Why the world should ensure Netanyahu appears before ICC

History was made recently after the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes. Even though the court as well issued an arrest warrant for Hamas military chief Mohammed Deif, the man is presumed dead, and it is the arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant that will be much-talked-about around the globe in the coming weeks, months and even years.

Given the attitude towards the court in Western capitals, and Israel's decades-long enjoyment of protection from many of the world's most powerful countries, save for Russia and China, those watching in the Middle East, Asia, Africa, Eastern Europe and Latin America will be keen to see if, indeed, action such as sought by the ICC could be taken against, not just the Israeli governmental leadership, but also, potentially, those in the West long accused of war crimes such as former US President George W Bush and former British Prime Minister Tony Blair.

It is noteworthy that the decision followed months' worth of struggle by rights activists, and even the court's Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan, for legal action against suspects for possible war crimes in the Israel-Hamas war that first broke out in October last year and has since drawn in, not just the Lebanese militant group, Hezbollah, but also its long-accused state sponsor, Iran.

And the decision, therefore, is the first real attempt by an international institution to scratch farther underneath the layer of legal, military and diplomatic protection of Israel by the West. It is, importantly, the world's first instance of institution-led censure against national behavioural impunity and such unbridled and unpunished law-breaking as has been Israel's doing in Gaza lately since the Nuremberg Trials of the 1940s that followed the Nazi-led pogroms against the Jews of Europe during World War II.

The unspoken statement by the court is clear: If we are to build and live in a world where both the mighty and lowly are safe, laws, rules and order must apply to all without exceptions. The court, in its decision, neither denies nor takes away Israel's right to self-defence. It only seeks to subject Israel, like it does the rest of the community of nations, to the internationally prescribed treaty-based and institution-enforced dictates of national conduct.

The West, even in its alliance with and defence of Israel, should adhere to international law and order. The victims of Israeli military excesses in Gaza and elsewhere in the Middle East are as much a part of humanity as are those of continued Hamas attacks on Israel. The West must, therefore, in the spirit of fairness, recognise the jurisdiction of and cooperate with the ICC in the enforcement of arrest warrants issued against both Palestinian and Israeli suspects accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

It's heartening that, despite Washington's slamming of the decision, countries in the West, including France, Canada, the Netherlands, Norway, Ireland, Italy, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Belgium and Switzerland, joined rights groups Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch in reacting favourably to it, with some expressing a willingness to cooperate with the court in its enforcement.

This, coming on the heels of calls, including increasingly from some countries long considered staunch allies of Israel in the West, for the institutional and diplomatic recognition of Palestine's statehood, signals an important volte-face from policy obduracy and relational monomania in the West long seen as inimical to the pursuit of peace between Israel and her neighbours.

Since the Hamas attacks on Israel of October 7 last year, which killed about 1,400 people, Israel has bombarded, not just Gaza—which has been Hamas-administered since 2007—and other parts of Palestinian territory, but also southern Lebanon, in retaliation for attacks by Iran-backed Hezbollah militants. The war has killed an estimated 45,000 people in Palestine alone thus far along with the two militant groups Hamas and Hezbollah's leaders, Ismail Haniyeh and Hassan Nasrallah, respectively.

The US has, not only defended Israel's actions in Gaza, but also vetoed nearly every UN Security Council resolution aimed at reaching a ceasefire. In the US itself, pro-Palestinian protesters—including college students and professors—condemning Israel's actions in Gaza have been arrested. And it was, therefore, not surprising to see Washington and Tel Aviv lead the near-muted condemnation of the ICC's issuance of arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant.

The court doesn't have its own police force and depends, mainly, on signatory member states' help and cooperation for the smooth enforcement of its orders. The UN Security Council, of which the US, the UK, France, Russia and China are veto-vote-wielding permanent members, however, expects cooperation with the court of all countries in the world regardless of whether or not they are signatories to the court's founding treaty.

It's this all-binding nature of international law, coupled with the moral conflict of defending and aiding the commission, by Israel, of war crimes in Gaza, that should signpost Washington in the direction of self-criticism and moral re-enculturation.