850 גג

International courts: a terrorist's last line of defense

Opinion: Originally intended to curtail horrific acts of genocide and ethnic cleansing, international tribunals have been co-opted by the very people they were designed to stop, putting democratic nations that follow the rules on trial

In theory, international law exists to protect innocent lives and prevent atrocities like genocide, ethnic cleansing and mass starvation. Yet, ever since the establishment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC), these institutions have arguably fallen short of their lofty goals.
Since World War II, where between 50 and 70 million people perished (most of them civilians), an additional 90 million lives have been lost to conflicts, with another 100 million succumbing to diseases and hunger resulting from these wars. Shockingly, according to UN estimates, 90% of these casualties are innocent civilians.
3 View gallery
בניין בית הדין הבינלאומי לצדק
בניין בית הדין הבינלאומי לצדק
International Court of Justice
(Photo: Shutterstock)
Rather than curbing violence and injustice, international courts have become instruments wielded by oppressive regimes and terrorist organizations to target democratic nations. Democratic states inherently strive to avoid committing crimes without needing external oversight. Conversely, it’s the oppressive states that urgently require such scrutiny.
Ironically, these very states and their sponsored entities show a blatant disregard for international tribunals. Instead, they manipulate these courts to accuse those who combat terrorism. The ICJ and ICC, conceived in response to the horrors of World War II and Nazism, now paradoxically serve entities like Hamas—a terrorist organization calling for the annihilation of Jews and embodying modern-day Nazism. Whom do these courts protect? Hamas. Whom do they target? Israel. This is the tragic paradox of international law.
A forthcoming report by the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP) highlights a disturbing reality: "South Africa serves as a crucial operational hub for Islamic terrorist groups, facilitating connections with terror networks across Africa... Entities linked to terrorism continue to operate freely within South Africa, evading international oversight." Essentially, South Africa acts as the enforcement arm of oppressive blocs, particularly Iran and Hamas, within the ICJ.
3 View gallery
Karim Khan, the incoming prosecutor at the ICC, pictured in Baghdad, July 27, 2019,
Karim Khan, the incoming prosecutor at the ICC, pictured in Baghdad, July 27, 2019,
ICC Chief Prosecutor Karim Khan
(Photo: AFP)
Julius Malema, a prominent South African politician who serves as the president of a group called "Economic Freedom Fighters", openly pledges to bolster support for terrorism and arm Hamas if he gains governmental power (with elections imminent). He also advocates for the murder of white people. Alarmingly, 27,494 murders occurred in South Africa last year alone—surpassing the inflated UN estimates of casualties in Gaza. Yet, this terror-supporting, violence-ridden state exploits the ICJ to wage its campaign against Israel.
The ICJ’s recent decision is a significant setback for Israel. It implies that no democratic nation can effectively combat a terrorist organization embedded within and backed by civilian populations. According to the logic of the ICJ judges, Britain committed crimes against Germany, the U.S. against Japan, and similarly in Iraq, Afghanistan and against ISIS. If this reasoning holds, injunctions should have been issued against all these nations.
Historically, before the establishment of the ICJ and ICC, actual war criminals faced trial in special courts, as seen in Nuremberg and Tokyo post-World War II. Today, however, there is no practical mechanism to hold Hamas accountable, even if an international tribunal ruled against them. These criminals could still traverse the oppressive bloc, from Ankara to Doha, Beijing, Johannesburg, and Moscow. What value does international law hold if it cannot punish the perpetrators of terror and oppression but might impede democratic nations from targeting these power centers? This is the essence of the recent rulings by the ICJ and ICC against Israel.
3 View gallery
Gaza's Hamas Chief Yehya Al-Sinwar talks to media, in Gaza City
Gaza's Hamas Chief Yehya Al-Sinwar talks to media, in Gaza City
Crying victimhood, Yahya Sinwar
(Photo: Reuters)
For Israel, the ICJ’s decision is a blow to its global image, particularly when paired with ICC prosecutor Karim Khan’s request for arrest warrants against top-tier Israeli politicians. Although the ICJ’s ruling technically permits continued fighting, global media are broadcasting headlines claiming, "the court issued an injunction against Israel regarding the continuation of the war."
This narrative appears to favor terrorism over justice. Unsurprisingly, Hamas quickly lauded the decision, which serves their interests. An organization dedicated to the destruction of Jews, akin to a modern Nazi entity, benefits from an international tribunal established to combat Nazism and its genocidal agenda. This is not the International Court of Justice; it is the International Court for the Support of Terrorism and Extermination.
<< Follow Ynetnews on Facebook | Twitter | Instagram >>
Comments
The commenter agrees to the privacy policy of Ynet News and agrees not to submit comments that violate the terms of use, including incitement, libel and expressions that exceed the accepted norms of freedom of speech.
""