Yuram Weiler: U.S. and Israel are subject to ICJ’s jurisdiction

Yuram Abdullah Weiler, journalist and political commentator in Denver, says all U.N. members, including the U.S. and Israel, in principle are subject to the ICJ’s jurisdiction, but enforcement is subject to authorization by the U.N. Security Council.

کد خبر: ۱۲۴۰۴۴۴

تاریخ: ۱۲ خرداد ۱۴۰۳ - ۱۴:۲۴

Following is the text of the TABNAK interview with Yuram Abdullah Weiler.

Q: Despite widespread opposition, Israel attacked Rafah. Why did Netanyahu insist on this operation?

A: In order to remain in power, and therefore avoid prosecution on corruption charges, Netanyahu has no alternative but to continue his genocidal war. Former military commander and ex-defense minister Benny Gantz, and current Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant, both oppose any long-term Israeli military occupation or governance of Gaza. Both are demanding that Netanyahu present a viable exit strategy for his war, and have threatened to resign from his “war cabinet.” However, if Netanyahu were to cave in to their demands, he would trigger the collapse of his government due to the inevitable loss of support from the extremist Zionist parties in his coalition, represented by the likes of national security minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and finance minister Bezalel Smotrich.

Netanyahu has been indicted on three separate charges of corruption involving fraud, bribery and breach of trust. His trial began in May of 2020 and has been delayed twice; once due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and the second time due to the war that he launched after the daring 7 October 2023 Hamas resistance operation. In one case, Arnon Milchan, a prominent Israeli Hollywood producer, has already admitted to giving Netanyahu gifts in return for political favors. In another case, Netanyahu is accused of negotiating with the Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth for favorable press in return for legislation that would hamper a competitor.  In the third case, he is accused of granting political favors to the Israeli firm Bezeq Telecom, also in return for favorable news coverage.  While the trial is ongoing, Netanyahu, at least as long as he is prime minister, is exempted from having to appear in court.

The number one failure in Netanyahu’s war has been the inability by Israeli occupation forces to eradicate Hamas resistance fighters from Gaza.  Due to the extensive tunnel network, Hamas fighters have been able to move about relatively unimpeded and undetected, emerge and strike Israeli occupation forces with surprising lethal efficacy, and then quickly withdraw, as we have witnessed recently in Jabalia and Gaza City.  While many Israelis would like to see Netanyahu removed from office and even blame him for alleged security lapses that allowed the successful penetration of the Zionist state by Hamas, the majority still supports continuing his genocidal war in Gaza.

Before invading Rafah, Netanyahu tried to widen the Gaza war into a regional conflict by his ill-conceived attack on Iran’s consulate building in Damascus, which was a blatant act of war on his part.  When the Islamic Republic responded rightfully and legally to this provocative act by the Zionist regime with a finely-tuned and carefully calibrated retaliatory missile and drone attack, Netanyahu was confronted with the glaring inadequacy of Israel’s air defenses and his need of U.S. military support if he hoped to further expand the conflict. Hence, failing in this endeavor, Netanyahu had no alternative to remain in power and avoid prosecution but to invade Rafah.

Q: Biden's extensive support for Israel seems to have negative results on his voting base. Protests continue in American universities and among minorities who are Biden's vote base. Is it possible for the United States to put pressure on Netanyahu's government to stop the war?

A: There are two broad portions of the voting base that have distanced themselves from Biden: young people, and minorities, including Muslims.  These groups of voters were crucial for Biden’s 2020 victory in such states as Pennsylvania and Michigan, where the “uncommitted” movement among Muslim voters during recent primary elections has raised concern among Democratic leaders as to Biden’s electability. Adding to voter discontent over Biden’s unabashed support of Netanyahu’s Gaza war is the U.S. president’s approval of the harsh police crackdowns on students involved in campus protests in support of Palestinians.  For his part, Biden does not seem to believe that student protests against the Gaza war constitute a legitimate form of dissent, nor does the self-proclaimed Zionist president seem to be able to muster an ounce of moral concern over the plight of the Palestinians.

As far as the question of U.S. ability to pressure Israel, it certainly seems that it should be possible given the massive military assistance granted to the Tel Aviv regime year after year, totaling nearly $300 billion since 1948, but the tenacious grip of the Israel lobby on U.S. politics prevents that pressure from being applied decisively. Mearsheimer and Walt in their 2007 book, The Israel Lobby, document in detail how deeply embedded and influential the Zionists are within the circles of power in the U.S. government.  The passage of such measures as U.S. House Resolution 883, which brands the slogan “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” as antisemitic, or H.R.6090, which adopts the very broad definition of antisemitism put forth by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, demonstrates the choke hold the Zionist lobby has on U.S. politics. The Spanish newspaper, El Pais, was right on target by suggesting that Israel is the true influential superpower, and not the United States.

Q: The International Criminal Court (ICC) has applied for the arrest and detention of Netanyahu. Will this request become a final ruling? What effect will this request have on Netanyahu's political future?

A: First, it must be pointed out that the ICC, while endorsed by the U.N. General Assembly, was created by the Rome Statute in 2002, but has no power in itself to enforce its rulings, and must therefore rely on individual countries to arrest and detain those individuals who are charged with crimes or are subpoenaed to appear before the court.  Adding to its ineffectiveness is the fact that the United States, along with China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Qatar and Yemen, are not signatories to the Rome Statute and do not accept the court’s jurisdiction.  Nevertheless, citizens of non-party states can be subject to ICC jurisdiction if the court investigates war crimes, crimes against humanity, or genocide in territories of member states.

In 2020, when the ICC began to investigate the possibility of charging U.S. officials with war crimes for acts committed in Afghanistan, former U.S. president Trump sanctioned by Executive Order 13928 the court’s prosecutor and a senior staff member.  Trump’s hyper-hawk national security adviser John Bolton in a speech before the U.N. General Assembly in September 2018 denied that the ICC had any jurisdiction, legitimacy or authority whatsoever. Although Biden removed these sanctions in 2021, and has reversed Trump’s legal and financial assault on the judicial body, he still does not want U.S. officials and personnel to be subject to ICC jurisdiction.  Consequently, it would be extremely doubtful that he would support prosecution of Netanyahu given the U.S. president’s total support of, and hence culpability in, the Palestinian genocide.

As far as any effect on Netanyahu’s political future, most likely the court’s actions will have little or none.  As previously mentioned, he is facing fraud, bribery and corruption charges within Israel, and is much more likely to forfeit his political future as a result of a ruling by an Israeli court than one by the ICC.  Moreover, Netanyahu has declared his irrational intention to hold the Palestinian Authority responsible for the ICC arrest warrants and take out his vengeance upon Palestinians in the West Bank by freezing transfer of tax revenues, thus bankrupting the PA.

Q: The United States has rejected the jurisdiction of the ICC for such a request. What is your assessment? Meanwhile, a similar sentence was proposed for Putin by this court and it was welcomed by the United States.

A: As noted above, the U.S. does not recognize the jurisdiction of the ICC.  Putin’s reaction to the ICC warrant for his arrest was basically the same as Trump’s.  In the past, the U.S. has supported the ICC’s rulings against late Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi and ousted Sudanese leader Omar al-Bashir, while U.S. president George W. Bush led an international campaign against the ICC by pressuring countries to enter into bilateral agreements with the U.S. to ignore extradition requests by the court for U.S. citizens.  Biden’s position is to support ICC investigations on a case-by-case basis, and even offers rewards up to $5 million for information on fugitives through the U.S. state department’s “Global Criminal Justice Rewards Program.”  There is no need to point out that the U.S. supports the ICC only when the court acts in accord with Washington’s desires, and even this lukewarm support could vanish after the next presidential election.

Q: At the same time as the Criminal Court, the International Court of Justice also ruled to stop the war in Rafah. Can these decrees pressure Israel to stop the war?

A: Just to clarify, the ICC can prosecute individuals, while the ICJ deals with legal disputes between states that are U.N. members. Therefore, all U.N. members, including the U.S. and Israel, in principle are subject to the ICJ’s jurisdiction, but enforcement is subject to authorization by the U.N. Security Council.  With veto power on the UNSC, the U.S. will most likely veto any measure directed at enforcing the ICJ ruling against its Israeli ally ordering the latter to immediately halt its genocidal military offensive against Palestinians.