ALBAWABA- The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, accusing them of serious violations of international law.
In response, the United States immediately rejected the decision, declaring that the ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel.
A White House spokesperson reaffirmed this stance, stating, "America categorically rejects the ICC’s arrest warrants" and asserting that Israel acted lawfully in defending its borders against terrorism.
President-elect Trump's National Security Advisor criticized the International Criminal Court (ICC), calling it lacking in credibility and accusing it of anti-Semitic bias.
He further stated that Israel acted lawfully in defending its people and borders against terrorist threats, hinting at a strong U.S. response to the ICC's actions in January.
Netanyahu criticized the ICC’s actions as “anti-Semitic,” while U.S. officials, including members of President-elect Trump’s team, dismissed the court’s credibility and vowed a strong response.
This U.S. position aligns with its historical support for Israel but has drawn sharp criticism for undermining international legal mechanisms.
Contrarily, global reactions showcased divided opinions. Leaders from Ireland and South Africa welcomed the ICC’s decision as a vital step toward accountability, with the Irish Prime Minister describing the charges as “the most serious.”
Human rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, praised the warrants as a stand for justice, countering impunity for grave crimes.
European nations like France and Belgium emphasized the importance of respecting the ICC’s independence, with Belgium affirming its obligation to comply with the court’s orders.
In the Middle East, Jordan’s Foreign Minister lauded the ICC decision as a call to action for the international community, particularly amidst the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
