The International Criminal Court Is Allowing Itself to Be Hijacked by the Palestinian Authority

By opening preliminary proceedings against Israel in response to petitions brought by the Palestinian Authority (PA), the International Criminal Court (ICC) is undermining its own authority and legitimacy, argues David Daoud. Not only are the accusations against Israel unconvincing, but the PA’s membership in the court rests on highly dubious grounds:

In effect, the PA seeks to use international law improperly as a tool to bring about the establishment of a Palestinian state with or without Israel’s consent.

The Palestinian Authority has revealed its true intentions behind joining the ICC. Top PA official Nabil Sha’ath, for example, has said that ICC accession was intended to be part of a “continuous battle” against Israel, a comment which the PLO seconded, saying that its ICC accession was “a first step toward waging a total and continuous political and judicial battle” against Israel. Hamas, a member of the PA’s unity government, also welcomed Palestinian membership in the ICC, calling it the “first step by the international community to isolate” Israel, and called on all Palestinians to unite behind a clear strategy to “expose” and “isolate” the Jewish state, confronting it through “all forms of resistance,” of which the judicial process was just one. . . .

The Palestinians’ threats to prosecute Israelis in the ICC over these incidents are only a taste of things to come. Whether the ICC will play along with the Palestinians’ political game remains to be seen, but the record of similar international institutions does not provide much comfort.

Read more at Tower

More about: ICC, International Law, Israel & Zionism, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian statehood

What a Strategic Victory in Gaza Can and Can’t Achieve

On Tuesday, the Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant met in Washington with Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. Gallant says that he told the former that only “a decisive victory will bring this war to an end.” Shay Shabtai tries to outline what exactly this would entail, arguing that the IDF can and must attain a “strategic” victory, as opposed to merely a tactical or operational one. Yet even after a such a victory Israelis can’t expect to start beating their rifles into plowshares:

Strategic victory is the removal of the enemy’s ability to pose a military threat in the operational arena for many years to come. . . . This means the Israeli military will continue to fight guerrilla and terrorist operatives in the Strip alongside extensive activity by a local civilian government with an effective police force and international and regional economic and civil backing. This should lead in the coming years to the stabilization of the Gaza Strip without Hamas control over it.

In such a scenario, it will be possible to ensure relative quiet for a decade or more. However, it will not be possible to ensure quiet beyond that, since the absence of a fundamental change in the situation on the ground is likely to lead to a long-term erosion of security quiet and the re-creation of challenges to Israel. This is what happened in the West Bank after a decade of relative quiet, and in relatively stable Iraq after the withdrawal of the United States at the end of 2011.

Read more at BESA Center

More about: Gaza War 2023, Hamas, IDF