What does the ICC decision mean for the leaders of the occupying state?

The International Criminal Court's decision, which was long overdue against the occupation's Prime Minister Netanyahu and his dismissed Minister of War Galant, was due to the great pressures and threats that the President of the International Criminal Court, Karim Khan, and its judges faced from America, which sought to blackmail the President of the Court and its judges financially and personally, and threatened to impose sanctions on the International Criminal Court if it proceeded to issue an arrest warrant against the leaders of the occupation. According to the American description, these courts were only established for Arabs, Africans, and rogue presidents or thugs such as Russian President Putin, and not to try American leaders, officers, soldiers, and leaders of Western countries, or their "democratic" allies such as the leaders of the occupation state. These leaders whose "humanity drips from their faces", and whose hands were not "stained" with the blood of innocent children and women in the Gaza Strip, and did not practice starvation, siege, killing, persecution, and inhumane practices against them according to the decision of the International Criminal Court. This decision will create a state of confusion, anxiety and fear, and will increase the intensity of divisions and conflicts within Israel. This decision was described by the leader of the Israeli opposition, Yair Lapid, as a political failure, while the leader of the so-called National Camp, Benny Gantz, described it as moral blindness and an unforgettable historical disgrace. As for Ben Gvir, the leader of the Jewish Power Party, he said that this is an unparalleled disgrace, and this decision must be confronted by increasing settlements and annexing the West Bank, increasing pressure on the Palestinian Authority, severing relations with it, and imposing sanctions on it. Meanwhile, the former Prime Minister of the occupation, Naftali Bennett, said that the judges of the court should be ashamed, not Israel. Likewise, the leader of the Republican majority in the US Senate, John Thune, before this decision was issued, threatened to impose sanctions on the International Criminal Court, describing it as a bad court. The same did the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the occupation, Gideon Sa’ar, by describing this decision as illegitimate, and that it represents a black stage in the history of this court, which has become a political tool, according to his description, in the hands of those working to undermine international security and peace, and that this decision is illegitimate and lacks an executive mechanism, while the Prime Minister of the occupation said Netanyahu said the decision was anti-Semitic, and Israeli Transportation Minister Miri Regev called the arrest warrants a legal absurdity.

This late decision was a step in the right direction, and a qualitative development in 76 years in questioning and issuing arrest warrants against the leaders of the occupying state, and accusing them of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity. It constitutes a political and diplomatic victory, par excellence, for the Palestinians, and a victory for all the free people of the world and supporters of the oppressed and wronged in the world, and a victory for the Arabs and Muslims, even if they are not up to the challenge, support and backing in this regard. Perhaps one of the effects and repercussions of this decision is that the occupation government will take dramatic steps in the processes of annexation, Judaization, expulsion and displacement, and control of the Ibrahimi Mosque, as an Israeli Knesset member from the Likud said, "The Ibrahimi Mosque must be controlled meter by meter, that is, completely Judaize it, and we must not forget that this will push towards progress in the Judaization of Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa."

This decision will have dimensions that go beyond the judicial and legal aspects, and will have repercussions in Palestinian, Arab and international dimensions. It may push America to take revenge on the President of the International Court and its judges, limit their movement, and perhaps punish them financially. It may also stop funding the International Criminal Court, and will ask its allies to stop funding the court, just as it did in “demonizing” the United Nations Relief and Refugee Agency (UNRWA) and cutting off its funding, based on Israeli accusations against a number of its employees, no more than the fingers of one hand, of participating in the battle of October 7, 2023, without providing conclusive evidence and proof. This prompted Western European countries to re-fund the agency, which Israel later proceeded to sever relations with, consider it an illegal organization, and cancel the economic and political privileges granted to its employees.

This decision will deepen the crisis and siege of Israel on the international level, in terms of defining relations with it by the countries of the world, stopping trade and economic dealings, severing relations with it, and even preventing the export of weapons to it. We have seen how Australia prevented the former Israeli Minister of Justice, Ayelet Shaked, from entering its territory for fear of incitement and protests.

In light of this decision, the normalization process between the occupying state and some Arab regimes will suffer a fatal blow, and will put sticks in its cogs, and will prevent its wheels from turning. This will also constitute support and backing for South Africa and the countries that participated alongside it, and joined it in filing a lawsuit against Israel before the International Court of Justice, in which Israel is accused of committing crimes of genocide and crimes against humanity.

Israel, which is using starvation as a weapon in the Gaza Strip, specifically in its northern regions, preventing the entry of sufficient humanitarian aid, and committing crimes of genocide and ethnic cleansing, as the Hebrew newspaper Haaretz said in an editorial five days ago, that ethnic cleansing there is being practiced on the orders of Netanyahu and the army leaders, this decision may “slow down” the measures, practices, operations of repression, abuse, expulsion, displacement, and destruction that Israel is carrying out.

America is a direct partner in the crimes committed against the Palestinian people, through the political and legal cover it provides to Israel, and the military and financial support it provides. The effects of its use of the veto for the fourth time against a permanent ceasefire in the Gaza Strip on 19-11-2024 may be contained, and it will be a pressure factor on America, which has become alone in its continued support for the occupation’s crimes in the Gaza Strip, and which we expect will impose financial sanctions on the international institution.

This decision will provide university students, civil society organizations, social movements, and the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement with the opportunity to escalate their struggles, campaigns, and popular protests, and to demand an end to dealing with Israel, stopping trade, economic, and academic relations with it, and calling for the withdrawal of investments from it.

Netanyahu, who described the decision as anti-Semitic and that the court is targeting him, will provide him with a great opportunity to achieve a Zionist national consensus around him, condemning the International Criminal Court, considering that he is being subjected to a fierce campaign while he is leading the war to “defend the existence of the state,” and that he will seek through his populism to enhance his popularity and presence in Israeli society, especially among the right and extreme right, and he will also seek to portray himself as the victim of his victims among the Palestinians and their friends and supporters in the world.

This decision, if it is dealt with and dealt with properly by Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims, and if all Arab energies, capabilities and capacities are employed, including oil and gas wealth, as well as dealing with America and Western Europe on the basis of interests, such that these countries feel that their interests in the Arab world will be threatened if they continue to support the crimes of the occupying state, and if the Arab countries that have normalized relations with Israel and have peace agreements and treaties review them, this may lead to increasing pressure on Israel and its allies to stop its aggression against the Palestinian people and open real prospects for ending the occupation, and creating real possibilities for progress towards a political solution that achieves for the Palestinian people part of their legitimate rights, by establishing a Palestinian state on part of the lands of historical Palestine.