US and Israel Undermine International Law, Echoing Past Hypocrisy
The article argues that both the United States and Israel are actively undermining international law by attacking institutions that attempt to hold them accountable, a stark contrast to the principles established after World War II. It begins by referencing a 2015 incident where an Israeli lawmaker suggested using a D9 bulldozer against the Supreme Court, symbolizing a disregard for legal obstacles. This "bulldozer instinct" is now, according to the author, directed at international law.
The immediate flashpoint is the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, which issued arrest warrants for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant in November 2024. Instead of merely defending Israel legally or politically, the U.S. launched a direct attack on the ICC itself. While neither the U.S. nor Israel are signatories to the Rome Statute, the ICC asserts territorial jurisdiction over crimes in the Palestinian territories. The U.S., which has long feared its own personnel being tried for war crimes, has now imposed sanctions on ICC officials, including its president, in response to the warrants.
The author highlights the irony of the U.S. dismantling institutions whose conceptual framework it helped create at the Nuremberg trials. Then, U.S. chief prosecutor Robert Jackson championed individual accountability for war crimes, asserting that official status would not exempt leaders. Today, the U.S. penalizes these same principles when applied to its allies, while seemingly endorsing them when directed at adversaries like Iran.
The article further details alleged covert actions by Israel's Mossad over nearly a decade to thwart the ICC's investigation into war crimes in the territories, including personal pressure and threats against former chief prosecutor Fatou Bensouda. This is contrasted with the U.S.'s overt pressure, including economic sanctions against ICC officials.
Finally, the piece contends that weakening international legal institutions is not just about evading inconvenient rulings but about eroding the framework that allows the international system to function. Israel, despite its regional power, relies on a stable international system and legitimacy. While undermining international law might offer short-term tactical advantages, it poses a long-term strategic risk, particularly as its alliance with the U.S. is not guaranteed. The author concludes that the danger lies not in destroying these institutions, but in rendering them ineffective, turning international law into "faded ink on paper."
