In an article I published in the Calgary Herald in November 1999, I wrote that “it is conceivable that some international tribunal may someday indict an Israeli leader for war crimes.”
Might this soon come to pass?
On Dec. 30, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas signed the Rome Statute, paving the way for membership in the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague.
Palestinian chances of joining the ICC improved in 2012 after the United Nations General Assembly voted to upgrade their status to that of a “non-member observer state.”
These are not easy days for Israel.
The summer war with Hamas in Gaza, whatever the military outcome, was largely negative from the standpoint of international opinion.
In Europe, more and more countries are moving towards recognition of a Palestinian state, even in the absence of a peace treaty with Israel, recognized borders, the final status of Jerusalem, and other critical issues.
The legislatures of Great Britain, Ireland, France, Portugal, Spain, and Sweden have all urged their governments to take this step.
In the United Nations, only the American veto on the Security Council prevents even more drastic international sanctions of various sorts.
Membership in the ICC could see the Palestinians pursue Israel on war crimes charges. The ICC can prosecute individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed since July 1, 2002, when the Rome Statute came into force. Israel is not a member of the ICC and does not recognize its jurisdiction.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded by asserting, “It is the Palestinian Authority, which is in a unity government with Hamas, an avowed terrorist organization that, like ISIS, perpetrates war crimes, that needs to be concerned about the International Criminal Court in the Hague.”
The move to join the ICC is part of a strategic shift by the Palestinian leadership to pursue statehood in the international arena after years of failed U.S.-brokered negotiations with Israel. At the same time, Abbas also signed applications to join 20 other international conventions.
All of this follows the narrow rejection of a UN Security Council resolution demanding an end to the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territories by late 2017.
Eight members of the 15-strong Security Council voted for the Jordanian-sponsored resolution, while the U.S. and Australia voted against. Five countries abstained. (It needed nine votes to pass.)
Permanent members China, France and Russia voted yes, while Britain abstained. Nigeria, which had been expected to vote in favor, changed its position at the last minute — thus preventing its passage.
Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said the resolution’s failure “should teach the Palestinians that provocations and attempts to force Israel into unilateral processes will not achieve anything.”
Lieberman’s gloating may be premature.
The composition of the Security Council will soon change, with newly-elected members Angola, Malaysia, New Zealand, Venezuela and Spain — none particularly enamored of Israel — replacing Argentina, Australia, Luxembourg, the Republic of Korea and Rwanda for two-year terms.
Since South Korea and Rwanda abstained, while Australia was opposed, the same resolution may get nine votes if re-introduced in 2015, necessitating the embarrassment of an American veto.
As for Abbas’ plan to join the ICC, given Washington’s displeasure with the decision, it could prove counterproductive. “There will be immediate American and Israeli financial sanctions,” declared Khalil Shikaki, director of the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah.
A U.S. State Department spokesman has warned that it would only “push the parties further apart.” Meanwhile, Netanyahu will be facing the Israeli electorate in March, and is certainly in no mood to compromise.
Henry Srebrnik is a professor of political science at the University of Prince Edward Island.
