SPECIAL REPORTS

Nov wk5 P3 -- -- Nov wk5 P2 -- Nov wk5 -- Nov wk4 P3 -- Nov wk4 P2 -- Nov wk4 -- Nov wk3 P2 -- Nov wk3 -- Nov wk2 P2 -- Nov. wk2 -- Nov. wk1
 Click here for an overview by week in 2024
 

November '24 Special reports: For actual updates Nov. 2024 Added: Muslim charities face discrimination as Palestinians are desperate for aid  &  Cola Gaza Free & The Lebanon ceasefire is a respite, not a solution for the Middle East & "The Middle East Needs 'Women, Life, Freedom'" & Gangsters block aid distribution in south Gaza   Previous report: In Gaza dreams die, but hope remains and & "ICC arrest warrants: 'Binyamin Netanyahu's world has shrunk considerably'" & Facing genocide while disabled & Stripped of our human dignity  & Woman Palestinian journalist speaks out about reporting Israel’s attacks     Overview special reports

November 28 - 24 and earler stories, 2024 Is Netanyahu immune from ICC arrest warrant-NO! TRIBUTES TO MOTHERS AND CHILDREN

Shireen Abu Akleh In commemoration of Shireen Abu Akleh, the 'voice of Al Jazeera' killed while revealing the true face of israel Updated: Nov. 2 - Oct. 24: Gazaian journalists under permanent siege by the idf October 23 - 16, 2024: "Attacks, arrests, threats, censorship: The high risks of reporting the Israel-Gaza war" All incl. Additional stories of utmost interest  Click here for earlier stories/news

December 1 - November 28, 2024 Food for thought: "US surgeon brakes down ..." and I (Palestine-free activist) can hardly eat knowing/seeing what really is happening and "Let's not pretend: Although the war corroded Iran's deterrence, the 60-day cease-fire in Lebanon is a temporary lull as far as both Israel and Hezbollah are concerned - and if it was done so Netanyahu can prolong a futile war in Gaza, there is little to rejoice about" Haaretz outlet editor-in-chief. Read more and decide for yourself

November 28- 26, 2024 Food for thought: "Let's not pretend: Although the war corroded Iran's deterrence, the 60-day cease-fire in Lebanon is a temporary lull as far as both Israel and Hezbollah are concerned - and if it was done so Netanyahu can prolong a futile war in Gaza, there is little to rejoice about" Haaretz outlet editor-in-chief. Read more and decide for yourself

November 24 - 21, 2024 Food for thought: Here's why the Gaza war is 'consistent with genocide', according to UN body Read more and decide for yourself

When one hurts or kills a women
one hurts or kills hummanity and is an antrocitie.
Gino d'Artali
and: My mother (1931-1997) always said to me <Mi figlio, non esistono notizie <vecchie> perche puoi imparare qualcosa da qualsiasi notizia.> Translated: <My son, there is no such thing as so called 'old' news because you can learn something from any news.>
Gianna d'Artali.


Le Monde - November 28, 2024 - By Stephanie Maupas (The Hague (Netherlands) correspondent) and Philippe Ricard
<<Why France offered Netanyahu guarantees over ICC arrest warrant
On Wednesday, Paris argued that 'immunities apply' to the Israeli prime minister. The French statement, which undermines the Court's authority, outraged human rights defenders.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has been dealt a harsh blow by one of its founding states, which also prides itself on being the "homeland of human rights." On Wednesday, November 27, France issued a cryptic statement undermining both the authority of this judicial body and the arrest warrant issued six days earlier by its judges against Benjamin Netanyahu for war crimes and crimes against humanity in the context of the war in Gaza. According to corroborating sources, this statement was meant to avoid severing ties with the Israeli prime minister, who contested the role of mediator claimed by Paris in the search for a hard-fought ceasefire in Lebanon, announced on Tuesday evening by Joe Biden and Emmanuel Macron.
After several confusing comments, France clarified its position on the arrest warrant issued for the head of the Israeli government by the ICC. While saying that it "will comply with its international obligations" and that the Rome Statute, the Court's founding text, "demands full cooperation with the International Criminal Court," the communique issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stressed that this text "also stipulates that a State cannot be required to act inconsistently with its obligations under international law with respect to the immunities of States not party to the ICC." This was a reference to article 98 of the Rome Statute. The Foreign Ministry continued: "Such immunities apply to Prime Minister Netanyahu and the other ministers concerned and will have to be taken into account should the ICC request of us their arrest and surrender." As Israel has not signed the Rome Statute, it has not waived the immunities of its current leaders, unlike the 124 ICC states parties, including France. This so-called clarification came as all the more of a thunderclap, as it was delivered against a backdrop of recurring tensions between the French and Israeli governments, following weeks of negotiations to secure a ceasefire in Lebanon. In the last stretch of these talks, the ICC's announcement of the arrest warrants on November 21 further strained the often acrimonious exchanges between Macron and Netanyahu. So much so that Netanyahu, according to a highly-placed source, asked the French president over the phone on Friday to speak out against the Court's decision. He was very insistent and reiterated a threat he had made in recent months: to challenge France's mediation efforts in Lebanon, and exclude it from the committee overseeing a potential ceasefire, against the advice of Beirut and Washington, which insisted instead on keeping Paris on board.>>
Source: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2024/11/28/why-france-offered-netanyahu-concessions-over-icc-arrest-warrant_6734435_4.html

Al Jazeera - Nov 28, 2024 - By Nils Adler
<<Is Netanyahu immune from ICC arrest warrant as France claims?
Paris has argued that the warrants issued against the Israeli PM for war crimes are not valid as Israel is not a member of the ICC.
On November 21, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defence minister Yoav Gallant over what it says may constitute their legal responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated during Israel's war on Gaza. A flurry of official announcements followed from European leaders stating they would uphold the decision and meet their obligations to arrest the Israeli leader should he step foot in their territories. One notable exception is Hungary, whose prime minister, Viktor Orban, has promised not to arrest Netanyahu and has instead extended a warm invitation to visit.
Now France has also bucked the general trend.
After initially stating that it would adhere to the ICC statutes, Paris has since suggested that Netanyahu enjoys immunity from the arrest warrants as Israel is <not a party to the ICC>. "Such immunities apply to Prime Minister Netanyahu and other ministers in question and must be taken into consideration should the ICC ask us to arrest them and hand them over," a statement by the French Ministry for Europe and Foreign Affairs read.
But does France's stance hold up legally? Here is what you need to know about the ICC arrest warrants:
Is Netanyahu immune from the ICC arrest warrants as France claims?
No.
Article 27 of the Rome Statute, which established the court, states its rulings "“apply equally to all persons without any distinction based on official capacity" and "in no case exempt a person from criminal responsibility". France has a duty to cooperate with the court under the Rome Statute of the ICC, and "that duty of cooperation extends to giving effect to arrest warrants," Yasmine Ahmed, the UK director of Human Rights Watch, told Al Jazeera.
So why is France arguing for Netanyahu's immunity?
The French argument appears to centre around Article 98 of the Rome Statute, which states that a country may not "act inconsistently with its obligations under international law with respect to the ... diplomatic immunity of a person ... of a third State".
Some 124 countries have ratified the Rome Statute, but Israel is not a signatory.
William Schabas, a professor of international law at Middlesex University, told Al Jazeera that France's stance could once have been a "plausible argument", but the court has already cleared up the ambiguity created by Article 98 regarding non-ICC members in a 2019 Appeals Chamber ruling.
That case concerned the outstanding arrest warrant for Sudan's former President Omar al-Bashir. Like Israel, Sudan is not a party to the Rome Statute. The court concluded, however, that there is no head of state immunity under customary international law - third party or not. That means France is under a legal obligation to follow what the ICC has decided regarding the Israeli prime minister "even if it does not agree with it", Schabas said. He warned that France, by suggesting it may not uphold the ICC ruling, is suggesting "that a state can defy the judgements of the court" and signals a "worrying" development for the members of the international criminal tribunal.
Countries that are party to the ICC
If France considers Netanyahu immune, what does it think about Putin?
In March 2023, the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin over alleged war crimes in Ukraine. The French government welcomed the move, with the Foreign Ministry issuing a statement saying, "No one ... regardless of their status, should escape justice." The ICC also ruled that Mongolia had violated its obligations as a member of the court for failing to arrest the Russian president during an official visit in August this year. After the ruling, the French ministry stated in a news briefing that "each State party to the Rome Statute has an obligation to cooperate with the ICC and execute the arrest warrants it issues, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Rome Statute". Schabas said the contrast in how France has responded to the arrest warrants for Putin and Netanyahu has revealed "double standards". He noted that it demonstrates that the French argument is not based on a "legal principle" but rather on who Paris considers a friend and who it regards as an enemy. France's "selective interpretation" of the Rome Statute sets a worrying precedent, Ahmed told Al Jazeera. "It undermines the very purpose of the ICC ... which was to ensure that there is no impunity, and there is accountability for the most serious crimes," she said.
So does this mean Netanyahu can travel to France?
It is unlikely that Netanyahu would visit the country because it remains unclear whether he would be arrested. Schabas said that despite the uncertainty the French government has created with its latest statement, the decision about whether to implement the arrest warrant ultimately resides with the French courts. He noted that as long as Netanyahu remains a head of state, any trip to France would be an official visit, and the government is very unlikely to invite him, given that the courts could still rule that his arrest warrant is valid.>>
SOURCE: AL JAZEERA:
ttps://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/28/is-netanyahu-immune-from-icc-arrest-warrant-as-france-claims

Haaretz- November 25, 2024 - by Amir Tibon
<<Analysis | Did the ICC Just Commit Suicide? The Answer Has as Much to Do With Putin as Netanyahu
Western allies' responses to the International Criminal Court's arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu is complicated by a similar move against Amir Did the International Criminal Court commit suicide last week by issuing arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant?>>
Source: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-11-25/ty-article/.premium/did-the-icc-just-commit-suicide-the-answer-has-as-much-to-do-with-putin-as-netanyahu/00000193-640c-dcb0-abfb-7c9f73450000

Al Jazeera - Nov 24, 2024 - By Patrick Gathara Senior Editor for Inclusive Storytelling at The New Humanitarian
<<The West, the ICC, and 'mtu wetu' in Israel
The mobilisation of an imagined identity is very effective in scaring off prosecutors and intimidating judges.
The arrest warrants for Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC), have brought back not-so-fond memories to many Kenyans. More than a decade ago, then Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta and his deputy - current President William Ruto - became the first incumbent heads of state or government to actually face an ICC trial, having been indicted before they got into office. However, while both Kenyatta and Ruto chose to cooperate with the court - at least on the face of it - and attended their trials, thus obviating the need for an arrest warrant, it is unlikely that Netanyahu and Gallant will be taking a trip to The Hague any time soon. Kenyatta and Ruto were accused of being responsible for the violence that followed the country's disputed 2007 election, in which more than 1,300 people lost their lives. The two had been on opposing sides of the conflict and were alleged to have organised and funded "tribal" militia to carry out killings. To date, only a handful of people have ever been prosecuted for the murders, rapes and mutilation that led to the forcible displacement of 660,000 people, and it was only after the Kenyan state proved unwilling to act that the ICC stepped in. Similarly, when he applied for warrants for the Israeli leaders in May, ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan - who coincidentally headed Ruto's defence team - also indicated he would be happy to defer prosecution if Israel's justice system shows any willingness to take action against Netanyahu and Gallant and "engage in independent and impartial judicial processes that do not shield suspects and are not a sham". The ICC judges have now agreed that there are reasonable grounds to believe the two bear criminal responsibility for the many crimes committed by Israel against the Palestinians during its ongoing genocidal assault on Gaza. With an official death toll of more than 44,000, Gaza has witnessed murders, rapes and displacement on a vast scale, as well as mass starvation, and the deliberate targeting of schools, hospitals and places of worship. Many have complained about the seven-month-long delay in the ICC judges issuing the arrest warrants, but Kenyans had to wait for two years to have the ICC prosecutor send a request for an investigation and then another five months for the court to approve it. It then took another 12 months for the actual indictment of specific individuals - six of them - to be handed down.
Thus, by comparison, the Palestine cases have moved much faster.
Among the reasons for the delay in the Palestine case were the numerous briefs challenging the court’s jurisdiction and the admissibility of the allegations. There was also a lot of pressure put on the ICC by Israel and its Western friends. There were Israeli attempts to intimidate the court even before the war started last year, with Khan's predecessor, Fatou Bensouda, facing threats by the Mossad not to launch an investigation into Israel's war crimes of 2021. Khan now himself faces accusations of sexual misconduct. It is notable that few Western nations came to Kenyatta’s and Ruto's aid. On the contrary, there was more than a subtle hint given to Kenyans that electing Kenyatta and Ruto would be a bad idea - that "choices have consequences". I am not saying they should have opposed the duo's arraignment, but there is more than a whiff of double standards here. It does seem that there is more of an interest in seeing justice done when those in the dock are Africans, and not just anti-Western. That point is driven home when one considers how the indictments of Israeli officials have been framed in the Western press. The Guardian, for example, described it as "the first time a western ally from a modern democracy has been charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity by a global judicial body". This account comes as a surprise to Kenya, which for well over six decades has considered itself a "Western ally" and which - having held regular elections throughout that time - can be described as something of a "modern democracy", whatever that means. Unless, of course, these are euphemistic descriptors of more problematic relationships. Kenyans have a name for this sort of thing: the "mtu wetu [our guy] syndrome". Whenever our politicians find themselves being investigated or - God forbid! - charged with crimes, they try to rally their ethnic kinsmen around the idea that it is the "tribe" being targeted. The mobilisation of an imagined identity is a political tactic that is very effective in scaring off prosecutors and intimidating judges both locally and internationally. "Mtu wetu" is how Kenyatta and Ruto were able to avoid prosecution at home and then instrumentalise their control of the Kenyan state to undermine their cases at the ICC. It is why the ICC found itself accused of "race hunting" - of focusing on prosecuting Black Africans, an allegation that conveniently ignored the fact that most of the situations the court was pursuing had been referred to it by African governments. "Mtu wetu" is why Netanyahu today accuses the court of anti-Semitism, suggesting his prosecution is an attack on all Jews. "Mtu wetu" is why suddenly Germany seems less keen on upholding its obligations under international law, and why US politicians are threatening all and sundry, even those in Canada and Europe who perhaps mistakenly thought they would be always part of the tribe. It is sadly ironic that on the 140th anniversary of the Berlin West Africa Conference - which set the stage for European colonisation of Africa and which subsequently introduced the scourge of tribalism to the continent - that the same irrational and totalising conception of identity is being weaponised in the West to defend people accused of some of the worst categories of crimes imaginable.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.>>
Source: https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/11/24/the-west-the-icc-and-mtu-wetu-in-israel
Earlier reports:
France 24 - November 23, 2024 - INTERVIEW by: Marc DAOU
<<ICC arrest warrants: 'Binyamin Netanyahu's world has shrunk considerably'
Arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court on Thursday for Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, former Israeli defence minister Yoav Gallant and Hamas military chief Mohammed Deif mark a "historic moment" in the history of the court, according to international law specialist Johann Soufi.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) earned Israel's ire with its controversial decision to issue arrest warrants for Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant for crimes allegedly committed in the Gaza Strip as part of the Israeli offensive in response to the deadly Hamas attacks of October 7, 2023. The ICC said in its statement there were "reasonable grounds to believe" that Netanyahu and Gallant had committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, notably by "using starvation as a method of warfare" and "intentionally" targeting civilians. Hamas military chief Mohammad Deif, for his part, was accused of committing crimes against humanity including murder, torture and rape.
Netanyahu immediately rejected the ICC decision against him and Gallant as <anti-Semitic>. Israel <rejects with disgust the absurd and false actions and accusations made against it>, Netanyahu said, accusing the ICC judges of being <driven by anti-Semitic hatred of Israel> and calling the decision a <modern-day Dreyfus trial> - a reference to the infamous 1894 trial of French Jewish army captain Alfred Dreyfus, who was wrongly convicted of treason and who has now become a symbol of anti-Semitic injustice. Israel and the United States are not signatories to the Rome Statute that established the ICC and do not recognise the court's jurisdiction. But the Israeli leader's movements and those of his former defence minister are now effectively restricted, with each of the court's 124 member states theoretically obliged to arrest the men if they arrive on member territory. While the ICC has no police force to enforce its warrants and instead relies on the goodwill of its member states to respect its decisions, EU top diplomat Josep Borrell quickly said the arrest warrants must be respected and implemented (all 27 EU states are ICC members). So far, France, Italy, Ireland, Belgium and the Netherlands have indicated they would respect the ICC ruling and move to arrest the men if they were to arrive on their soil. Italy's Defence Minister Guido Crosetto said that although he felt it was "wrong" to equate Netanyahu and Gallant with Hamas, "we would have to arrest them" if they were to enter Italy. According to some international law specialists, the ICC has made a landmark decision with these warrants. For international lawyer Johann Soufi, an ICC specialist and former head of the legal department of the UN Agency for Palestinian Refugees in Gaza (2020 and 2023), these decisions mark a "historic moment" for the court.
FRANCE 24: How important is this ICC move?>>
Read the interview here:
Source: https://www.france24.com/en/middle-east/20241122-icc-arrest-warrant-binyamin-netanyahu-world-has-shrunk-considerably-gallant-international-justice

Al Jazeera - Nov 22, 2024 - By Sarah Shamim
<<Arms to Israel: Will countries halt sales in wake of ICC arrest warrants?
The arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant could lead to countries rethinking selling arms to Israel, experts say.
Western nations which sell arms to Israel may be forced to re-evaluate their trade agreements after arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity" in Gaza, experts say. The warrants came amid Israel's continuing bombardment and military campaign on the Gaza Strip, where more than 44,000 Palestinians have been killed since October 7, 2023, according to health officials. All 124 countries which are signatories to the Rome Statute of the ICC are now legally obliged to arrest Netanyahu and Gallant if they set foot on their territory. The question of whether countries supplying arms to a country whose leaders are accused of crimes against humanity could be considered complicit is unclear, but experts say some suppliers will have to consider carefully if they wish to continue to support Israel in its war on Gaza.
Countries that are party to the ICC
Which countries provide arms to Israel?>>
Read it here: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/22/arms-to-israel-will-countries-halt-sales-in-wake-of-icc-arrest-warrants

Al Jazeera - Nov 21, 2024 - By Shola Lawal
<<Israel's Netanyahu, Gallant issued ICC arrest warrants: What's next?
This is the first time there has been an indictment for Netanyahu since Israel's war on Gaza began in October 2023. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant and a top Hamas leader on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity. This is the first time that Netanyahu or any Israeli official has been indicted by an international court for the ongoing war on Gaza. In a decision posted online on Thursday, the ICC charged Netanyahu, Gallant and Hamas leader Mohammed Deif over Hamas’s October 7, 2023 attacks on Israel and Israel's subsequent genocidal war in Gaza. Israel claimed to have killed Deif in July, however. It is unclear whether he is still alive. Effectively, the defendants are now internationally wanted suspects and ICC member states are under legal obligation to arrest them. Israeli officials slammed the move, calling it <anti-Semitic>. Here's what this all means:
What is the ICC accusing Netanyahu and Gallant of?
In a decision posted online, the court said it had issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant for "crimes against humanity and war crimes committed from at least 8 October until at least 20 May, 2024" and which related to the use of starvation and the deliberate targeting of medical facilities. The court's Prosecutor Karim Khan first requested the arrest warrants in May. The court says there are reasonable grounds to believe Netanyahu and Gallant bear "criminal responsibility" for causing mass starvation in Gaza. The court has accused both Netanyahu and Gallant of jointly using "starvation as a method of warfare", referring to Israel's systemic restriction of food and humanitarian aid supplies into the Gaza Strip throughout the war. The ICC further accused the two leaders of the "crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts" and referenced Israel's deliberate targeting of Gaza's hospitals and its refusal to allow humanitarian and medical supplies into the Strip.
What happens next? Does the ICC have a case?
The indictment means there will be a trial if the arrests are made. There will not be a trial until that happens, however, as the court does not have the power to hold a trial "in absentia". Speaking to Al Jazeera after the news of the arrest warrants broke, political analyst Neve Gordon, professor of human rights law at Queen Mary University of London and vice president of the British Society for Middle East Studies, said the ICC had a strong case, and that proving the Israeli leaders' intention to weaponise food will be fairly straightforward.
"Israel has been using starvation as a weapon in the Gaza Strip for close to 20 years," Gordon said. "I think the intention of using food as a weapon is clear by the statements of Israeli leaders and the practices of the Israeli military, and I think this will be easy to prove." All 36 hospitals in the Gaza Strip have been targeted, he added, and ambulances and healthcare workers hit in the near-incessant bombing campaigns on the Strip, as Al Jazeera has reported. Gordon said this evidence would help build the ICC prosecutor's cases.
Practically speaking, will this change anything?
It may. Netanyahu and Gallant will find it difficult to travel internationally the same way they did before Thursday, as they could be arrested. That is because all 124 countries that are signatories to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court are legally obliged to arrest them if they travel to those countries. However, this would not apply in the United States. Washington and Israel are not subject to ICC obligations as they are not members of the court. In practice, it is not likely that Netanyahu or Gallant will be handed over to the ICC if they travel to the US. Besides this, the ICC has no powers of enforcement and lacks its own police force. The court also issued an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin in March 2023 for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but Putin has not been arrested. Despite this, human rights organisations welcomed the decision to issue the warrants. Balkees Jarrah, senior counsel at Human Rights Watch, said: "The ICC arrest warrants against senior Israeli leaders and a Hamas official break through the perception that certain individuals are beyond the reach of the law. Whether the ICC can effectively deliver on its mandate will depend on governments' willingness to support justice no matter where abuses are committed and by whom. These warrants should finally push the international community to address atrocities and secure justice for all victims in Palestine and Israel." Analysts also said the ICC's decision has far-reaching implications for Western nations - particularly the US and European countries like Germany and the United Kingdom, which supply arms to Israel. "By issuing the arrest warrant, the ICC has also made a certain demand on Western countries," Gordon, the political analyst, told Al Jazeera. "If the leaders of Israel are charged with crimes against humanity, it means the weapons European countries are sending are used to carry out crimes. Western countries must now reassess their trade agreements."
Which Hamas leader has an arrest warrant been issued for?
The ICC also issued an arrest warrant for Hamas leader Mohammed Deif, also known as Mohammed Diab Ibrahim al-Masri, relating to his role in the October 7 Hamas-led attack on army outposts and villages in southern Israel, which resulted in the deaths of 1,139 people and the capture of more than 250. However, the Israeli military claimed to have killed Deif in July this year. Deif was the leader of Hamas's military wing, the Qassam Brigades. Hamas has not confirmed the commander's killing.
What reactions have there been to the arrest warrants?
Israeli officials immediately slammed the decision to issue the warrants, saying Israel has a right to defend itself and calling the move <anti-Semitic.> In a post on X, opposition leader Yair Lapid condemned the court's decision, characterising Israel's war on Gaza as a fight for its life <against terrorist organisations>. Former Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman also spoke out against the ruling, writing on X that it shows the international community's <double standards and hypocrisy>. <The state of Israel will not apologise for protecting its citizens and is committed to continuing to fight terrorism without compromise,> Lieberman said. US President Joe Biden in May criticised the decision of the court's prosecutors to apply for warrants, and said the US would stand by Israel. The US has not commented on Thursday's development.>>
SOURCE: AL JAZEERA: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/21/netanyahu-gallant-issued-icc-arrest-warrants-for-war-crimes-whats-next

Al Jazeera - November 21, 2024
<<World reacts to ICC arrest warrants for Israel's Netanyahu, Gallant
The ICC said it had found ‘reasonable grounds' to believe that the Israeli officials were responsible for starvation in Gaza.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged "war crimes". The court said on Thursday that there were "reasonable grounds" to believe Netanyahu and Gallant "intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival". The ICC also issued an arrest warrant for Hamas military chief Mohammed Deif for alleged "crimes against humanity and war crimes". Israel said in August that Deif was killed in an air strike in southern Gaza the previous month. ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan first applied for the warrants six months ago. In August, Khan called on the court to make a decision, saying, "Any unjustified delay in these proceedings detrimentally affects the rights of victims." Since the decision was announced, Israeli officials have slammed the warrants, with Israeli Transportation Minister Miri Regev referring to them as <modern anti-Semitism in the guise of justice>. Here are some of the key reactions to the ICC decision incl. video:>>
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/21/world-reacts-to-icc-arrest-warrants-for-israels-netanyahu-gallant

Al Jazeera - November 22, 2024 - Belen Fernández - Al Jazeera columnist
<<ICC arrest warrants: Netanyahu is certainly a criminal, but …
There's a reasonable basis to believe, when it comes to Israel-Palestine, that justice is not ultimately an option.
Yesterday, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defence minister, Yoav Gallant, "for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed from at least 8 October 2023 until at least 20 May 2024", as per the ICC press release. An arrest warrant was also issued for Hamas military commander Mohammed Deif, although this particular detail will continue to be entirely ignored by the Israeli establishment, which prefers to remain up in arms over its allegedly singular victimisation. In the eyes of Israel, the ICC decision constitutes a horrifying display of anti-Semitism and even support for <terror>. Among the war crimes charges against Netanyahu and Gallant are that "both individuals intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity, from at least 8 October 2023 to 20 May 2024". The latter date refers to the day that the ICC prosecutor filed the applications for the arrest warrants and is not, obviously, an indication that Israeli war crimes in the Gaza Strip have abated over the past six months.
Officially, the Israeli military has killed nearly 45,000 Palestinians in Gaza since October 2023, although the true death toll is undoubtedly many times higher. And while a United Nations committee recently found Israel's methods of warfare in the Gaza Strip to be "consistent with genocide", the ICC has stopped short of calling Israel out on this front, instead specifying that the court "could not determine that all elements of the crime against humanity of extermination were met". Of course, any and all international recognition of Israel's criminal behaviour is morally significant given the country's modus operandi, according to which international law is made to be broken - but only by Israel itself. It's no accident that neither Israel nor the United States, Israel's primary backer and current accomplice to genocide, are not parties to the ICC. Were international "justice" not completely selective and governed by an egregious double standard, the US would have its own plethora of war crimes to answer for - like the wanton slaughter of civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq under the guise of the so-called "war on terror". Meanwhile, it's not quite clear why the ICC has stopped short of detecting "all elements of the crime of against humanity of extermination" on the part of Netanyahu and Gallant. After all, knowingly depriving a civilian population of everything "indispensable to their survival" would seem to be a pretty surefire way of ensuring, well, extermination. It's also kind of "indispensable to survival" to not be bombed to death while having your entire territory pulverised. And to that end, perhaps, the ICC has "found reasonable grounds to believe" that both Netanyahu and Gallant "each bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing an attack against the civilian population". But assigning such individual guilt is a mere drop in the bucket of "justice". At the end of the day, the state of Israel as a whole bears "criminal responsibility" for usurping Palestinian land and engaging in 76.5 years (and counting) of ethnic cleansing, displacement and massacres. All of this while driving a sector of the Palestinian population to armed resistance and thereby converting them into targets for continued Israeli criminality. Given Israel's lengthy history of flouting United Nations resolutions, the country's presumption that it should also be immune from ICC rulings comes as no surprise. While Israel does not recognise ICC jurisdiction domestically, Netanyahu and Gallant could in theory be arrested if they travel to any of the court's 124 member states. Needless to say, this is not an eventuality that will be encouraged by the world's reigning superpower. And yet this is not Israel's first run-in with the ICC. Back in 2019, after nearly five years of "preliminary investigation", the court announced that then-prosecutor Fatou Bensouda was "satisfied" that there was a "reasonable basis to initiate an investigation into the situation in Palestine". This did not mean, of course, that said investigation was set to commence - eternal bureaucracy and foot-dragging being the hallmark of international criminal law. Rather, it had simply been established that there was a "reasonable basis to believe that war crimes have been or are being committed in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip".
Well, yeah. And that "reasonable basis" had already been around for, oh, seven decades or so.
Anyway, Bensouda's ruminations were still more than the Israelis could handle. The Jerusalem Post, for example, ran a dispatch by Israeli attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner - titled <Refusing to Play the Palestinians' ICC game> - in which the author accused the court of serving as a <concealed weapon> against Israel. Contending that there was <nothing sexier for Bensouda than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict>, Darshan-Leitner concluded: <We knew that Bensouda was tired of pursuing African dictators and brutal tribal leaders, and wanted to show that the ICC was a court with a truly international reach>. Speaking of sexy, Al Jazeera has noted that, as a result of Bensouda's ongoing perceived insolence, Israeli spy chief Yossi Cohen <intensified the covert war on the court that Israel has been waging since Palestine joined the ICC in 2015>. The Mossad went about intercepting Bensouda's communications, and she reported being <personally threatened>. She stepped down as prosecutor in 2021, the same year the "investigation into the situation in Palestine" finally got under way. Now, it remains to be seen just what the Israelis have up their sleeves in this latest international legal showdown. But as the "situation in Palestine" proceeds apace and genocide rages, there's a reasonable basis to believe justice is not ultimately an option.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.>>
Source: https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2024/11/22/icc-arrest-warrants-netanyahu-is-certainly-a-criminal-but

Al Jazeera - November 21, 2024 - By Al Jazeera Staff
<<How US politicians responded to Netanyahu’s ICC arrest warrant
Biden administration 'fundamentally rejects' decision as lawmakers issue threats and call for sanctions against court.
Washington, DC - When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke in front of the United States Congress earlier this year, the lawmakers stood up and clapped for him dozens of times. Now that he is a formally suspected war criminal wanted by the International Criminal Court (ICC), the adoration he received in Washington, DC, in July from US politicians is turning into anger and threats against the Hague-based tribunal. ICC pre-trial judges issued arrest warrants on Thursday for Netanyahu and his former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for charges of using starvation as a method of warfare as well as the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution and other inhumane acts. The court found that there were reasonable grounds that the Israeli siege of Gaza "created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population". With a few exceptions, US politicians from both major parties expressed outrage at the court's decision, with many questioning the court's legitimacy.
White House 'rejects' warrants
The administration of President Joe Biden was quick to voice opposition to the ruling.
"We fundamentally reject the court's decision to issue arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials," White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters. "We remain deeply concerned by the prosecutor's rush to seek arrest warrants and the troubling process errors that led to this decision."
She did not identify the alleged errors.
The Biden administration raised eyebrows earlier this month when it said that Israel had not violated a deadline to allow humanitarian assistance to Gaza, contradicting the findings of top aid organisations. Jean-Pierre also reiterated the US argument that the ICC has no jurisdiction over Israeli officials because Israel is not a party to the court. But the court has rejected that rationale, asserting that it has jurisdiction on the matter because Palestine - where the suspected crimes occurred - accepts the court's authority. US officials have previously argued that Palestinians do not have a state, and therefore cannot enter the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the court. But Palestine, which joined the ICC in 2015, is a non-member observer state of the United Nations. Asked about calls for sanctioning court officials, Jean-Pierre told reporters: <We are in consultation with our partners, which include Israel, about our next steps.> A recent Brown University study found that the Biden administration spent $17.9bn on security assistance to Israel over the past year - funds that were vital to the US ally's devastating war on Gaza.>>
Read more here: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/11/21/how-us-politicians-responded-to-netanyahus-icc-arrest-warrant

Women's Liberation Front 2019/cryfreedom.net 2024