What to make of the arrest warrant against Netanyahu?
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his former defence minister Yoav Gallant and Hamas leader Mohammed Deif for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. Israel and the United States, which do not officially recognise the ICC, have harshly criticised the move. Europe's press is divided.
An important debut
Le Soir sees a step in the right direction:
“One can assume that the Palestinian victims of Israel's terrifying methods in the Gaza Strip will greet the announcement of the arrest warrants with satisfaction tinged with disbelief. ... The victims suspect that there is a long way to go yet and that the spectacle of an Israeli prime minister appearing before his judges in The Hague will probably never happen. ... Nonetheless, these arrest warrants, which have been a long time coming due to heavy pressure on the ICC, represent a very welcome debut in international justice. Something that goes (slightly) beyond symbolism. Moreover, this is a first, given that never before have the leaders of a state considered to be part of the 'West' been subjected to such humiliation.”
Hamas is delighted
De Telegraaf is outraged:
“The court seems to ignore the fact that Israel is fighting a barbaric terrorist group that has vowed to murder, rape and take hostages until Israel is wiped off the map. ... In the legitimate exercise of its right to self-defence, Israel is confronted with an enemy that is blatantly using citizens as human shields. ... Clearly, none of this interests the ICC. The fact that the Hamas gang of murderers reacted jubilantly to the issuing of the arrest warrants speaks volumes.”
A dangerous course
By equating Israel with Hamas the ICC is putting its authority at risk, criticises the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung:
“No public mention of the genocidal terrorist attack that Israel is defending itself against. Arrest warrants against mass murderers and members of the government of a democratic constitutional state announced in the same breath. The Criminal Court should not be surprised if previously loyal Western states refuse to follow it - and the enemies of law and freedom cheer it on. A further rift is looming - and this from a court whose statute invokes the common bonds of all peoples and expresses concern 'that this fragile mosaic could be destroyed at any time'. And so it is.”
Put support for Israel on ice
Politiken explains how the decision should be handled in Copenhagen:
“It goes without saying that Denmark must obey the order and arrest Netanyahu if he enters the country. ... Denmark gave Israel massive support after the Hamas terrorist attack on 7 October and stood up for the country's right to self-defence. What do we think should happen now that the highest legal authority in international humanitarian law has accused Israel's leaders of the most serious crimes of all? Should it have consequences for our policy? The answer is yes. Until Benjamin Netanyahu capitulates or the case is closed in some other way, we should put Israel on ice. Both economically and diplomatically.”
Threat of a divided West
Europe won't go against the United States on this issue, Libération's chief editor Dov Alfon predicts:
“Never short of enigmatic ways of expressing himself, the French Foreign Ministry explained that France has 'always supported' the Court's actions, but that the arrest warrants represent 'a complex legal issue' and therefore the situation requires 'many legal precautions'. Of course, the exact opposite is meant: the legal question is simple but requires complex political precautions. Since the United States has rejected the legitimacy of the warrants in the strongest terms, even before the future US president Donald Trump takes office, it is hard to imagine that Britain - or even France - would arrest Netanyahu at the risk of sacrificing the military support for Ukraine or Nato.”
A grandstanding exercise by the ICC
The Times says the arrest warrants are counterproductive:
“Israelis are still traumatised by October 7 and the instinct of many will be to circle the wagons and defend their prime minister against what they regard as a remote and hostile institution bent on smearing their embattled nation. That innocent inhabitants of Gaza, thousands of children among them, have suffered grievously in the last year is beyond doubt. But the forum for examining Israeli policy and those directing it is the province of the Israeli legal system. The ICC's grandstanding exercise in lawfare will simply create more heat, not light.”