The White House has complicated Congressional plans to rebuke the International Criminal Court (ICC) over the Israel-Hamas war by rejecting the nascent sanctions proposal that bipartisan House negotiators had hoped to get to President Biden’s desk early next month.
Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), head of the Foreign Relations Committee, has been in talks with Democrats in both chambers and the administration about legislation to impose penalties on ICC officials for recommending war crimes charges against leaders Israelis, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for their conduct throughout the conflict. McCaul hoped to quickly bring the bill to the House floor when Congress returns to Washington next week.
The White House’s opposition to this plan puts Republican Party leaders at a crossroads: either move forward with the sanctions proposal, knowing it will likely not become law. Or they go back to the drawing board and work with the administration on an alternative form of admonition that could demonstrate Washington’s support for Israel and gain the bipartisan support needed to be enacted.
White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre said the administration is interested in finding that alternative, promising to “work with Congress on other options.” But sanctions, she emphasized, are unacceptable.
“We fundamentally reject the ICC prosecutor’s request for arrest warrants against Israeli leaders,” she said on Tuesday. “However, we do not believe that ICC sanctions are an effective or appropriate path forward.”
White House spokesman John Kirby echoed that sentiment, telling reporters, “we don’t believe sanctioning the ICC is the answer.”
The White House’s opposition to ICC sanctions marks something of a departure from the administration, after Secretary of State Antony Blinken appeared open to penalizing the court through legislation.
During a hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee last week, Blinken told lawmakers “we will be happy to work with Congress, with this committee, on an appropriate response” to the ICC decision, which he called “totally misguided.”
He noted, however, that “the devil is in the details,” adding “let’s see what you have and we can go from there.”
The White House’s opposition to sanctions appeared to catch some lawmakers on Capitol Hill off guard. And Republican Party leaders — who have been vocal supporters of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza in the wake of the Hamas terrorist attacks on October 7 — wasted no time in accusing the administration of abandoning a democratic ally in the middle of the war.
“The ICC should clearly be sanctioned for its outrageous and baseless claims to authority,” President Mike Johnson (R-La.) posted. on social platform. “The White House’s refusal to protect Israelis and Americans is a terrible decision that will set a dangerous precedent.”
Netanyahu himself continued, telling SiriusXM’s “The Morgan Ortagus Show” in an interview, “I’m surprised and disappointed.”
“The United States said it would, in fact, support the sanctions bill,” Netanyahu said in the interview, a clip of which was released. first shared with Politico. “I thought that was still the American position because there was bipartisan consensus just a few days ago… Now you say there’s a question mark.”
It remains unclear how Republican Party leaders will respond legislatively to the administration’s position.
McCaul emphasized that he wants a bipartisan bill that sends the message that Congress is largely united in defending Israel, not a partisan proposal that alienates Democrats and never reaches Biden’s desk.
“We want something that can become law,” McCaul told reporters last week before Congress left Washington for a long holiday recess. “We’re not really interested in a messaging bill.”
His office did not respond Wednesday to requests for comment on his next steps.
Republicans are not the only ones demanding a sharp response to the ICC’s proposed charges. Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.), a staunch ally of Israel, praised the Biden administration’s “unequivocal condemnation of the ICC’s outrageous and false equivalence between our closest friend in the Middle East and the terrorist organization Hamas.” But words alone, he added, are not enough.
“Congress must act,” Schneider said in a statement Wednesday. “I hope Speaker Johnson will work in a bipartisan manner with House Democrats, the Senate and the administration to bring to the floor a commonsense, bipartisan bill that pushes back against these ICC actions.”
ICC prosecutor Karim Khan, a British human rights lawyer, announced last week that he was filing arrest warrants against Netanyahu, Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant and Hamas leaders, claiming they “are responsible criminals” by a list of war crimes. including the starvation of civilians as a method of war and extermination as a crime against humanity, among others.
ICC judges will now consider whether to grant the arrest warrants. McCaul said last week that the sanctions bill is important for “deterrence purposes.”
The chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee maintains a close relationship with Representative Gregory Meeks (NY), the panel’s top Democrat, who has also expressed support for resistance to the ICC. Like McCaul, he stressed the importance of the effort being bipartisan.
“We should make sure we are together,” he told reporters just before halftime. “I’m willing to do it. I hope they are too.”
Meeks’ office did not respond to questions about the administration’s opposition to the sanctions.
It is also unclear what other tools Congress has at its disposal to punish the ICC. The United States has never recognized the legitimacy of the global court, which was created in 2002 to judge cases of genocide and other crimes against humanity. And because Congress does not provide any funding to the ICC, lawmakers have virtually no influence over the court’s operations — an independence that many liberal Democrats consider to be a key asset.
Republicans are more united in their approach to the ICC, saying the court does not have jurisdiction over Americans or other US allies with their own functioning judicial systems. Representative Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, acknowledged this week that Congress has little power to punish the ICC, but suggested that Congress could send a message by withholding funding from another international body: the United Nations .
“We clearly have leverage over this in terms of the funding we do across the international community, so we could use that leverage,” Davidson told The Hill over the phone.
There is some precedent for US sanctions on the ICC. In September 2020, then-President Trump signed an executive order that imposed economic and travel sanctions against the ICC’s chief prosecutor and one of his top aides as they investigated alleged war crimes committed by US forces in Afghanistan.
Less than a year later, in April 2021, the Biden administration lifted the sanctions.
As Congress continues to consider ways to penalize the ICC following its controversial move against Netanyahu, lawmakers are vowing to explore any approach to get their message across to the criminal court.
“Time and time again, international institutions like the ICC and the UN have shown their true colors and their vile hatred for America and Israel,” Rep. Mike Lawler (RN.Y.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, told The Hill. in a statement. “I will continue to work with my colleagues in Congress, exploring all avenues – including sanctions – to ensure these bad actors are held accountable.”
This story originally appeared on thehill.com read the full story
