Pages

▼

Tuesday, May 21, 2024

05/21 Links Pt1: Courting infamy; A judicial pogrom; Benny Gantz’s Big Gamble; Poll: Americans Continue to Strongly Support Israel

From Ian:

Melanie Phillips: Courting infamy
So why did such a man trash what was left of the court’s reputation by turning a court that is a supposed bulwark against tyranny into a weapon to punish a democracy for defending itself against genocide?

The answer is surely that Khan, a former member of a “human rights” barristers’ chambers in London, subscribes to “human rights” culture. And in recent years international “human rights” law — which, when it was developed in the middle of the last century to protect powerless minorities, some presciently warned would turn into a politicised weapon against the Jewish people — has indeed developed into a weapon to demonise, delegitimise and destroy the State of Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East. “Human rights” culture today is suffused with hatred of Israel and has thus played a major role in poisoning the progressive west against it.

Defensively, Khan says he has consulted a panel of “impartial” lawyers. Yet this panel contains a number of radical “human rights” lawyers who are no friends of Israel.

One of them, Danny Friedman KC, is a barrister at the radical Matrix Chambers. On November 18 last year he wrote:
Israel’s response to the attack on its territory has involved catastrophic mass fatality and untold human suffering of Palestinians — not only as a result of aerial and ground bombardment, but through, among other features, cessation of basic sustenance and amenities, destruction of medical facilities, and forced movement of populations within the blockaded geography of the Gaza strip. These are also grave war crimes… it is difficult to see from a legal point of view how the continuation of military action in Gaza at this time would be concordant with international law.

In a speech he gave to a fundraising dinner for Medical Aid for Palestine, he said a ceasefire was now “a matter of legal imperative”. These were hardly the views of someone who brought an open mind to the ICC’s deliberations.

Another panel member was the veteran barrister Baroness Kennedy of the Shaws KC. Her website says she is president of Medical Aid for Palestinians. Last October, she warned against “collective punishment” by Israel and referred to Gaza “being reduced to rubble”. She said only token amounts of aid were being allowed in and accused Israel of cutting off Gaza’s water supplies.

In a speech on genocide in the House of Lords in March, she said:
The current conflict between Hamas and Israel follows decades of terrible conduct, by both the IDF and Hamas, before, during and after 7 October.

Rub your eyes. In the view of this doyenne of “human rights,” Israeli soldiers who died in great number as they desperately tried to fight off the Hamas stormtroopers even while they were continuing to perpetrate that depraved and barbaric pogrom against Israeli women, children and men, were guilty of “terrible conduct”.

This “impartial” panel is actually a hanging jury from the Salem school of law: verdict first, evidence nowhere.

Khan’s attack against Israel — with the panel of lawyers he assembled serving as his human shield against criticism — represents yet another onslaught of defamation, demonisation and delegitimisation mounted by the apparatus of international law against the Jewish state, a unique and malicious double standard applied to no other country on earth.

Far from restoring the ICC’s reputation, Khan’s move will now bury it in the eyes of all fair-minded and decent people.

It will also hammer a nail into the coffin of human rights law, the legal instrument of the international “humanitarian” establishment of the UN and anti-Israel non-governmental organisations for which this kind of “lawfare” has become a principal weapon aimed at Israel’s destruction.

Doubtless under enormous pressure from both the UN and his former chums in Britain’s radical barrister sets, Khan’s preposterous move is part of the agenda for Israel’s destruction through a pincer movement of genocidal terror, brainwashed street insurrection and “human rights” lawfare.

The beneficiary will be Hamas; the victims will be Israel, the rule of law and civilisation itself.
Arsen Ostrovsky: The ICC has perverted the very meaning of justice
Yesterday was a dark day for justice.

The announcement by the International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor Karim Khan that he is pursuing arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant alongside the leaders of Hamas is an egregious and unconscionable perversion of the law, and a gift to the murderers and rapists of October 7 - one which Yahya Sinwar could never have imagined in his wildest dreams.

That Khan would even utter Israel and Hamas in the same breath is simply unfathomable.

There is absolutely no comparison between a genocidal terrorist organisation like Hamas and a democratic state like Israel, seeking to defend its citizens and rescue its hostages, following the largest mass slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust.

To draw such equivalence, which is no different to equating Churchill and Hitler, is abominable and morally repugnant.

The ICC was established in 2002 as a “court of last resort” to end impunity for the perpetrators of the most heinous of crimes, including war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide - not the Orwellian circumstances of arresting Israeli leaders for responding to the pogrom of October 7.

Notwithstanding the heinous crimes inflicted upon the Jewish state, which continue to this day with the holding of 128 hostages in Gaza and ongoing rocket attacks, the IDF has gone to unprecedented lengths - not seen until now in the history of modern warfare - to abide by the laws of war and avoid harm to Palestinian civilians.

As a court of last resort, the ICC is governed by the principle of “complementarity”, meaning it may only assert jurisdiction in circumstances where a national legal system fails to act, or to do so in a bona fide manner.

Khan himself stated during a visit to Israel after the October massacre that “Israel has trained lawyers who advise commanders and a robust system intended to ensure compliance with international humanitarian law.” How quickly has Khan forgotten his own words.
Brendan O'Neill: A judicial pogrom
The Clooney vision of the ICC and its brainy advisers as gallant defenders of decency is a grotesque lie. Clooney, in her statement, says ‘I will never accept that one child’s life has less value than another’s’. Big words from a barrister who’s advising prosecutors for a court that is notoriously selective in which wars it investigates and which wars it leaves alone. So Israel is threatened with being dragged to The Hague, but Bashar al-Assad was not, despite overseeing a war that killed hundreds of thousands. Neither were Saudi leaders over their killings in Yemen. And this isn’t to mention Western leaders – in the US, Britain, France – whose warmongering has caused far greater death and destruction in the Middle East than Israel ever has. I would really like to ask all those legal eagles why killings by the Jewish State seem to cause them greater angst than killings by ‘white’ states.

The ICC is infamous for its disproportionate targeting of the leaders of black Africa. To see a map of ICC investigations is to behold neo-imperialism in all its shameless pomposity. Most of its investigations have been in Africa, with a smattering in Latin America and Asia. No wonder the African Union has advised African states to cut ties with the ICC on the basis that it is a ‘neo-colonial force seeking to further empower Western political… interests in Africa’. That ‘anti-racist’ leftists are now cheering a court, riddled with racist double standards, because it has lumped the Jews in with the blacks is a testament to how fried their brains have become as a result of Israelophobia. Even the neo-colonial powers of the postwar globalist order are treated as allies by the woke left, as ‘good guys’, if they make moves against Evil Israel.

There’s a special cruelty to the seeking of arrest warrants against the Jewish State. The ICC has its origins in the postwar discussion about the need for ‘international law’ to deal with criminals like the Nazis. So grave were the crimes of fascism against the Jews that new legal systems are needed to punish such crimes, the argument went. Eventually, the ICC emerged. Fast forward to 2024 and this court that was founded on the principle that fascistic murder must never again go unpunished now threatens to punish a state whose only crime was to fight back against fascistic murderers. The postwar ideal of protecting the likes of the Jews is now weaponised against the Jews. The seeking of arrest warrants against Israel is a grotesque betrayal of the promises and principles of the entire postwar era. It is the self-negation of everything the modern, liberal West claims to represent.

I see it as a judicial pogrom, to go alongside the militant pogrom launched by Hamas and the intellectual pogrom pursued by Hamas’s apologists in the West. Militarily, politically and now legally, the Jewish State is under attack. We are fast reaching a situation where it isn’t only Israel’s military actions that are viewed as crimes against humanity but Israel itself. The Jewish homeland itself is this close to being redefined as a crime. This should be intolerable to anyone who believes in nationhood, self-determination and the equal right of Jews to go after the armies that butcher their people. Screw the ICC. It should enjoy no jurisdiction over Israel or any other independent nation.
Eli Lake: Israel Is Not Equivalent to Hamas
In the coming weeks there is a very good chance that Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, will be pursued by the International Criminal Court as a wanted man. On Monday, the court’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, applied for an arrest warrant for Israel’s leader and its defense minister, Yoav Gallant.

That Netanyahu and Gallant’s warrant applications were announced alongside warrants for three Hamas leaders responsible for the October 7 massacre is the first of many flaws in this disgraceful case. Secretary of State Antony Blinken was right when he called the equivalence of Israel with Hamas “shameful.”

Then there’s the fact that Israel is not a party to the treaty that created the International Criminal Court, or ICC. Blinken said that “the United States has been clear since well before the current conflict that ICC has no jurisdiction over this matter.” Finally, Blinken noted “deeply troubling process questions.” Israel has said it was willing to cooperate with the court and that Khan had been due to visit Israel next week. Instead he abruptly announced his application for a warrant, which “call[s] into question the legitimacy and credibility of this investigation,” Blinken said.

But even assuming Khan is waging a credible, legitimate prosecution, there is another problem with the case. Khan’s central accusation against Israel is that the Jewish state has “intentionally and systematically deprived the civilian population in all parts of Gaza of objects indispensable to human survival.” That is a crime under international law. And Khan argues in a press statement that Israel has used “starvation of civilians as a method of warfare” to collectively punish Gaza’s 2.3 million people and to pressure Hamas to release the hostages it captured on October 7.

We have heard many accusations of starvation over the course of this war, but there has been scant evidence. (According to The Wall Street Journal, over the past seven months Hamas claims that 31 Gazans have died because of malnutrition and dehydration.) More, the ICC ignores abundant evidence that Hamas is hoarding the food and medical aid meant for the population it purports to govern. As the U.S. military was building a pier in Gaza to deliver aid last month, Hamas fired mortar rounds at the construction area. The Israel Defense Forces have posted many videos and photographs of Hamas gunmen commandeering aid from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). On May 2, State Department spokesman Matthew Miller acknowledged that Hamas was diverting aid.


The Gantz Ultimatum
If the Biden administration is trying to prevent the Israelis from defeating Hamas soundly, if they are restraining the Israelis against Hezbollah, if they are turning a blind eye to the rise of Iranian proxies in Yemen, Iraq, and Syria, if they are refusing to enforce sanctions against Iranian oil sales to China—if they are making all of these concessions and more to Tehran, what makes Gantz think they are eager to bring Israel into a grand alliance with the Europeans and the Arabs against Iran?

Gantz doesn’t really think that, of course. But he can abandon his post in the government and launch a campaign against Netanyahu only if a significant percentage of the Israeli public accepts the fiction. If it concludes, for example, that the Biden administration is appeasing Iran at Israel’s expense, or that Washington refuses to support an Israeli victory for any reason other than its hostility to Ben-Gvir and Smotrich, then Gantz will lose some of the support that he gained by putting aside political differences and taking up a position of responsibility in the war.

In this context, the news, which broke on Monday morning, that the International Criminal Court is seeking arrest warrants for Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar and Netanyahu on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity arrived at an inopportune moment for Gantz. The warrants come on the heels of Blinken’s statement, made a little over a week earlier, that “it was reasonable to assess that ... Israel acted in ways that are not consistent with international humanitarian law.” Most Israelis find such assessments ludicrous. If the public concludes that Gantz is weakening the Israeli government to join forces with an American administration that does not have Israel’s best interests at heart, his popularity in the polls will drop as fast as it rose.

But the key players in this charade—Gantz, Antony Blinken, Thomas Friedman, and a host of Israeli commentators—understand the game. They will work to facilitate a departure by Gantz that appears patriotic rather than self-interested. They have their story, and they are sticking to it. The problem, they insist, boils down to Smotrich and Ben-Gvir, and the hold they have over Netanyahu. Were it not for those religious zealots, and Israel’s politically, if not also personally, corrupt prime minister, desperate to maintain his personal hold on power, then the United States and Israel would surely be working together hand-in-glove to lay Iran low.

While this story may not have any connection to actual American policy anywhere in the Middle East, it does have great appeal to every Israeli who hates Netanyahu and his right-wing coalition partners and finds understandable comfort in the fiction of a benevolent, powerful, and well-intentioned America that wants nothing more than to take Israel’s side against a tightening ring of terror armies backed by a nuclear-capable Iran. And that might be just enough support to deliver the premiership to Gantz in a few months’ time.
Seth Mandel: Benny Gantz’s Big Gamble
Benny Gantz is in an unenviable position: He does not have enough power to singlehandedly fix what ails the Israeli war effort, but if he’s not careful, he can set back that effort on a whim.

Over the weekend, Gantz gave Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu an ultimatum: Make a plan for postwar Gaza and set it in motion by June 8, or Gantz will bolt the unity government. Two days earlier, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant gave a highly unusual speech in which he, too, challenged Netanyahu over the lack of a concrete plan for who will govern Gaza after Hamas is defeated.

Gallant didn’t give a clear ultimatum or deadline. But his address was the reason for Gantz’s challenge. Gantz is the leader of the opposition and the prohibitive favorite if elections were held today; he can’t be seen to be outhustled politically by the defense minister—especially since Gallant is from the prime minister’s own party.

It’s likely that Gallant’s speech was the reason Gantz released his ultimatum when he did, but Gantz clearly had already prepared his plan, probably in consultation with Washington.

Therein lies the danger. The Biden administration’s motive here is very different from Gantz’s. There’s no reason to think Benny Gantz, the former IDF chief of staff and a man with still-higher political ambitions, wants anything other than Hamas’s defeat. But President Biden and his close aides have made it clear that they do not value the continued pursuit of that objective.

Biden wants to be able to take credit, ultimately, for a mutual-recognition agreement involving the Saudis and Israel. Because the Israelis want that as well, Biden believes he can use it as leverage against Israel’s determination to root out Hamas once and for all. Biden aims to force Israel to choose between the two. He believes he needs Gantz’s help to get Netanyahu out of the driver’s seat, and Gantz believes he needs Biden’s help to finally parlay his poll numbers into a premiership instead of being outmaneuvered by Bibi. Biden and Gantz, then, can offer each other the same thing: to be the leader who signs the deal with Riyadh.
Poll: Americans Continue to Strongly Support Israel
79% of American voters, including 80% of Independents, support Israel in the Gaza war, while 21% support Hamas, according to a Harvard-Harris Poll conducted on May 15-16, 2024.

69% agree that Israel is trying to avoid civilian casualties in Gaza.

66% think any ceasefire should happen only after the release of all hostages and Hamas is removed from power. 78% say Hamas needs to be removed from running Gaza.

74% think Israel should move forward with an operation in Rafah to finish the war with Hamas.

56% agree that threats to withhold weapons from Israel embolden Hamas and its backers to continue the war. 58% say such threats hurt negotiations to get the hostages back.

57% think Biden should continue to provide Israel with weapons even if it enters Rafah.


‘Israel must take aggressive action against ICC’
Avi Bell, a law professor at the University of San Diego and at Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan, told JNS that Israel should “immediately implement an aggressive strategy of non-cooperation.”

Israel should not cooperate, nor allow any citizen to cooperate, with the court. “Don’t allow anybody to go abroad to talk to them,” he said. “It’s perfectly fair given the ICC is threatening Israelis with false imprisonment and false prosecution, that it’s actively collaborating with a terrorist organization in lawfare against Israel.”

To date, Israel has pursued the opposite strategy, said Bell, sharply criticizing the Foreign Ministry and State Attorney’s Office, which have collaborated with the ICC for years.

“Just a few months ago, they invited the ICC prosecutor’s team to Israel to interview witnesses, collect evidence and coordinate with the PLO in Ramallah, which is simply unthinkable to me. I just don’t understand how anybody could be so foolish,” he told JNS.

Given their track record, officials at the Foreign Ministry and attorney general’s office are the last people that Bell said he would want to handle ICC strategy going forward.

“No matter what happens, no matter how much the strategy fails, they just don’t stop,” he said. “They keep going in the same direction.”

Israel should impose sanctions and pass legislation against the ICC similar to what America did, he said.

Eugene Kontorovich, head of the international law department at the Kohelet Policy Forum, agreed, telling JNS, “Israel must refuse any cooperation with the ICC, and pass a law similar to the U.S. Armed Service Members’ Protection Act [ASPA], barring cooperation with the ICC, and allowing all measures to be taken against any of its officials or member states that work to arrest Israeli nationals.”

Congress passed ASPA in 2002 because it feared that the ICC would be used as a political weapon against U.S. soldiers.

The law was dubbed the “Hague Invasion Act,” as it authorized the president “to use all means necessary” to release U.S. and allied personnel “held captive by, on behalf, or at the request of the court,” raising the specter of an extreme scenario in which the United States would send troops to invade Holland to free its service members.

Kontorovich also urged that the United States impose sanctions similar to those imposed by former President Donald Trump via an executive order in 2020 that targeted assets and imposed entry bans on ICC officials and their families. Trump’s move came as the court debated whether to open an investigation into alleged U.S. war crimes in Afghanistan.

“They [sanctions] work. The ICC bureaucrats want Israel to fight Hamas with both hands tied behind its back, but personally they are cowards,” said Kontorovich.
How Israel Can Fight Back against the International Criminal Court
One need not be an expert in international law to see the absurdity of the ICC prosecutor’s determination that the leaders of Hamas and the leaders of Israel are equally guilty of war crimes. It takes only a little more knowledge to understand that the court has no jurisdiction over Israel, which is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, the ICC’s founding treaty. In a careful analysis, Avraham Russell Shalev outlines some of the many legal holes in this case, and observes that the problems are inherent in the court itself:
A review of the ICC’s relationship towards Israel over its two decades of existence demonstrates a fundamental bias and double standard toward the Jewish state. This bias is not a function of any specific prosecutor. Rather, it is an institutional feature, found even in the Rome Statute. . . . Israel initially refused to sign the Rome Statute as it became apparent that the Arab states had politicized the Rome Conference and introduced language that departed from existing international law specifically to criminalize Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria.

Therefore, argues Shalev, Jerusalem should deal with the case against it not as a legal problem, to which it would respond by dispatching lawyers to make carefully reasoned arguments, but as a political and diplomatic one. More specifically, he contends that
collaboration with the ICC will not reduce the very high chances of arrest warrants being issued against Israeli officials, but will give those charges great weight and legitimacy when they come. Instead, Israel must adopt a policy of non-cooperation and even offense.

And what does a policy of offense entail?
Israel has repeatedly stated that it does not recognize the ICC’s jurisdiction. Therefore, any legal proceedings are completely illegitimate and as such, the various legal bodies—the attorney general, the Justice Ministry’s International Affairs Office, the Foreign Ministry’s legal advisors, and the Military Advocate General’s International Law Department—will no longer communicate with the ICC. [In addition], the Knesset must pass legislation modeled on the American Service-Member’s Protection Act. This legislation would bar any government agency from cooperating with the ICC without a government decision.

While Israel has never accepted the ICC’s jurisdiction, the Palestinian Authority (PA) has willingly accepted it. The court can hardly turn around now and deny jurisdiction to avoid prosecuting Palestinian crimes. . . . Palestinian nationals, acting on behalf of Hamas, Fatah, and other terrorist organizations, and with no affiliation, have carried out serious war crimes against Israelis and Palestinians. Israel must publicly demand that the ICC issue indictments against them.
Read more at Kohelet
“Absurd And Discredits ICC!” Prosecutor Seeks Arrest Warrants For Netanyahu And Hamas Leaders
Talk’s Kevin O’Sullivan is joined by Israeli legal scholar Professor Eugene Kontorovich.

Kevin and Prof Eugene discuss the International Criminal Court (ICC)’s plans to seek arrest warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli and Hamas leaders, alleging they are responsible for war crimes in Gaza and Israel.

Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor, accused Israel of using “starvation as a method of warfare” and carrying out “collective punishment” of the population of Gaza.

Regarding the Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, he said the terrorist actions were “unconscionable crimes” that “demand accountability”.

Prof Eugene says this “discredits the ICC”.


Legal earthquake: ICC charges against Netanyahu would be unprecedented in court’s history
The principle of complementarity
One crucial component of the Rome Statute, known as the principle of complementarity, is that the ICC will not conduct investigations and file charges against nationals of a country if that country has an independent judiciary, and is capable and willing to investigate and prosecute its own nationals for the crimes listed in the Rome Statute.

Israel will argue strongly that its judiciary is fiercely independent and is fully capable of investigating its own politicians and generals for any suspected violations of international law covered by the Rome Statute.

Indeed, Israel’s legal representatives to the ICJ stated on Friday that there are currently dozens of active investigations into suspected misconduct rising to criminal liability by military prosecutors, and that the Attorney General’s Office was treating some comments as liable for prosecution under charges of incitement to genocide.

Khan himself stated explicitly in December that “Israel has trained lawyers who advise commanders and a robust system intended to ensure compliance with international humanitarian law,” although these comments appear to refer more to legal accountability within the military and not civilian politicians prosecuting the war, such as Netanyahu and Gallant.

That said, Article 17 of the Rome Statute says explicitly that the ICC shall determine a case inadmissible when “the case is being investigated or prosecuted by a State which has jurisdiction over it, unless the State is unwilling or unable genuinely to carry out the investigation or prosecution.”

The Attorney General’s Office has not given any public notice that it is investigating senior level politicians such as the prime minister or defense minister.

According to Prof. Robbie Sabel, an expert in international law at the Hebrew University’s Faculty of Law, Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara is highly unlikely to do so since “there is no prima facie evidence that we have committed any of these crimes.”

But if the ICC chief prosecutor believes differently, the complementarity principle may not apply.

Khan specifically addressed this issue in his remarks on Monday, stating that complementarity requires deferral to national authorities “only when they engage in independent and impartial judicial processes that do not shield suspects and are not a sham,” and adding: “It requires thorough investigations at all levels addressing the policies and actions underlying these applications.”

Absent evidence of such investigations, Khan will likely wish to push ahead with the case and the judges in the pre-trial chamber may agree with him.

Anne Herzberg, an international law expert and legal adviser of the NGO Monitor organization, argued that Khan was “taking a very narrow definition of complementarity, to go after Israelis.” She contended that the mere fact that there are no indictments yet in Israel did not mean that the ICC was entitled to issue its own charges, and questioned the extent to which Khan had investigated what preliminary examinations or investigations are taking place, or if he could even obtain such information independently.

There is a possibility that the Attorney General’s Office could seek some sort of arrangement whereby it announces an investigation into senior officials for the crimes being investigated by the ICC in order to avert the catastrophe of arrest warrants being issued.

It remains unclear how likely such a scenario is.

Former Canadian justice minister Irwin Cotler pointed out to the Times of Israel recently that Khan recently came to an arrangement with Venezuela, a dictatorial regime led by Nicolas Maduro, to allow for cooperation between Caracas and the ICC, a step that averted the possible issuance of arrest warrants against senior regime officials for crimes against humanity over concerns regarding detention in the country since 2017.

Cotler said he believed any charges brought against Israeli officials would violate the Rome Statute because of Israel’s ability to investigate itself, and pointed to a current petition before the High Court of Justice by several human rights groups asking the justices to order the government to increase the supply of humanitarian aid to Gaza.

“This kind of initiative would undermine the ICC. It would be a breach of the founding principles of the ICC, a breach of admissibility in Article 17, and the first time officials from a democratic country would be brought before the court,” said Cotler in the interview, conducted shortly before Khan’s announcement on Monday.
ICC requests 'like charging US and al-Qaeda after 9/11,' says Netanyahu
Western democratic leaders will also be hauled before the International Criminal Court unless a way is found to prevent Israelis from standing trial there, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told ABC on Tuesday.

“Every democracy will be pulled into the [ICC] dock. We’re first, and you’re next. People understand that,” Netanyahu said.

He spoke one day after ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan announced that he sought arrest warrants for top Israeli and Hamas leaders, including Netanyahu, and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for crimes against humanity due to IDF actions in the Gaza war.

“That has to be stopped. And that has to be resisted. And I can assure you, the vast majority of Israelis and all responsible leaders in the world understand that this should be resisted,” he said.

The ICC pre-trial chamber has yet to approve Khan’s request. If it does, the warrants would be the first issued against leaders of a democratic country.

Israeli has been particularly outraged over the equity Khan drew between Israel and the terror organization Hamas, particularly in light of the group’s October 7 invasion of Israel in which it raped, dismembered, and burned alive its victims.

Khan is “creating a false symmetry between the democratically elected leaders of Israel and the terrorist chieftains,” Netanyahu said.

It’s akin to an ICC chief prosecutor seeking arrest warrants for both US and al-Qaeda leaders in the aftermath of the September 11 attack on the Twin Towers in New York in 2001, Netanyahu said.

It is also akin to the issuance of warrants against both former US president Franklin Delano Roosevelt and former German chancellor Adolf Hitler, he added. This is “a hit job. It’s not serious,” Netanyahu said.
Netanyahu: ICC Decision "a Moral Outrage of Historic Proportions"
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday: "The outrageous decision by the ICC prosecutor, Karim Khan, to seek arrest warrants against the democratically elected leaders of Israel is a moral outrage of historic proportions....Israel is waging a just war against Hamas, a genocidal terrorist organization that perpetrated the worst attack on the Jewish people since the Holocaust. Hamas massacred 1200 Jews, raped Jewish women, burned Jewish babies, took hundreds hostage."

"Now, in the face of these horrors, Mr. Khan creates a twisted and false moral equivalence between the leaders of Israel and the henchmen of Hamas. This is like creating a moral equivalence after September 11th between President Bush and Osama Bin Laden, or during World War II between FDR and Hitler. What a travesty of justice! What a disgrace!"

"Eighty years ago, the Jewish people were totally defenseless against our enemies. Those days are over....Israel will continue to wage this war in full compliance with international law. We will continue to take unprecedented measures to get innocent civilians out of harm's way and to ensure that humanitarian assistance reaches those in need in Gaza."

"Mr. Khan also sets a dangerous precedent that undermines every democracy's right to defend itself against terror organizations and aggressors. The ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel and Mr. Khan's actions will not stop us from waging our just war against Hamas...until that war is won. Because 'never again' is now."


Israeli defense establishment learned of ICC warrant application through CNN
Israel’s defense establishment learned of the International Criminal Court’s effort to issue arrest warrants against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on Monday through CNN’s report on the issue, Jewish insider has learned.

The defense establishment did not have prior notice that the ICC was preparing to issue the warrants, a senior official with knowledge of the matter said. Officials found out about the move when CNN International’s communications team touted the “exclusive interview” between CNN anchor Christiane Amanpour and ICC prosecutor Karim Khan.

“We were informed of the warrants via a CNN interview,” the official said. “The ICC produced a PR stunt — reflecting their political and corrupt nature over professional channels or even over communicating via its official platforms. Aside from the method of publication, in requesting the warrants themselves, the court is making a mockery out of its own values and the entire premise of humanitarian law.”

“The double standard and refusal to acknowledge Israel’s right to defend itself, as well as the failure to recognize our extraordinary efforts to protect human lives, is in fact, antisemitic,” the official added.

A delegation had been slated to travel to Israel on Monday to prepare for an upcoming visit by Khan, but did not board the plane.

Khan announced his application for the arrest warrants in an official statement shortly after the publication of the CNN interview.

Gallant said on Tuesday, “The attempt made by the ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan to turn things around will not succeed — the parallel he has drawn between the Hamas terrorist organization and the State of Israel is despicable. The State of Israel is not a party to the Court and does not recognize its authority. Prosecutor Karim Khan’s attempt to deny the State of Israel the right to defend herself and ensure the release of the hostages held in Gaza, must be rejected explicitly.”

Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD), formerly the House majority leader, raised concerns about the timing of the announcement. “The prosecutor’s action is particularly counterproductive given that he was scheduled to meet Israeli officials in a matter of days to discuss the investigation,” Hoyer said. “Instead, he announced these charges on CNN before giving the Israeli government an opportunity to comment, which the Israeli government indicated it was prepared to do.”


FDD: Defund ICC’s ‘kangaroo court’ as it wages anti-Israel lawfare
The double standard and political nature of the ICC’s action against Israel becomes apparent by its notable inaction against the world’s most evil regimes.

In more than 20 years, this so-called court has taken no action against some of the greatest perpetrators of crimes against humanity on the planet — from Xi Jinping’s genocide in Xinjiang, to Ali Khamenei’s brutalization of the Iranian people and sponsorship of terrorism throughout the world, to Bashar al-Assad’s mass-murder of the Syrian people.

But when the world’s only Jewish state, taking utmost care to mitigate civilian casualties, fights back against Nazi-like terrorists that slaughtered Jewish families and took others hostage, the democracy of Israel becomes the ICC’s primary concern and target.

Tragically, it took only 79 years for Europe to become a place where Jews are put on trial for fighting Nazis.

That Japan and Germany are the top donors to the institution perpetrating this abomination should be jarring.

That the United Kingdom and France are the next two top donors should be nauseating.

No democracy can call itself an ally of the United States and fund antisemitic lawfare against Israel that invites future lawfare against America, too.

Washington must act decisively by threatening financial sanctions against any bank that processes a transaction for or on behalf of the ICC. Its officials should face asset freezes and visa denials.

And the ICC’s leading donors must be put to a choice: stand with democracy and the rule of law or stand with terrorist sympathizers using lawfare to undermine both.

The ICC should not be dismissed as symbolic or a joke.

The institution is misusing law as a weapon of war, and the United States should act accordingly.


Telegraph Editorial: The ICC has disgraced itself
The International Criminal Court’s decision to seek arrest warrants for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and defence minister Yoav Gallant makes a mockery of both the institution and the laws it claims to uphold.

By applying for the arrest of the Israeli leadership alongside that of Hamas, the court has bolstered a supposed moral equivalence where none exists. Israel is engaged in an existential struggle against a foe which hides among the civilian population. IDF soldiers have gone to extraordinary lengths to minimise non-combatant casualties, often at greater risk to their own lives.

Hamas, in contrast, initiated this conflict by slaughtering innocent civilians on Israeli soil. Its leader, Yahya Sinwar, has made clear his intention to “wipe out” the world’s only Jewish state. Yet Karim Khan, the ICC’s chief prosecutor, has brought charges including “causing extermination” and “deliberately targeting civilians” against both Mr Netanyahu and Mr Gallant.
Ben-Dror Yemini: ICC in the service of terror, axis of evil
Truth be told, the international law has never before become a slave to the axis of evil and to terror, until now. A terror organization that openly announces its aim to destroy Israel, murder Jews and Christians and dominate the world, a terror group that launched the worse murderous attack on Jews since the Holocaust, a terror force whose leaders say they will continue that murder, is equated to a country defending itself against the murderous organization out to destroy it.

Is there justification for severe response to the murderous enemy facing a sovereign country? This is not a theoretical question. There are facts. When the United States killed hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese, when Tokyo was bombed, who was to blame? The U.S.? Japan?

When the UK bombed Dresden and Hamburg during WWII, who was to blame? Hitler or Churchill?

When the war on terror caused the death of half a million people, 70% of them innocent civilians, according to modest estimations, who was responsible, Osama Bin Laden or George Bush and Barak Obama? When the U.S. destroyed 70% of the buildings in Mosul and ar-Raqqa, who was responsible, the U.S. or ISIS? The answers are clear, until it comes to Israel.

There is no shortage of reasons to criticize Israel's leaders such as the outrageous statements about cutting off water supplies, stopping food delivery, claims that 'there are no innocent Gazans," and much more.

Even when their bravado was quoted in the International Court of Justice, (IJC) and despite repeated warnings, they continued. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich went the extra mile to hurt Israel's standing when he declared there must be total extermination in Rafah, Deir al Balah and the Nuseirat refugee camp in Gaza. [Hamas leader Yahya] Sinwar and South Africa should send him a bouquet of flowers. And if there is doubt about the extent of damage caused by the far-right members of the government, it's time to put it to rest.

Israel, we've learned, is not the United States, which not refrained from signing on the Rome Statute, on which prosecutions for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, at the International Criminal Court (ICC) - are based, It had even legislated, in bi-partisan approval, a law allowing military action to free any U.S. citizens arrested by the court, for actions taken on the behalf of his country.

When former ICC prosecutor Fatou Bensouda asked to investigate alleged crimes by American forces, her visa to enter the U.S. was revoked. A three-judge panel summoned to hear her concerns, took the hint and rejected her request.

We are in the preliminary stages Khan's request must be approved by ICC judges. In the current climate, chances are they will rule in favor of the prosecutor.
Israel in the dock
What we did not know until yesterday is that Khan had appointed a panel of international legal experts to support his investigation. Panel members were asked whether they thought there were “reasonable grounds to believe that the persons named in the warrants have committed crimes within the jurisdiction of the court”.

For this purpose they were “asked to assess objectively the material provided to them by the prosecutor and to advise the prosecutor whether it meets the relevant legal test”. They reviewed “the applications for arrest warrants, as well as underlying evidence, including witness statements, expert evidence and authenticated videos and photographs obtained by investigators”.

But, as lawyers sitting thousands of miles away from Gaza, they have no reliable means of testing the evidence handed to them by the prosecutor’s office. How can they know how much of it comes ultimately from Hamas itself?
....
I make no criticism of these lawyers’ assessments of international criminal law — though their legal skills do not give them any special expertise to assess evidence that is untried and untested. And it is surely not for them to decide that the ICC “has jurisdiction over Israeli, Palestinian or other nationals who committed crimes in Gaza or the West Bank”.

But is Khan really justified in describing them as an “impartial group” of “independent” experts? Was each candidate asked to provide a statement of independence and impartiality? Were they asked, as is customary in international courts and tribunals, to disclose matters that could give rise to doubts about whether they had taken sides on the issue, for example by supporting a Palestinian charity?

If a public position on the conflict is no bar, did it not occur to Khan that his panel might have had more credibility if it had included London-based international lawyers who are already familiar with what is happening in Gaza? Why not include Natasha Hausdorff, a barrister and international law specialist who is also legal director of the UK Lawyers for Israel charitable trust? Or Professor Malcolm Shaw KC, who was subsequently briefed to represent Israel at the International Court of Justice? Or Professor Lord Verdirame KC, who set out the legal issues in a House of Lords debate last October? Or Sir Daniel Bethlehem KCMG KC, former legal adviser at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office?

What next?
The ICC has various checks and balances built into its rules. Khan’s task now is to persuade a pre-trial chamber of three judges to issue the arrest warrants he seeks. No doubt he hopes the chamber will not question the opinions of former judges such as Fulford and Meron.

But Khan’s recruitment of an expert panel drawn partly from his team of 20 special advisers — not to mention the grim-faced trial lawyers who flanked him in The Hague yesterday — is a sign of weakness, not strength. It suggests he does not have the confidence to act on his own authority.
Revealed: Lawyer pushing for Netanyahu arrest warrant said October 7 was legally justified
Lawyers who claimed the October 7 massacre was legally justified and that Israel had no right to self-defence in Gaza are key figures in the push to have Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders prosecuted in the International Criminal Court (ICC), the JC can reveal.

The ICC’s chief prosecutor, British barrister Karim Khan KC, is reportedly close to issuing war crimes indictments against the Israeli prime minister, Defence Minister Yoav Gallant and IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi – a move that Netanyahu has said would constitute an “antisemitic hate crime”.

Khaled al-Shouli said in a televised interview screened the day following the October 7 massacre that the attack was justified under international law. Abdelmajid Mrari, a French-Algerian, has referred to the terror group as a “resistance movement”. Both lawyers are key members of a group of some 600 lawyers from around the world who have filed evidence about the current conflict to the ICC.

The men were pictured with French lawyer Gilles Devers – who filed the first of many complaints to the ICC about Israel’s treatment of Palestinians in 2009 – delivering a dossier of evidence to the court on November 14.

Afterwards Devers gave a statement addressed to Palestinians, saying: “You had no one to defend you, but now you now have an army to defend you in international and national courts.”

On the same day Mrari claimed – citing Article 51 of the UN Charter – that the fact Israel was an “occupier” in Gaza meant it had no legal right to self-defence.

Both Mrari and Al-Shouli, who are based in France, have represented Hamas or its members in previous court actions.

Last year Mrari filed a suit with the ICC asking it to issue an order to lift Israel’s Gaza “siege” on behalf of eight Palestinian politicians led by a senior Hamas official, Ahmad Bahar. In a sermon televised in 2012, Bahar asked Allah to “kill the Jews and their supporters, the Americans and their supporters, without leaving a single one”.


President Biden condemns ICC warrants for Netanyahu, Gallant
President Joe Biden slammed the International Criminal Court on Monday after the body’s lead prosecutor announced plans to seek arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, calling the warrants “outrageous.” The forceful condemnation by the Biden administration joined a bipartisan chorus in Washington that quickly criticized the move by the ICC.

Biden called out ICC prosecutor Karim A. A. Khan for simultaneously announcing plans to seek arrest warrants for the Israeli leaders and Yahya Sinwar, who heads the Iranian-backed terror group Hamas in Gaza, Mohammed Deif, leader of Hamas’ al-Qassam Brigades military wing, and Hamas’ Qatar-based leader Ismail Haniyeh.

“Let me be clear: whatever this prosecutor might imply, there is no equivalence — none — between Israel and Hamas. We will always stand with Israel against threats to its security,” Biden said in a statement.

Secretary of State Tony Blinken offered a lengthier statement on Monday, stating that the announcement of the arrest warrants “does nothing to help, and could jeopardize, ongoing efforts to reach a ceasefire agreement that would get hostages out and surge humanitarian assistance in, which are the goals the United States continues to pursue relentlessly.”

Blinken asserted that the ICC lacks jurisdiction over the Israel-Hamas war and called out the swift process that did not allow Israel a chance to respond. In fact, Blinken said, Khan was supposed to visit Israel next week, and his staff were scheduled to depart for Israel today.

“Israel was informed that they did not board their flight around the same time that the Prosecutor went on cable television to announce the charges,” Blinken said. “These and other circumstances call into question the legitimacy and credibility of this investigation.”

The administration’s unequivocal criticism of the ICC was matched by anger from leaders in both parties on Capitol Hill. Top lawmakers have, for weeks, been signaling opposition to the prospect of ICC warrants and suggesting that Congress could pursue sanctions against the ICC and its officials. Legislation implementing such sanctions has already been introduced, and the House will likely hold a vote related to the warrants this week.


U.S. "Fundamentally Rejects Shameful" ICC Warrant Applications for Israeli Leaders
Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Monday: "The United States fundamentally rejects the announcement today from the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) that he is applying for arrest warrants for senior Israeli officials, together with warrants for Hamas terrorists. We reject the Prosecutor's equivalence of Israel with Hamas. It is shameful."

"Hamas is a brutal terrorist organization that carried out the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust and is still holding dozens of innocent people hostage, including Americans. Moreover, the United States has been clear since well before the current conflict that the ICC has no jurisdiction over this matter."

"Despite not being a member of the court, Israel was prepared to cooperate with the Prosecutor. In fact, the Prosecutor himself was scheduled to visit Israel as early as next week to discuss the investigation and hear from the Israeli Government....[Then] the Prosecutor went on cable television to announce the charges. These and other circumstances call into question the legitimacy and credibility of this investigation."
ICC warrants put hostage rescues at risk, bipartisan group of senators
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.), chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, led seven other senators in a bipartisan statement that the International Criminal Court’s plan to obtain arrest warrants for Israeli leaders would “jeopardize efforts to bring about sustainable peace in the Middle East.”

The ICC prosecutor’s decision also threatens to endanger “sensitive negotiations to bring home hostages, including Americans, and surge humanitarian assistance,” the senators wrote.

The ICC prosecutor stated earlier in the week that he intends to apply for arrest warrants for both Hamas leaders and for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

The senators said that the application for the arrest warrants “draws a false equivalence between Israel with its longstanding commitment to the rule of law, and Hamas’s theocratic, autocratic and unaccountable rule over Gaza.”

“To state the obvious: Israel is a functioning democracy, while Hamas is a terrorist organization,” they stated.

The senators rejected the need for the ICC to intervene and expressed their “great confidence in the Israeli judicial system’s ability to administer justice.”

The other signatories were Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Jim Risch (R-Idaho), Katie Britt (R-Ala.) and John Thune (R-S.D.).
House lawmakers pushing to sanction ICC over potential Israel arrest warrants
The House has begun working to advance legislation sanctioning the International Criminal Court over its decision to seek arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, while Republicans in the Senate are searching for Democrats to partner up on a similar effort.

Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), the No. 3 House Republican, is calling on the lower chamber to pass her bill imposing sanctions on ICC officials and associates working to investigate or arrest Americans or U.S. allies. Stefanik introduced the bill with Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) last month as concerns grew over the impending warrants, and a source familiar with the matter told Jewish Insider a vote on the legislation could come as soon as this week.

Sens. Tom Cotton (R-AR), Ted Cruz (R-TX), and Marco Rubio (R-FL) originally introduced the legislation in the upper chamber back in February, but it has no Democratic cosponsors and faces a difficult path to passage in the Democratically controlled Senate.

Senate Republicans largely want to see some type of action in response to the ICC’s decision, whether it be from President Joe Biden or Congress. While most Senate Democrats have been quick to follow Biden’s lead and condemn the ICC, they haven’t said they back sanctions.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) demanded that Biden “commit to imposing significant costs” on the ICC “and its agents if it pursues” these “shameful and baseless charges against Israel.” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) also harshly criticized the Court, vowing to “work with President Biden and members on all sides to keep support for Israel strong and unwavering.” Still, he did not voice his support for imposing sanctions or other moves to punish the Court.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) told JI that they are collecting signatures for a bipartisan statement denouncing ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan and the Court. Cardin, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he had not yet commented on the developments because he wanted to release something bipartisan instead.

Graham added that he’s hopeful he can extend the effort beyond the statement, complimenting the Biden administration on its firm condemnation of the ICC but calling the words insufficient.

“The [president’s] statement was good but words without deeds go nowhere. It’s time to put on the table [former President Donald] Trump’s executive order. I want to turn that into legislation,” Graham said. “I think you will find hopefully bipartisan support to sanction the ICC through Congress.”


Germany backs ICC after prosecutor requests arrest warrants for Israelis
Germany respects the “independence” of the International Criminal Court, Berlin declared after the tribunal’s chief prosecutor on Monday announced he would be seeking arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.

“The International Criminal Court is a fundamental achievement of the international community that Germany has always supported. Germany respects its independence and the conduct of proceedings just as it does for all other international courts,” Berlin’s Federal Foreign Office stated.

Germany noted, however, that “the simultaneous applications for arrest warrants for the Hamas leadership on the one hand and the two Israeli officials on the other have resulted in an incorrect implication of equivalence.”

“The Court will have a host of difficult questions to answer here, including in particular the question as to its jurisdiction and the complementarity of investigations carried out by affected states governed by the rule of law, which include Israel,” added the missive.

On Monday night, European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs Josep Borrell reiterated Brussels’s view that “all states that have ratified the ICC statutes are bound to execute the Court’s decisions.

“I take note of the decision of the ICC Prosecutor to apply for warrants of arrest before Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (ICC) against Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif, Ismail Haniyeh, Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant,” tweeted the top E.U. diplomat.

“The mandate of the ICC, as an independent international institution, is to prosecute the most serious crimes under international law,” he said.
France and Belgium support ICC request for arrest warrants of Israel and Hamas leaders
France and Belgium released statements supporting the world’s top war crimes court’s request for arrest warrants for leaders of Israel and Hamas, after Israel and the United States both harshly condemned the effort.

The International Criminal Court’s chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and three Hamas leaders — Yehya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh — of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Gaza Strip and Israel. While Netanyahu and Gallant do not face imminent arrest, the announcement Monday was a symbolic blow that deepened Israel’s isolation over the war in Gaza.

Israeli forces raided a militant stronghold Tuesday in the occupied West Bank, killing at least seven and wounding several, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry. The raid into Jenin is part of months of surging violence in the Palestinian territory.


Fury as Labour Party's foreign spokesman David Lammy backs bid for war crimes case against Israel's prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Labour foreign affairs spokesman David Lammy faced a storm of criticism on Monday night after appearing to back war crimes prosecutions against Israel's prime minister.

While Downing Street criticised yesterday's call by the International Criminal Court's chief prosecutor for an arrest warrant to be issued against Benjamin Netanyahu, David Lammy said it was 'an independent matter'.

Labour has been accused in recent weeks of softening its support for Israel's right to self-defence after realising its stance was costing the party support.

Yesterday, in the clearest indication yet of a shift, Mr Lammy suggested the country's response to the terrorist atrocities of October 7 last year – when Hamas murdered 1,200 people in Israel – warranted the ICC's remarks.


JPost Editorial: Death of Raisi doesn't signify Israel's defense establishment can sleep well at night - editorial
As expected, Iran’s proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, that have been waging their battles against Israel on behalf of their cruel backer, issued statements of mourning over Raisi’s and his fellow Iranians’ deaths.

“These leaders supported the legitimate struggle of our people against the Zionist entity, provided valued support to the Palestinian resistance, and made tireless efforts in solidarity and support in all forums and fields for our people in the steadfast Gaza Strip during the Battle of al-Aqsa Flood,” Hamas said, referring to their barbarous October 7 attack on Israel.

Hezbollah eulogized Raisi as “a strong supporter, a staunch defender of our causes.”

Also expected were condolences from Iran’s Jewish community, who must toe a line of allegiance to the regime for their safety. Calling Raisi “compassionate and dedicated,” the representative of the Tehran Jewish Association reacted with “a heart full of sorrow and eyes brimming with tears,” while recognizing the significant loss of a leader revered for his service and humility.

At the same time, social media was full of expatriate Iranians celebrating Raisi’s death and voicing hope that freedom-loving Iranians would be able to exploit the opportunity to overturn the yoke of oppression that has plagued the Iranian people since 1979.

That likelihood is slim, as experts on Iran told The Jerusalem Post’s Tovah Lazaroff on Sunday. This does “nothing” for regime change, said Dr. Meir Javedanfar, an Iranian lecturer at Reichman University, as he explained that the impact would primarily be domestic.

Former national security adviser Yaakov Amidror predicted that neither Iran’s determination to wipe out Israel by producing nuclear weapons, nor its support of Hamas and Hezbollah would change following Raisi’s death, adding that it is Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who sets the country’s policies.

Although Israel can take solace in the knowledge that one of its arch-enemies has met a fiery end, there are more than enough just like him to prevent the country’s defense establishment from sleeping well at night.
Masih Alinejad: As Iran’s Regime Jockeys for a New Leader, It’s Time to Stand With Iranian Women
While Raisi's death may close the chapter on his controversial presidency, it opens crucial questions about the future of Iran's leadership. Reports suggest rising tensions within the regime, particularly with Khamenei's son Mojtaba being groomed for succession. A potential move toward a dynastic rule is exacerbating rifts within the regime, with many Iranians desiring a radically different future.

To be clear, Raisi’s passing will not directly lead to an uprising. The brutal suppression of the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests of 2022 and 2023 has transitioned to a new phase: civil disobedience and labor strikes, with Iranian women courageously leading the charge. By defying laws requiring them to wear veils, known as hijab, women are fighting not just a piece of fabric but the regime's control over our lives. Iranian women are not content to live as second-class citizens in their own country.

In the wake of Raisi’s death, I call upon the West to defend its values. I’m not asking you to dance on Raisi’s grave, but to prioritize where you direct your time and energy. Stand in solidarity with the brave women of Iran who refuse to be silenced or to surrender to oppression.

This pivotal moment offers a unique opportunity to address and challenge the systematic subjugation of women. We must end gender apartheid, the treatment of women as second‑class citizens under law and policy, by codifying it as a violation of international law. Only then can the Islamic Republic be held accountable for its crimes against women at the International Criminal Court. The time for action is now – let us not waste this critical opportunity.

Our fight is far from over, and as the world watches, we continue to seek justice for every soul stifled under this regime.


Biden Admin Sends Iran Condolences After Mass Murderer President Killed in Helicopter Crash
The Biden administration on Monday sent "official condolences" to the Iranian regime following a weekend helicopter crash that claimed the lives of its hardline president and foreign minister.

"The United States expresses its official condolences for the death of Iranian president Ebrahim Raisi, foreign minister [Hossein] Amir-Abdollahian, and other members of their delegation in a helicopter crash in northwest Iran," State Department spokesman Matthew Miller said in a statement. "As Iran selects a new president, we reaffirm our support for the Iranian people and their struggle for human rights and fundamental freedoms."

Raisi, a longtime hardliner who was close to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, was known for leading chants of "death to America" during public events in Iran. In February, during a rally in which onlookers burned American and Israeli flags, he slammed the U.S. for supporting "the Zionist regime's crimes against humanity in Gaza."

"I say to the enemies; you want to hear the word of the people? These are the great people of Iran," Raisi was quoted as saying, as the crowd chanted "death to America" and "death to Israel."

Raisi—who is known as "the Butcher of Tehran"—was one of the main architects of a 1988 massacre in Iran that killed around 5,000 regime opponents. Raisi at the time served on the hardline government’s "death committee" that issued death sentences to scores of political opponents.

Raisi was sanctioned by the U.S. government in 2019 for his role in committing mass human rights abuses "over three decades."


Why is the BBC being so soft on the ‘Butcher of Tehran’?
It’s hard to think of anything too positive to say about Ebrahim Raisi. The Iranian president, who died in a helicopter crash on Sunday, was a hardline Islamist ideologue. During his four-decade rise to the presidency, through a variety of roles in the judiciary and security services, he brutally repressed the Iranian people. Yet somehow, despite this, a bizarre obituary on the BBC website has described his ‘legacy’ as ‘mixed’.

Yes, Raisi was ‘hated’ by many Iranians for his role in the ‘death committee’ that sentenced thousands of dissidents to death in the 1980s, the BBC obit admits. Yes, he was ultimately responsible for the death of Mahsa Amini, a brave Iranian teenager whose only ‘crime’ was to appear in public without a hijab, the article notes. And yes, he poured billions of dollars into Islamist proxy groups like Hamas, the anti-Semitic terror army responsible for 7 October, the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust.

But was there another side to the man the Iranians dubbed the ‘Butcher of Tehran’? Well, according to the BBC, we shouldn’t overlook the fact that, ‘under his leadership, there was some reform in processing a backlog of court cases’. He also made promises to ‘build affordable houses’ and ‘fight inflation’ (although, as the BBC article later notes, these promises were never kept). And that’s about it, as far as the positives go.

Of course, we all understand the BBC’s duty to be impartial. No one expects or wants the Beeb to produce tub-thumping op-eds denouncing and condemning various world leaders. But this hamfisted attempt at balance ends up severely downplaying Raisi’s brutality. It’s as if a few well-intentioned (and failed) social policies can somehow cancel out decades of violent Islamist repression.


U.S. "Day After" Proposals Will Only Bolster Hamas
While Secretary of State Antony Blinken has criticized Israel's conduct in Gaza for not achieving "an enduring result" on the ground, the same could be said about the reality in northern Samaria. In Jenin and the Tulkarm area, IDF forces go in, arrest or eliminate targets, and withdraw - only to see terror elements rear their heads again, forcing a continuous cycle of operations. Nevertheless, no one has doubted the necessity of such action.

This has been refined into an almost official policy called "mowing the grass," the belief that the fight against terror is an ongoing process, not a one-time thing. The Hamas order of battle in Gaza still includes thousands of fighters, ammunition, weaponry, and tunnels. In such a situation, the debate over the "day after" is akin to arguing over the skin of a bear that has yet to be hunted.

The truth must be told: There are no good options in Gaza. If there were, they would have been implemented over the years of conflict. Israel did not enter this war to find a replacement for Hamas but to destroy it. That is the goal. Given the current balance of power in Gaza, no entity can replace Hamas in the civilian administration of the Strip without its consent. This applies to the "Palestinian Authority," the "Dahlan camp," "technocratic ministers," or local "clan" leaders.

Given this situation, it must be stated that even after seven months, the conditions for establishing an alternative to Hamas' rule have not yet matured. From Israel's perspective, the question of the "day after" in Gaza is secondary to the more important goal: destroying Hamas' military and governing capabilities and restoring Israeli deterrence. Israel must not be tempted by proposals that provide the appearance of a solution while leaving the problem intact.
The PA's Return to Gaza Is Impractical and Unwanted
PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas was severely criticized for his remarks at the Arab Summit in Manama, Bahrain, on May 16, 2024. Abbas blamed Hamas for providing Israel with reasons to attack Gaza. In February, he urged Hamas to complete a deal for the release of Israeli hostages to prevent further disaster for Palestinians.

Despite pressure from the Biden administration for the PA to manage Gaza post-war, the Israeli government does not see the PA as a viable option. Prime Minister Netanyahu views the PA as a promoter of terrorism, pointing to its failure to condemn the Oct. 7 massacre, its practice of paying salaries to terrorists, and its incitement against Israel in its educational and media systems.

The PA's legitimacy is questioned on the Palestinian street, where it is seen as corrupt and unfit to govern the West Bank and Gaza. The PA's refusal to hold general elections exacerbates this distrust, as many believe Abbas would lose.

The Gazan public harbors significant animosity towards Abbas, who imposed sanctions on Gaza in 2018 to incite rebellion against Hamas. The Biden administration is also disappointed with the PA, labeling the new technocratic government led by Mohammad Mustafa a puppet of Abbas.

Moreover, the PA's loss of security control in northern Samaria to Iranian-backed terrorist groups raises further doubts about its ability to manage Gaza. It is unlikely that PA security personnel would confront Hamas' armed terrorists.
Mayor of Sderot: 'The leadership of the country abandoned us for years'
Alon Davidi, Mayor of Sderot, harshly criticized Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on Friday morning following his harsh words against the prime minister and his political performance. Davidi spoke about the situation of residents of the South, some of whom have returned to their homes but continue to live with sporadic rocket fire from Gaza.

"I watched the political speech of the defense minister with concern. After dozens of rockets were fired at the city of Sderot, instead of informing us that he was going to instruct the IDF to stay in Beit Hanoun, Beit Lahia, and prevent the strengthening and return of Hamas to act, I heard a political speech. It was a bit strange," he said at the beginning of the conversation.

"I am a Zionist Jew who loves the city of Sderot, our country, the IDF, and everyone," Davidi continued. "So do all the residents of Sderot. I didn't call on anyone to come back, and I didn't tell anyone not to come back. The leadership of the country abandoned us for years. Since 2001, this is our reality. The leadership of the country and the army abandoned us on October 7, and what I am asking of them is not to abandon us again."

Following a critical comment about Gantz, Davidi said, "I simply try to understand what kind of lunatic imagines that if he spends a million shekels due to Hamass' threat to the northern Gaza Strip, it will do good? To bring in the Palestinian Authority and all kinds of factors and think it will be good? At least take responsibility. If you are already exploiting the residents, then give answers to the residents of the North. Yesterday, fifty percent of school students in Sderot did not come. Where is the statement of the defense minister? Neither he nor the prime minister ever address the residents of the north or the residents of the south. When they do, it is only on a statistical level."
Gaza aid piles up in Egypt, US pier delivery falters
Food and medicine for Palestinians in Gaza are piling up in Egypt because the Rafah crossing remains closed and there has been no aid delivered to a U.N. warehouse from a U.S.-built pier for two days, U.N. officials warned on Monday.

Senior U.N. aid official Edem Wosornu said there were insufficient supplies and fuel to provide any meaningful level of support to the people of Gaza as they endure Israel's military onslaught against Hamas militants.

"We are running out of words to describe what is happening in Gaza. We have described it as a catastrophe, a nightmare, as hell on earth. It is all of these, and worse," she said. She told the U.N. Security Council that the closure of Rafah crossing from Egypt had stopped the delivery of at least 82,000 metric tonnes of supplies, while access at Israel's Kerem Shalom crossing was limited due to "hostilities, challenging logistical conditions, and complex coordination procedures."

Egypt said on Monday that the crossing is closed due to the threat posed to aid work by Israel's military operation.
Biden Admin To Rely on Hamas-Linked UNRWA As Gaza Pier Effort Ramps Up
The Biden administration says it is channeling aid for a pier system built off the coast of the Gaza Strip through the entirety of the United Nations’ humanitarian infrastructure, comments that come after a top U.S. official confirmed the United States is still relying on the Hamas-linked Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) for aid distribution. But officials from across the administration will not detail the extent of UNRWA’s involvement in their ongoing humanitarian efforts.

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which is leading U.S. aid operations, said last week that "the entire U.N. family should and will be able to benefit from the distribution networks" established through America’s aid pier. "It is definitely a U.N.-wide participation," Daniel Dieckhaus, USAID’s response director, told reporters during a Wednesday briefing.

Samantha Power, USAID’s top official, said on Friday the pier is part of a joint aid operation led by the United States, Arab nations, the U.N., and international donors. Power, during an April 10 briefing before Congress, said, "UNRWA infrastructure is still being relied upon, including by USAID's partners" to deliver aid into the Gaza Strip. UNRWA, Power said at the time, is "at the heart of the response" to the humanitarian situation, and is being used by the U.S. government even after Congress froze American funding to the organization as a result of its ties to Hamas and participation by some of its employees in the terror group’s Oct. 7 attack on Israel.

As the pier becomes active and aid begins to be distributed, Biden administration officials from USAID, the State Department, and the Defense Department will not disclose the extent of UNRWA’s involvement in their effort to pump humanitarian goods into the Hamas-controlled territory. America’s ties to UNRWA are driving opposition on Capitol Hill, with Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas), telling the Washington Free Beacon that the Biden administration is trying to circumvent congressional prohibitions on U.S. support for the aid group.

"The Biden administration is using the Gaza Pier to do an end-run around Congress and funnel resources through UNRWA, which means they're funneling resources to Hamas," Cruz said. "It's another disgraceful example of just how far they are willing to go as part of their pathological obsession with undermining Israel."
Goods from Aid Packages on Sale at Inflated Prices in Gaza Markets
Wartime vendors lined a street in Deir al Balah, Gaza, selling entire aid parcels - still emblazoned with the flags of their donating countries and meant to be distributed for free.

"Most of the goods found in the markets are labeled, 'Not for sale,'" said Issam Hamouda, 51. Humanitarian aid and looted items end up in makeshift markets.

Hamouda said that the aid his family occasionally received came from the Hamas-run Ministry of Social Development. He said packages were often missing items - especially sugar, dates or cooking oil.

The food items that go missing from aid parcels eventually end up in markets sold at high prices.

In the years before the war, the economy in Gaza was beginning to improve, according to economists and Gazan businesspeople.

Beachside hotels and restaurants were opening. More Palestinians got permits to work in Israel and earned good salaries.

All of those gains - and more - have been lost.


Israeli inspectors take down Associated Press webcam on Gaza border
Israel’s Communications Ministry on Tuesday seized an Associated Press webcam in the southern town of Sderot, accusing the agency of airing troop movements in the Gaza Strip and providing services to Al Jazeera, in violation of a law that prohibits the outlet from operating in the country.

“The confiscated camera broadcast the northern Gaza Strip live on the Al Jazeera channel in violation of the law,” the Ministry of Communications said in a statement shared with JNS, adding that the AP live feed revealed “the activities of the IDF forces and endangered our fighters.”

“The AP agency was warned last week that, according to the law and the government’s decision, they are prohibited from providing broadcasts to Al Jazeera,” the missive claimed. “However, they chose to continue the channel’s broadcast, which caused real harm to state security.”

The confiscated equipment was said to include a camera, tripod, two microphones and live broadcasting equipment.

“Following the government’s decision and the order of the minister of communications, the Ministry of Communications will continue to carry out enforcement actions in so far as is necessary to limit broadcasts that harm the security of the state,” concluded the statement.

Tuesday’s action followed the Cabinet’s approval on May 5 of action under a Knesset law passed last month to outlaw Al Jazeera.

The Knesset voted 71-10 for the bill that gave Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the authority to shut down the Qatari broadcaster, which Jerusalem has accused of aiding the Hamas terrorist group in Gaza.

The bill states that the communications minister may act against a foreign channel that harms the state’s security, with the consent of the prime minister and the approval of the cabinet or the government.


With Most Civilians Moved Safely, Is the U.S. Still Opposed to the IDF's Rafah Operation?
Israel has resolved the debate with the U.S. over whether Palestinian civilians taking refuge in Rafah could be moved without a mass loss of civilian life. Israel said "yes," and the U.S. said "no." Between 2/3 and 80% of the Palestinian civilian population has now been moved out of Rafah with a minimal number of casualties in under two weeks.

American concerns about harm to Rafah civilians were not realized. If those concerns led Washington to threaten an offensive arms embargo against Israel, then perhaps that threat can now be removed.


The Commentary Magazine Podcast: Condolences for Evil
Hosted by Abe Greenwald, Christine Rosen, John Podhoretz & Matthew Continetti
Why did American institutions express sorrow at the passing of Iran’s monstrous president? Why does anyone pay attention to the International Criminal Court? Why is an awful academic named Dov Waxman running a Jewish studies program at UCLA? Why did Biden say he was vice president during COVID? Why did the judge in the Trump case get all hysterical about a case of “side eye”?


Disinformation Wars Ep43: Israel’s messaging challenges
In this episode of DISINFORMATION WARS, host Ilan Berman talks to former Israeli government spokesman Eylon Levy about his experience on Israel’s informational front lines, and the areas where Israel needs to improve in order to get its message out in today’s increasingly contested and hostile global media environment.

BIO: Eylon Levy is the host of the State of a Nation Podcast and a former Israeli Government Spokesman, representing Israel on international television and radio in the October 7 War with Hamas. He previously served as International Media Advisor to President Isaac Herzog after a career as a television news anchor.
“You Advocate For The DEVIL” Professor DEFENDS Dead Iran President Raisi
On the 19th of May, a military helicopter carrying Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi, crashed near Varzaqan, Iran killing everyone onboard. The world has been shocked by what Raisi’s death could mean for the country and the region. Piers Morgan speaks to University of Tehran Professor, Mohammad Marandi, who furiously defends Raisi as a popular figure and calls out the hypocrisy of western governments. Piers’ in-studio guest, IDF spokesperson Jonathan Conricus retorts that “The Butcher of Tehran is a good description” for Raisi, and claims that the Islamic regime in Iran is the source of terrorism all around the world.

00:46 - Professor Marandi reacts to the death of President Raisi
01:40 - “The Butcher of Iran’s" death greeted by women in Iran celebrating
02:24 - “I think the real monsters are much closer to home” says Professor Marandi
04:40 - “Iran will see during the funeral ceremony just how popular he was” Says Professor Marandi
06:53 - Mahsa Amini, and women in Iran
09:01 - Piers asks Marandi: Do you think women should be free to dress how they wish?
12:04 - Protests in Iran against the regime
15:16 - Piers asks Israeli Spokesperson Jonathan Conricus “Was Raisi’s death deliberate?”
20:04 - ICC seeking arrest warrant for Netanyahu/ICC’s Charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity
25:23 - An Invasion of Rafah
27:30 - What happens next
37:10 - This didn’t start on October the 7th
38:00 - Mustafa Bargouti reacts to Jonathan Conricus’ discussion with Piers
40:26 - You cannot accuse every International Court in the world of being antisemitic or drunk with power
44:50 - No more impunity for anybody
45:04 - “Netanyahu was the war criminal”
45:16 - Was October the 7th Justified?




Nova Peris quits republican movement over Gaza split with co-chair Craig Foster
Olympic champion and former Labor senator Nova Peris has resigned as co-chair of the Australian Republican Movement in response to what she described as an “inaccurate and divisive” public intervention made by her fellow leader, Craig Foster.

Peris said her position with the ARM, a cause she has been prominently involved with since the lead-up to the failed 1999 referendum, was untenable following Foster’s publication of an open letter to FIFA and Football Australia calling for Australia to support Israel’s suspension from international football.

She said Foster’s emotive letter posted to his nearly 30,000 Instagram followers, which included a “flat-out wrong” statement about what the International Court of Justice had found about Israel’s conduct of the war in Gaza, risked sowing further social divisions.

“I don’t believe that inaccurate and divisive public statements like the one made to FIFA are appropriate,” Peris said in a statement to this masthead.

“Given our different styles of leadership and our different visions on how to promote dialogue, reconciliation and social cohesion, it is untenable for me to continue alongside Craig as co-chair of the ARM and I’ll be stepping down.”

Peris informed the Australian Republican Movement of her decision on Tuesday.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!
 

 

at