Potential arrest warrant for Netanyahu receives resistance from the White House

The Biden administration is opposing any possible prosecution of members of the Israeli government, amid speculation that the International Criminal Court (ICC) may soon issue arrest warrants for their conduct of the war in Gaza.

“We do not support this,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters at Monday’s press conference, referring to the ICC investigation, which covers the actions of Hamas as well as Israel. “We don’t believe they have jurisdiction.”

Neither the United States nor Israel are among the 124 nations that are members of the ICC. And the chances of Israel giving up any member of its government to be prosecuted in The Hague under a warrant are effectively zero.

But even so, arrest warrants for Israeli officials – perhaps including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself – would clearly reinforce the argument made by the country’s critics.

At its core, this case is that the Israeli counterattack following the Hamas attack on October 7, which killed nearly 1,200 Israelis, was gratuitously brutal and indiscriminate, and that some attacks by the Israeli military, as well as the restriction of humanitarian aid , violated international law.

Israel’s attack on Gaza is estimated to have killed around 34,000 people.

Speculation that ICC arrest warrants could be imminent adds another ingredient to a volatile mix of the American debate over the war in Gaza.

The debate already encompasses university protests against Israel’s actions; growing disapproval, especially among Democratic voters, of Netanyahu’s actions; and the question of whether President Biden fully utilized American influence to control Israel.

On the other hand, pro-Israel Democrats, as well as many Republicans and independents, claim that the greatest danger is that Biden will be pulled to the left by pro-Palestinian activists, to the point where his supposed “firm” commitment to Israel’s security become less reliable.

Furthermore, many Jewish organizations have expressed alarm over the rise in anti-Semitism, while voices on the progressive left counter that accusations of anti-Jewish bigotry are used to delegitimize criticism of Netanyahu’s policies.

These divisions are once again evident in the debate over potential ICC action.

The ICC “is doing its job, which is to hold people accountable for international crimes and war crimes – what the Netanyahu regime and senior members of that government have been doing for months,” said Usamah Andrabi, a spokesman for the ICC Democrats. Justice, a progressive group. .

Andrabi gave little credence to the White House’s argument that the ICC does not have jurisdiction to investigate the war in Gaza or to prosecute senior Israeli government officials if there is evidence to do so.

“I would question why anyone thinks the ICC doesn’t have jurisdiction over the exact type of crimes it should have jurisdiction over – or why governments that aren’t part of the ICC have any say in who is or isn’t. it is not part of the jurisdiction,” he told this column.

On the other hand, Democratic strategist Joel Rubin, who served as deputy assistant secretary of state during the Obama administration, called the possibility of the ICC issuing warrants for Israeli government officials “ridiculous.”

Rubin, who noted that he himself has frequently criticized Netanyahu, said the ICC — as well as the International Court of Justice, which is hearing a separate case in which the South African government accused Israel of committing genocide — comes with “prejudices rooted against Israel.”

For Rubin, “a sovereign country is defending its territory after a terrible terrorist attack. The idea that somehow the people who lead the defense of the country that was attacked end up being accused is a bit much.”

The debate is also roiling on Capitol Hill, where President Mike Johnson (R-La.) called the idea of ​​the ICC issuing arrest warrants against Netanyahu or other Israeli officials “shameful” and “an abomination.”

Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.), one of the most fervent Democratic voices supporting Israel during the conflict, wrote on social media that it would be “a fatal blow to the judicial and moral standing of [the] ICC to follow this path against Israel.”

Fetterman, who has already emphasized that he does not want “any conditions” imposed on Israel, also called on Biden to “intervene” against the ICC.

It is not entirely clear what form such an intervention would take, although behind-the-scenes diplomacy seems the most likely path.

There are also some suggestions that American officials believe the idea of ​​arrest warrants is counterproductive to efforts to achieve a ceasefire or a hostage agreement, or both, in the conflict.

A Monday report from Bloomberg stated that “the US and its allies” were concerned that issuing such warrants would end up “potentially putting a deal at risk.”

“The concern is that Israel will back out of a truce if the ICC proceeds with the warrants,” the Bloomberg report added, noting that the Group of Seven, or G7, nations “have begun a quiet diplomatic effort to convey that message to the court.” based in The Hague.”

As with everything in the conflict, there is, once again, disagreement over whether this is a genuine concern or a red herring meant to help quash potential charges.

“If we say that somehow the Hague arrest warrants are preventing Israel from committing to a ceasefire, we are delusional,” Andrabi said. “Israel blocked a ceasefire for months, killing thousands upon thousands of Palestinians and obstructing aid.”

But Rubin countered: “If your goal is to stop war… you want to reduce, rather than increase, the obstacles to that.”

“If we consider every member of the Israeli government a war criminal, we are reducing their incentives to change course,” he added. “It is telling them that they cannot defend their citizens and that if they make agreements to end a conflict, they will go to The Hague. They are doomed in both directions.”

The Memo is a column reported by Niall Stanage.