools and synagogues targeted and attacked.” She lauded Justin Trudeau’s recent statement “that Hamas can no longer rule Gaza, but really, it’s under his leadership that antisemitism has become so bad that people feel so comfortable doing Nazi salutes openly in the streets of Montreal. I’m a lot more worried for the well-being of Jewish Canadians than my own safety or status here.”
As for the mood surrounding the hostage release, she said “people need to understand we do really feel like one united family here, and until anything is made public by the government, prime minister’s office or IDF, saying anything or discussing details is just unethical, and everyone feels that way. We will not go into any details until we know anything for sure.”
After meeting with relatives of Shiri and Yarden Bibas—who were kidnapped on Oct. 7 along with their two young sons, Kfir and Ariel—she said “we’re really worried about them and we don’t know what their status is, but we don’t want to be willing negative things. The family themselves have said they have not lost hope and so our obligation and that of the people outside the family, is to follow their lead and be there for them whatever that is.
“Personally, it’s awful, so many of us feel sick to our stomachs, constantly on high stress, high alert and knowing about the release of known terrorists.”
Ariel Bibas turns five today in Hamas captivity.
I took this video outside the Bibas home on day 265, it is now day 304.
Why isn’t the world freaking out over these children being held by terrorists? Bring them home NOW! pic.twitter.com/HMolDz37VJ
— Zina Rakhamilova (@itsmezina__) August 5, 2024
While personally supportive of the deal, Rakhamilova said she understands “how devastating a price” Israel is paying. “There are people we know who are going to be personally affected by the terrorists being released.” The murderer of Hillel Fuld’s brother, Ari, and the bombers responsible for the deadly 2002 attack on Hebrew University are also scheduled to be released.
“These are hard emotions, but you still see what’s really beautiful: So many people being directly affected, that they’re so happy that the hostages are coming home.
“The lesson is we need to be as kind as possible to one another during all this.”
***
Thai nationals Thenna Pongsak, Sathian Suwannakham, Sriaoun Watchara, Seathao Bannawat, and Rumnao Surasak also kidnapped on Oct. 7, 2023, were released as well, following a week of uncertainty that threatened to derail the first phase of the ceasefire and hostage release plan.
The Palestinian Islamic Jihad terror group who holding Arbel Yehoud did not release her last Saturday along with four female military observers, as originally agreed. Israel was prepared to block access to Northern Gaza, also part of the original plan, until her release was arranged.
She is a teacher who snatched from Kibbutz Nir Oz where her family has lived for generations. The only presumed but unverified evidence of her being alive came in the form of a video released by Palestinian Islamic Jihad earlier this month.
Gadi Mozes, also of Nir Oz, was also released on Thursday. His partner Efrat Katz was killed during a battle between IDF gunships and Hamas fighters, her daughter and two grandchildren were kidnapped and released in the first hostage deal.
Last Saturday, four other female IDF observers—Liri Albag, Karina Ariev, Daniella Gilboa and Naama Levy—were the second group of hostages to be released in the plan, following the release of Emily Damari, Romi Gonen and Doron Steinbrecher a week earlier.
The post Canadians who moved to Israel celebrate the ongoing hostage releases—amid caution that the deal remains fragile appeared first on The Canadian Jewish News.
RSS
The Gaza-Auschwitz Comparison Is a Moral Failure
British teens placed pictures of Israeli hostages seized by Hamas on the train tracks leading to Auschwitz-Birkenau, the notorious Nazi death camp. Photo: JRoots
The banner proclaiming “Palestine: the victory of the oppressed people over Nazi Zionism,” was prominently displayed behind Hamas terrorists as they forced hostage Naama Levy — whose pants were bloodied at the time of her capture — to smile in an army uniform. The goal of this image is clear: to “Nazify” Israel, whitewash Hamas’ crimes, and invert the roles of victims and oppressors. This is the essence of the Iran-backed terror group’s propaganda.
This is not merely an act of cruelty and humiliation; it is a calculated political message, designed to invert historical roles: Israel as the modern-day Third Reich, and Zionism as its ideology.
But Hamas is not alone in spreading this message. It is part of a long-standing antisemitic propaganda campaign that has gained renewed traction far beyond Gaza.
On American college campuses, in activist circles, and across social media, this rhetoric finds eager amplifiers: “Israelis are Nazis,” “Israel is genocide,” “Hamas is resistance.” Pseudo-human rights organizations, pseudo-anti-racists, and pseudo-feminists echo these slogans. At the same time, these voices remain disturbingly silent about the mass rapes, murders, and kidnappings carried out by Hamas on October 7. Their hypocrisy speaks volumes about their supposed commitment to justice and human rights.
These comparisons are not simply misguided or exaggerated; they have a double-edged effect. On one hand, they trivialize the Nazi atrocities by equating them with a contemporary conflict, tragic as it may be, that differs fundamentally in purpose and scope. On the other, they invert historical roles, casting Jews — victims of an unparalleled genocide — as today’s oppressors. This shift doesn’t necessarily deny the Holocaust outright, but distorts its meaning, drains it of its uniqueness, and repurposes it as a malleable ideological tool. The result is an assault on memory itself — on its ability to prevent the resurgence of hatred and, most urgently, the rising antisemitism witnessed since October 7, 2023.
The accusations of genocide directed at Israel are not new. They trace back to Yasser Arafat and Soviet propaganda in the 1970s, gaining momentum with each flare-up in Gaza. These claims rely on a deliberate distortion of historical facts. The Holocaust was a systematic and industrialized campaign of extermination, carried out in secrecy to annihilate an entire people. Gaza, despite its immense suffering and devastation, is the scene of a conflict between a terrorist group and a sovereign military — not an extermination effort. Comparing Gaza to Auschwitz distorts history and reduces the Holocaust to a vague, manipulable idea, undermining its status as a universal moral anchor.
This confusion does more than undermine the past; it undermines the present. The legal mechanisms designed to prevent genocide lose their potency when misused in this way. Raphaël Lemkin, who coined the term “genocide,” emphasized its specificity: the deliberate, systematic destruction of a group. By conflating the horrors of asymmetrical warfare with organized genocide, we blur the critical distinction between war and extermination. This misapplication of language is not just a semantic issue; it is a moral failure.
The issue doesn’t end with hashtags or protest slogans. It reaches the highest levels of political discourse. In 2014, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan accused Israel of “surpassing the Nazis in its barbarity” during Operation Protective Edge. In 2022, Mahmoud Abbas claimed Israel had committed “fifty holocausts,” and made these remarks in Berlin — the very city where the Holocaust was meticulously planned.
These statements are more than rhetorical flourishes; they trivialize the Holocaust and weaponize its memory against Israel — and, by extension, against Jews worldwide.
Why this fixation? Part of the answer lies in a broader effort to reshape the moral foundations of the postwar order. For decades, the Holocaust served as a cornerstone of postwar ethics, justifying the establishment of Israel and supporting universal human rights. Yet some now seek to replace this foundation with a new paradigm: decolonization. In this narrative, Israel is no longer the homeland of a persecuted people but the final vestige of colonialism. This reframing severs the historical connection between the Holocaust and Zionism, presenting Israel not as a resolution to Jewish history, but as a historical anomaly to be rectified.
Replacing the memory of the Holocaust with that of other struggles — even legitimate ones — poses a grave threat and betrays the spirit of “Never again,” which was meant as a universal call for vigilance, not as a pretext for contemporary hostility toward Jews. The danger of succumbing to this propaganda is not just the betrayal of historical memory, but its devastating real-world impact. The rise of antisemitism under the guise of political activism threatens the safety of Jewish communities worldwide, and chips away at the universal principles of justice and human rights.
If there is one lesson to be learned from the last 80 years, it is that antisemitism remains rife, though it now takes new forms. The latest version today hides behind the rhetoric of human rights and anti-colonialism. Israel is not the only target; Jews across the globe are under attack. Unless we confront this reality with clarity and determination, we risk allowing history to repeat itself.
Simone Rodan-Benzaquen is the Director of AJC Europe.
The post The Gaza-Auschwitz Comparison Is a Moral Failure first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Behind the Mask of ‘Pro-Peace’ Groups in Israel
A general view shows the port in Haifa, Israel, July 24, 2022. Photo: REUTERS/Ilan Rosenberg
Rula Daood and Alon-Lee Green, the Israeli national directors of the Standing Together movement, were included in the Time 100 Next list for 2024 due to their extensive pacifist activities, such as the national campaign “The North Demands Peace – Deal Now.” As part of this campaign, the organization’s activists hung billboards in northern Israel with the statement “The North Demands Peace” in Arabic and Hebrew. Ironically, or perhaps tragically, one of the billboards placed at the Maxim intersection in Haifa was near a site damaged by a Hezbollah rocket last October. This area also witnessed the horrific terror suicide bombing at Maxim restaurant, co-owned by Arabs and Jews, in 2003, which killed 21 Jews and Arabs and injured 51 others.
The push for a diplomatic solution with Hezbollah for a ceasefire at any cost, without restrictions or the possibility of Israeli action for violations, indicates a lack of security awareness among Standing Together activists. Last November, northern residents, local authorities, and community forums expressed firm opposition to the proposed ceasefire agreement with Lebanon, fearing future violations by Hezbollah and the potential for a terrible massacre. This fear was reinforced when an IDF spokesman revealed Hezbollah’s plans to conquer the Galilee. Although the ceasefire was eventually signed, Hezbollah violated it within five days.
Besides calling for a ceasefire in the north, Standing Together does not address the circumstances that led to the Sword of Iron war. While they importantly call for the return of hostages to Israel, they mislead the public by claiming that “the government and media in Israel are ignoring war crimes in Gaza and claiming everything is fine.” They assert that Israel is waging a war of extermination in Gaza and that “we must not get used to killing and starving innocent Palestinians in Gaza, hundreds of rocket launches daily, or abandoning cities in the north and south.”
At a demonstration, one of the national directors held signs showing Israeli and Palestinian death tolls since the war’s beginning, citing 44,249 Palestinian deaths without specifying how many were Hamas terrorists. This figure, from the Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry, is unsupported. According to UN data from last May, a third of those killed in Gaza were women and children. A University of Pennsylvania expert’s study suggests the ratio of killed militants to civilians is around 1:1, according to the UN’s assessment. The ratio in urban combat zones around the world is 1:9, meaning nine civilians killed for every combatant killed — and that Israel is doing far more than any other military to avoid and reduce civilian deaths.
Regarding claims of starvation in Gaza, COGAT has facilitated the entry of over a million tons of aid on 57,545 trucks since the war began. From January to July 2024, the average daily food consumption in Gaza was about 3,004 calories per person, compared to 3,540 in Europe and North America, and 2,600 in African countries. Standing Together fails to blame Hamas for systematically stealing humanitarian aid from the residents of Gaza.
Originally supported by a German organization that backs the BDS movement and opposes the IHRA‘s working definition of antisemitism, Standing Together now promotes efforts embraced by the international delegitimization campaigns against Israel. They claim the destruction of Jabalia was for revenge and ethnic cleansing, ignoring the IDF’s continued discovery of weapons and terrorists since the military campaign renewed there on October 5, 2024.
The widespread recognition of organizations like Standing Together in Israel and internationally is concerning. While supposedly promoting coexistence and peace, they spread disinformation that could lead to sanctions harming both Israeli Arabs and Palestinians in the West Bank. Their focus on blaming Israel while neglecting to name Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran as the real culprits blurs the line between victim and attacker, undermining their legitimacy as a coexistence organization.
Tom Yohay is the manager of CAMERA on Campus Israel.
The post Behind the Mask of ‘Pro-Peace’ Groups in Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login