The body's public request for warrants for 2 Israeli and 3 Hamas leaders is a rare expression of moral clarity that raises hackles -- and some very basic questions.
I really appreciate your clarity in explaining the pros and cons of the ICC warrants, Ethan. I haven’t read an analysis as helpful as this, and that goes for your previous pieces on the subject as well. It would be great to believe your final wish might be in the realm of possibility: “Overall, one is left longing for a benevolent global hegemon with the power and will to solve complex problems.”
Thank you for this analysis and for laying out the actual substance of the ICC warrant for both sides.
Could you explain what you mean by being haunted by Obama’s single-minded focus on the Iran nuclear deal? Are you saying that it was a good or a bad thing?
thanks Sara! and for pointing that out. I intend to write a piece on the path to a nuclear Iran, and how inconsistencies in US policies basically encouraged this... starting with the JCPOA (Iran Deal) which had its smart elements. But by not being paired with a willingness to push back on Iran's support for violent proxies, and not anticipating any possibility that a future president (i.e., Trump) might withdraw from it, effectively guaranteed Iran would go nuclear. The Biden admin is pretty much taking this for granted now, in offering to help other Gulf countries set up their own nuclear programs.
the two issues overlap -- if the US had realized Iran needed the deal as much as it (the Obama administation) wanted it... it (OA) (might) have been more willing to push back against Hezbollah in Lebanon, pursue a more aggressive policy in Syria (we also invited the Russians in to blur the chemical weapons 'Red Line' , rather than intervene against an Iranian client), contain the Houthis when they first evidenced Iranian support, etc. But there were other parties to the deal, who also should have been in a position to continue it (and push back), but were left without a plan when Trump unilaterally withdrew.
If, ICC are serious about human rights & war crimes & go after Assad of Syria, Putin, N Korea, Iran, Taliban, Burma’s military junta, Omar AL Bashir, Brunei, etc.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has jurisdiction over the territories and nationals of states parties to the Rome Statute (as well as to cases referred by the UN Security Council). If the potential war crimes happened in the territory of a state party, the ICC has jurisdiction, whether or not the potential criminal is a national of a state party to the Rome Statute. But Israel is not a state party to the Rome Statute. The ICC considered the arguments for and against jurisdiction, concluding that yes, they have jurisdiction, on February 5, 2021.
Also, it would be interesting to know if, Karim Khan’s religious affiliation (Muslim) has to do with his decision (if any) to bring war crimes charges against various Israeli leaders! So far as we know the ICC hasn’t even opened a formal investigation into possible war crimes committed by BOTH the IDF and Hamas and without an investigation and the approval of a pre-trial Chamber Of Judges there can be NO war crimes indictment!
It is really an insane decision and action, what a poor world we are leaving in!!!!
Well reasoned and objective writing, with something increasingly rare: moral clarity.
I really appreciate your clarity in explaining the pros and cons of the ICC warrants, Ethan. I haven’t read an analysis as helpful as this, and that goes for your previous pieces on the subject as well. It would be great to believe your final wish might be in the realm of possibility: “Overall, one is left longing for a benevolent global hegemon with the power and will to solve complex problems.”
Thanks Ruth, the feedback is much appreciated! non-sequitur: I'd still rather be in Sicily... :)
Don’t blame you! Me too, now that I’m back! :)
Was going to ask :) hoped you were still ‘dans la nature’ …
Thank you for this analysis and for laying out the actual substance of the ICC warrant for both sides.
Could you explain what you mean by being haunted by Obama’s single-minded focus on the Iran nuclear deal? Are you saying that it was a good or a bad thing?
thanks Sara! and for pointing that out. I intend to write a piece on the path to a nuclear Iran, and how inconsistencies in US policies basically encouraged this... starting with the JCPOA (Iran Deal) which had its smart elements. But by not being paired with a willingness to push back on Iran's support for violent proxies, and not anticipating any possibility that a future president (i.e., Trump) might withdraw from it, effectively guaranteed Iran would go nuclear. The Biden admin is pretty much taking this for granted now, in offering to help other Gulf countries set up their own nuclear programs.
I see, thanks. How might the Obama Administration have taken into account the possiblity that a future administration would withdraw?
the two issues overlap -- if the US had realized Iran needed the deal as much as it (the Obama administation) wanted it... it (OA) (might) have been more willing to push back against Hezbollah in Lebanon, pursue a more aggressive policy in Syria (we also invited the Russians in to blur the chemical weapons 'Red Line' , rather than intervene against an Iranian client), contain the Houthis when they first evidenced Iranian support, etc. But there were other parties to the deal, who also should have been in a position to continue it (and push back), but were left without a plan when Trump unilaterally withdrew.
Hi Ethan, your position is clear.
If, ICC are serious about human rights & war crimes & go after Assad of Syria, Putin, N Korea, Iran, Taliban, Burma’s military junta, Omar AL Bashir, Brunei, etc.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has jurisdiction over the territories and nationals of states parties to the Rome Statute (as well as to cases referred by the UN Security Council). If the potential war crimes happened in the territory of a state party, the ICC has jurisdiction, whether or not the potential criminal is a national of a state party to the Rome Statute. But Israel is not a state party to the Rome Statute. The ICC considered the arguments for and against jurisdiction, concluding that yes, they have jurisdiction, on February 5, 2021.
Also, it would be interesting to know if, Karim Khan’s religious affiliation (Muslim) has to do with his decision (if any) to bring war crimes charges against various Israeli leaders! So far as we know the ICC hasn’t even opened a formal investigation into possible war crimes committed by BOTH the IDF and Hamas and without an investigation and the approval of a pre-trial Chamber Of Judges there can be NO war crimes indictment!
It is really an insane decision and action, what a poor world we are leaving in!!!!