The arrest warrant for Netanyahu will have big consequences

FOR MONTHSICCICCICCICC ICC ICCICCICCICCICC EUICCICC ICC the decision seemed both inevitable and improbable. On November 21st it finally came. The International Criminal Court () issued arrest warrants for Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, and Yoav Gallant, the defence minister (pictured right). They are accused of overseeing war crimes during Israel’s year-long war in Gaza against Hamas, a Palestinian militant group. The court also indicted the top commander of Hamas, which carried out a massacre of Israelis that triggered Israel’s assault on Gaza. But it is the charges against the two Israeli politicians that are the real earthquake: a diplomatic disaster for Mr Netanyahu, and perhaps also for the court itself.Karim Khan, the ’s prosecutor, requested the warrants in May. The case he brought is separate from allegations of Israeli acts of genocide against Palestinians pending before the International Court of Justice, which hears disputes between states (the prosecutes individuals). The type of charges brought against Messrs Netanyahu and Gallant are easier to prove than a charge of genocide against Israel would be: they are accused of using starvation as a weapon of war in Gaza, and of directing attacks against civilians in the territory.A three-judge panel found “reasonable grounds to believe” that such crimes had occurred. Recent events no doubt bolstered Mr Khan’s case: the United Nations continues to warn of imminent famine in northern Gaza, which has been largely for the past 40 days. The panel rejected a procedural challenge from Israel, which argued that the court has no jurisdiction in Gaza. Palestine, of which Gaza forms a part, is a signatory to the Rome Statute, the legal framework for the . The judges ruled that gave them authority to investigate crimes committed there.The is meant to be a court of last resort that steps in when a country’s own courts fail to prosecute abuses. Israel’s attorney-general told Mr Netanyahu this year that forming a state commission of inquiry might stall the’s probe. But he has yet to appoint one, and the judges noted Israel’s failure to do so in their decision.The ruling drew near-universal condemnation from Israeli politicians. Bezalel Smotrich, the far-right finance minister, called it a “mark of Cain” on the , while Yair Golan, the head of a left-wing party, called it a “shameful decision”. Many Israelis argued that it was the result of antisemitism: Mr Netanyahu himself called it a “modern Dreyfus trial”, referring to the wrongful prosecution of a Jewish officer in the French army in 1894.But the charge of antisemitism cheapens the term. Nothing about the court’s history suggests a fixation with Jews. Since it was founded in 2002 the has mostly prosecuted African warlords and despots, the likes of Omar al-Bashir, a Sudanese dictator, and Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, the son of Libya’s longtime tyrant. Over the past two years it has issued warrants for a number of Russian officials, including Vladimir Putin, for the invasion of Ukraine. This is the first time it has indicted Israelis.Along with Messrs Netanyahu and Gallant, the issued a warrant for Muhammad Deif, the longtime Hamas military chief. He is accused of directing the murder, torture and rape of civilians on October 7th 2023, among other offences. Mr Deif probably cannot stand trial: Israel believes he was killed in an air strike in July (the court issued a warrant because it could not confirm his fate). Mr Khan had also requested warrants for Yahya Sinwar, the architect of the massacre, and Ismail Haniyeh, the group’s leader at the time. Those requests were withdrawn because both men were killed by Israel this year.There is no risk that Israel will extradite Messrs Netanyahu or Gallant to The Hague, since the country is not a member of the . But 124 other countries are, including many of Israel’s closest friends. The most immediate consequence of the judgment is that both men will be unable to travel to those countries for fear of arrest. Josep Borrell, the European Union’s foreign-policy chief, said the court’s decision was binding on all members. “Netanyahu has ended his journey as a legitimate leader in the international arena,” wrote Eran Etzion, a former deputy national security adviser under Mr Netanyahu.The main exception, of course, is America, which is not a member of the court. The decision has thrown a bombshell into America’s presidential transition. It will embarrass Joe Biden’s outgoing administration, divide Democrats and outrage Republicans as they prepare to take control of the White House and both houses of Congress in January.Leading Republicans have warned that America will impose sanctions on the —with support from Democrats if possible or without it if necessary. Mike Waltz, whom Donald Trump has chosen to be his national security adviser, promised a “strong response” to the court’s “antisemitic bias”. John Thune, the Senate’s incoming majority leader, denounced the ’s move as “outrageous, unlawful and dangerous”. He said that its actions, left unchecked, “could pose a threat to the United States in the future”.He urged Chuck Schumer, the Democratic majority leader in the Senate, to take up a bill passed by the Republican-controlled House in June that would apply sweeping economic sanctions and visa restrictions to judges and others linked to the, including their family members. If not, he warned, Republicans would do so in January as a “top priority”.Democrats, for their part, are increasingly split over the war in the Middle East. On November 20th the Senate firmly rejected three motions calling on Mr Biden to halt various weapons shipments to Israel, but 17 of the 47 Democrats, and two independents who support them, voted for at least one of the critical motions. The Biden administration is in a quandary. It has opposed legal action against Israel, but it has supported the court in issuing an arrest warrant for Mr Putin and has resisted the House sanctions bill as going too far.Ironically, it may be the court that suffers the most immediate consequences in the form of sanctions imposed by America. Mr Netanyahu is not about to end up in the dock, nor is Israel about to end its war in Gaza. But the judgment will have long-term consequences: both Mr Netanyahu and the country he leads will be more isolated and more dependent on the United States.