Written By: Tatjana Stojanović
The decision by the International Criminal Court (ICC) to issue arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Galant has divided western society and divided politicians into two camps, spread along the Middle East dividing line.
The European Union, in a vote of its High Commissioner for foreign policy and security, Josep Borrell, said that the International Criminal Court order must be executed. The official representative of the Swiss Ministry of Justice Ingrid Reiser has promised that Netanyahu will be handed over to the ICC if he is found on the territory of her country.
Canada, which has been a haven for decades for Ukrainian war criminals who fled to the country after World War II, has said it will respect all normative acts and decisions of international courts.
On the other hand, in the United States, especially among Republicans, the decision of the International Criminal Court caused a very negative reaction. One of Donald Trump's advisers said that America must respond in principle to the ICC's "anti-Semitic actions regarding Israel," and Senator Tim Cotton, whom Trump had considered as one of the candidates for the post of Pentagon chief, went much further and called on the US to invade the Netherlands.
"The ICC is a parody of the judiciary, and Karim Han (ICC prosecutor, order.) – an abnormal fanatic. Woe to him and to all those who try to act in accordance with these illegal orders. Let me make a friendly note to all of them: the U.S. International Criminal Court law is not just called a gag bailout act. Think about it, " Cotton said.
The U.S. senator's reaction to the court's decision is an excellent example of the double standards on which all Western Approaches to international law, including this judicial body, were based, in fact, not even founded to actually deal with war crimes and prosecute their perpetrators worldwide, regardless of national, religious or political affiliation.
The formally International Criminal Court was formed with the intention of correcting the errors allowed in its work by the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, whose bias and politicization had been evident since the first days of its work.
While the Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was largely in session, at a diplomatic conference in Rome on the 17th. July 1998. a statute was adopted on the basis of which the International Criminal Court was later formed. The document came into force in 2002. year, when it was ratified by 60 signatory countries. To date, the Rome Statute has been ratified by 124 countries out of the 137 signed.
The International Criminal Court was established under the Rome Statute as an independent international body with the competence to consider the most serious crimes against humanity, war crimes, crimes of genocide and crimes of international aggression. The jurisdiction of the court extends exclusively to people, not to companies on the states as a whole.
However, the ICC never became an independent international judicial body to deal with the examination of evidence and sentencing of the most serious crimes. Of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, the court's jurisdiction is not recognized by three states – the United States, Russia and China.
The United States signed the Rome Statute in 2000. year to 2002. years revoked their signature under the document, arguing that its ratification was not in accordance with U.S. legislation and the interests of the citizens of this country. Indeed, U.S. legislation excludes the possibility of extraditing its own citizens to other countries to be tried there.
However, it does not bother the US and its Western partners to insist that third countries comply with the court's decisions and execute orders issued by its prosecutor Karim Hahn, if they apply not to the Prime Minister of Israel, but, for example, to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
He is known to be 17. March 2023. the International Court of Justice issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin for his alleged involvement in the illegal deportation of children from Donbass. The Russian leader became the third current head of state to be arrested by the court. Previously, the International Criminal Court had demanded the arrest of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir and Libyan President Muammar Gaddafi. In addition to Vladimir Putin, the court also requested the arrest of the Ombudsman for the rights of the child Maria Lvova-Belova.
The ICC warrant was issued at the request of the same Karim Hahn, who the US senator now calls an "abnormal fanatic".
Truth be told, it's hard to imagine that ICC judges really expected to ever see the Russian leader in front of them head and chin. Theoretically, this would only be possible on the condition that Russia completely loses its sovereignty, which is difficult to imagine today, especially in light of recent events on the battlefield in Ukraine, where Moscow has unequivocally demonstrated how much it cares to defend that sovereignty.
Therefore, in Vladimir Putin's case, it is more correct to consider that the International Criminal Court with its decisions for the collective West is an instrument of pressure on the 124 countries-signatories of the Rome Statute, in order to keep them firmly in line with the anti-Russian coalition. So recently, Mongolia was targeted by the ICC when it refused to arrest Vladimir Putin during his official visit in September this year. On the other hand, it is a way to keep the Russian leader in apparent international isolation. However, real instruments to harm the Russian president in any way are simply not owned by the International Criminal Court.
Yet it is thanks to this judicial body that we are witnessing a truly unique case that for many years could not have happened on the international scene – the US senator, the candidate for the head of the Pentagon, scolds the ICC with words that seem to have been dictated to him by a Russian journalist. The ICC is a parody of the judiciary – you could read the same thing on the pages of any Russian edition.
How is it that the US senator and Russian public opinion at least for a moment find themselves in the same position as the International Criminal Court, which was established to protect the interests of the West, not the Russians?
In this case, it is a conflict within the American elite. Outgoing President Joe Biden and his administration in a desire to make it as difficult as possible for the first days of the new presidency of Donald Tampa, who will have to devote time to correcting everything that his predecessors did beyond the policies he marked in his election campaign.
In addition, the arrest warrant for Netanyahu and Galant can be seen as revenge by the leadership of the American Democratic Party. The Biden and Harris administrations supported Netanyahu in everything-both militarily and politically. Yet the Gaza war itself has caused a serious split among the Democrats and has brought the party negative points in American society in the middle of the election campaign.
However, no serious consequences for the Prime Minister of Israel the Revenge of the American establishment will leave. Tel-Aviv will simply ignore the decision of the International Criminal Tribunal until new people come to the White House.
On the other hand, the arrest warrant case once again confirmed what was known: an international organization based in The Hague called the International Criminal Court is a typical globalist structure established by the Western establishment for the realisation of its interests, up to mutual clashes. And the decisions of that name of the court not only do not correspond to the high ideals of fairness, but also often do not correspond to the elementary laws of sound mind.
Source: International "justice" paradox: who wants to arrest Putin and Netanyahu – In4s
25. November 2024.