donderdag 21 november 2024

ICC confirms that Israel has committed virtually every war crime and crime against humanity

BREAKING: the ICC issues arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant

ICC confirms that Israel has committed virtually every war crime and crime against humanity in the book in Gaza

THOMAS FAZI

NOV 21

READ IN APP

After thirteen months of carnage, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has finally issued arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and former Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. This means that if they travel to any of the 124 countries that have signed up to the ICC — which do not include Israel or the United States —they theoretically would have to be immediately arrested. It will be interesting to see how those signatory countries that have been politically and materially supporting Israel so far — especially the UK and most EU countries — will react to the ruling, and whether they will decide to accept and enforce it, especially since, by doing so, they would be indirectly incriminating themselves as parties to the crimes.

It is worth reading the text explaining the decision because it confirms what has been apparent to most people around the world since the very beginning: that Israel has been committing virtually every war crime and crime against humanity in the book in Gaza, including the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare, and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution and other inhumane acts, and that “the alleged crimes against humanity were part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza”.

Though the ICC doesn’t openly accuse Israel of genocide or extermination, it does say that it “created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population in Gaza” and that “the population was targeted based on political and/or national grounds” — which is, of course, the very definition of genocide.

The ruling is particularly relevant because the ICC certainly cannot be accused of having an anti-Israel bias. Indeed, the court, if anything, has attracted a lot of criticism over the years precisely for targeting exclusively non-Western leaders, mostly from Africa, while refusing to investigate war crimes committed by Western nations or their allies in countries like Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and elsewhere.

This is probably not surprising considering that law is toothless in the absence of an authority capable of enforcing it, which is why international law has ultimately always been subordinated to the geopolitical balance of power. Many of the ICC’s funding sources come from Western countries, further raising concerns about its impartiality. Moreover, Western nations are known to have used their influence to shape the court’s agenda. For example, the US has exerted pressure to protect its citizens and allies from ICC prosecution.

Indeed, just a few months ago, the ICC prosecutor expressed concern over pressure the court was facing from the US regarding its investigations into Israel’s attacks on Gaza. So this ruling is exceptional also because it has occurred despite the court’s clear pro-Western bias. It thus testifies to the fact that Israel’s war crimes were just too great for the court to ignore, lest it lose all credibility — and also, arguably, to the fact that the geopolitical balance of power of shifting, diminishing the West’s ability to control these institutions.

Here is the relevant part of the ruling:

The Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that during the relevant time, international humanitarian law related to international armed conflict between Israel and Palestine applied. This is because they are two High Contracting Parties to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and because Israel occupies at least parts of Palestine. The Chamber also found that the law related to non-international armed conflict applied to the fighting between Israel and Hamas. The Chamber found that the alleged conduct of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant concerned the activities of Israeli government bodies and the armed forces against the civilian population in Palestine, more specifically civilians in Gaza. It therefore concerned the relationship between two parties to an international armed conflict, as well as the relationship between an occupying power and the population in occupied territory. For these reasons, with regards to war crimes, the Chamber found it appropriate to issue the arrest warrants pursuant to the law of international armed conflict. The Chamber also found that the alleged crimes against humanity were part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza.
The Chamber considered that there are reasonable grounds to believe that both individuals intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity, from at least 8 October 2023 to 20 May 2024. This finding is based on the role of Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant in impeding humanitarian aid in violation of international humanitarian law and their failure to facilitate relief by all means at its disposal. The Chamber found that their conduct led to the disruption of the ability of humanitarian organisations to provide food and other essential goods to the population in need in Gaza. The aforementioned restrictions together with cutting off electricity and reducing fuel supply also had a severe impact on the availability of water in Gaza and the ability of hospitals to provide medical care.
The Chamber also noted that decisions allowing or increasing humanitarian assistance into Gaza were often conditional. They were not made to fulfil Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian law or to ensure that the civilian population in Gaza would be adequately supplied with goods in need. In fact, they were a response to the pressure of the international community or requests by the United States of America. In any event, the increases in humanitarian assistance were not sufficient to improve the population’s access to essential goods.
Furthermore, the Chamber found reasonable grounds to believe that no clear military need or other justification under international humanitarian law could be identified for the restrictions placed on access for humanitarian relief operations. Despite warnings and appeals made by, inter alia, the UN Security Council, UN Secretary General, States, and governmental and civil society organisations about the humanitarian situation in Gaza, only minimal humanitarian assistance was authorised. In this regard, the Chamber considered the prolonged period of deprivation and Mr Netanyahu’s statement connecting the halt in the essential goods and humanitarian aid with the goals of war.
The Chamber therefore found reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant bear criminal responsibility for the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare.
The Chamber found that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the lack of food, water, electricity and fuel, and specific medical supplies, created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population in Gaza, which resulted in the death of civilians, including children due to malnutrition and dehydration. On the basis of material presented by the Prosecution covering the period until 20 May 2024, the Chamber could not determine that all elements of the crime against humanity of extermination were met. However, the Chamber did find that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the crime against humanity of murder was committed in relation to these victims.
In addition, by intentionally limiting or preventing medical supplies and medicine from getting into Gaza, in particular anaesthetics and anaesthesia machines, the two individuals are also responsible for inflicting great suffering by means of inhumane acts on persons in need of treatment. Doctors were forced to operate on wounded persons and carry out amputations, including on children, without anaesthetics, and/or were forced to use inadequate and unsafe means to sedate patients, causing these persons extreme pain and suffering. This amounts to the crime against humanity of other inhumane acts.
The Chamber also found reasonable grounds to believe that the abovementioned conduct deprived a significant portion of the civilian population in Gaza of their fundamental rights, including the rights to life and health, and that the population was targeted based on political and/or national grounds. It therefore found that the crime against humanity of persecution was committed.
Finally, the Chamber assessed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population of Gaza. In this regard, the Chamber found that the material provided by the Prosecution only allowed it to make findings on two incidents that qualified as attacks that were intentionally directed against civilians. Reasonable grounds to believe exist that Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant, despite having measures available to them to prevent or repress the commission of crimes or ensure the submittal of the matter to the competent authorities, failed to do so.

Thanks for reading. Putting out high-quality journalism requires constant research, most of which goes unpaid, so if you appreciate my writing please consider upgrading to a paid subscription if you haven’t already. Aside from a fuzzy feeling inside of you, you’ll get access to exclusive articles and commentary.

Subscribed