Israel's Contempt for International Justice and Its Impact on the World Order | Politics News

On July 19 of this year, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion entitled “Legal Consequences of the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and East Jerusalem,” in which it concluded that Israel’s occupation and annexation of the Palestinian territories is illegal, and that its laws and policies against Palestinians constitute racial discrimination.

Prior to that, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court had announced on May 20 that he had submitted a request to issue arrest warrants against senior officials in the Israeli entity on charges of involvement in committing genocide and crimes against humanity in the war on Gaza.

This is not the first time that the Israeli entity has found itself facing international justice, but it has systematically and deliberately become accustomed to showing its disdain for all principles of international law and the rulings of international judicial bodies issued against it. Its prime minister described the recent advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice as “wrong” and “false.”

His reaction to the requests of the International Criminal Court Prosecutor to issue arrest warrants against Israeli officials was more severe and extreme, because it was the first time that the leaders of the entity were personally threatened with arrest warrants.

This reaction has reached the point of threatening the International Criminal Court and the Prosecutor General himself, and the entity’s Foreign Minister stated that he will speak with the Foreign Ministers of major countries, and all over the world, so that they oppose the decision of the Prosecutor General, and announce that even if these orders are issued, they do not intend to implement them on the leaders of “Israel.”

No one expects the Israeli entity to comply with the rules of international legitimacy, as it was originally established, expanded and extended outside its framework.

This entity was born by the will of the victorious countries in World War II in the same year in which these countries completed the establishment of the rules of the new world order, and the goal was to ensure the achievement of their interests in times of peace without the need to resort to force and war.

Therefore, there was a thought to establish an international legal system based on protecting interests that were wrapped in a cover of human principles and values ​​such as justice, peace, human rights, and others. The most powerful countries became the supreme authority that imposed the application of these rules selectively and in a manner that served their interests, by limiting the authority to implement the decisions of international judicial bodies to the Security Council, in which these countries have the right to veto.

As a result, the Israeli entity has come to feel that it is above the international legal system and has absolute immunity in the face of international judicial rulings.

Therefore, he revolts when he is targeted by the rulings of international justice, because he believes that the entire international system and its institutions must be in the service of his interests, which are in fact the interests of the major countries that protect and support him, because his existence and continuation represent a vital interest that all the rules and institutions of the international system must be in the service of.

The entity's disregard for international judicial rulings theoretically supports a popular thesis among legal scholars about whether the rules of international law are actually binding legal rules.

This is because the rule of law is a general and binding rule, because it is directed to all those addressed by it without exception, and it is binding because it is attached to a penalty imposed by a legitimate higher authority whose will is above the will of all, while there is no such authority in the international community. Rather, the international system is based on a small number of countries monopolizing the authority of the final decision and imposing the matter by force if necessary through the Security Council, which is considered the body enforcing international law.

When it comes to the Palestinian issue in particular, the United States of America is ready at all levels of international institutions to defend the Israeli entity and protect it from any accountability, and even deny its crimes, as stated by the spokesman for the US National Security Council, John Kirby, who according to him, “his administration has not seen any evidence indicating that the occupation army violated the rules of international humanitarian law in its aggression against Gaza,” despite the fact that the toll of this aggression has reached 40,000 martyrs, most of whom were civilians.

Thus, the fate of the rules of international law and the rulings of international courts has been linked from the beginning to the will of states and the extent of their strength to defend their interests by harnessing the tools, principles and values ​​of law.

Despite the minimal level of compliance with the rules of international law even by the most powerful and influential countries in the world, the Israeli entity’s disregard for international judicial institutions and its disdain for their decisions by the United States of America and its backing have proven that the effectiveness of the international legal system is linked to the existence of interests, not to the protection of principles, and that when the institutions of this system stand in the face of the interests of the major countries, they directly criticize them, undermine their credibility and threaten them, even though they are the ones who designed this system and established its rules.

This is confirmed by the violent reaction of politicians in the United States of America against the recent decision of the International Court of Justice.

“The International Court of Justice should go to hell,” Republican Senator Lindsey Graham said. “It is long past time to stand up to these so-called international justice organizations that are tied to the United Nations. Their bias against Israel is overwhelming.”

But Graham himself has backed the International Criminal Court issuing an arrest warrant for Russian President Vladimir Putin over the war in Ukraine, saying “tolerating and forgetting Putin’s war crimes would irreversibly damage the international order based on the rule of law, which was established at the end of World War II.”

US President Joe Biden also considered the request by the International Criminal Court prosecutor to issue arrest warrants against Israeli officials as “outrageous.”

In the same context, 12 members of the US Senate signed a statement in which they explicitly threatened the Attorney General and the International Criminal Court with US sanctions, saying, “Target Israel and we will target you.”

The United States of America is thus losing its credibility due to its absolute support for the Israeli entity, and its image as the leader of the free world governed by the principles of justice, the rule of law and human rights is being destroyed. The entity’s disdain for international law is accelerating the erosion and collapse of the international justice system due to the growing conviction that this system is nothing more than an embodiment of a system of interests protected by the rules of law, and that its principles can always be tampered with and the obligations it imposes can be evaded without fear of any penalty or consequences.

Observers, political analysts, and even international law experts agree that the Palestinian issue poses the most difficult challenge to the international legal system, and represents a test of the effectiveness of this system in maintaining global security and peace every time the Israeli entity violates the rules of international law.

It is unfortunate to say that until now the international justice system has failed to protect the Palestinian people and guarantee their legitimate rights. For more than 300 days, this system has been unable to stop the most heinous crimes in modern history committed by the entity in Gaza.

With the absence of deterrence as the essence of any criminal policy in the international justice system, and the repeated impunity of the Israeli entity – despite its continued commission of crimes for decades – it has become certain to all international judicial bodies that they amount to crimes against humanity, doubts have increased about the effectiveness of the current international system in achieving the goals of peace and justice in the world.

But the most pressing questions now relate to whether the failure of the international justice system is due to shortcomings in its rules and mechanisms such that they can be restored and reformed, or whether it is necessary to recognize that the international community cannot be organized except according to the logic of power, which dictates that the strongest is the one who sets the rules and chooses when and to whom they are applied, and whenever this strongest falls, his system falls with him. As the lessons of history have proven, there is no escape, then, for those who want to achieve justice for themselves or others, except to strive to be the strongest, or at least to find a seat at the table of the strong.