Additional Resources
Top Commentators:
- Elliott Abrams
- Fouad Ajami
- Shlomo Avineri
- Benny Avni
- Alan Dershowitz
- Jackson Diehl
- Dore Gold
- Daniel Gordis
- Tom Gross
- Jonathan Halevy
- David Ignatius
- Pinchas Inbari
- Jeff Jacoby
- Efraim Karsh
- Mordechai Kedar
- Charles Krauthammer
- Emily Landau
- David Makovsky
- Aaron David Miller
- Benny Morris
- Jacques Neriah
- Marty Peretz
- Melanie Phillips
- Daniel Pipes
- Harold Rhode
- Gary Rosenblatt
- Jennifer Rubin
- David Schenkar
- Shimon Shapira
- Jonathan Spyer
- Gerald Steinberg
- Bret Stephens
- Amir Taheri
- Josh Teitelbaum
- Khaled Abu Toameh
- Jonathan Tobin
- Michael Totten
- Michael Young
- Mort Zuckerman
Think Tanks:
- American Enterprise Institute
- Brookings Institution
- Center for Security Policy
- Council on Foreign Relations
- Heritage Foundation
- Hudson Institute
- Institute for Contemporary Affairs
- Institute for Counter-Terrorism
- Institute for Global Jewish Affairs
- Institute for National Security Studies
- Institute for Science and Intl. Security
- Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center
- Investigative Project
- Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs
- RAND Corporation
- Saban Center for Middle East Policy
- Shalem Center
- Washington Institute for Near East Policy
Media:
- CAMERA
- Daily Alert
- Jewish Political Studies Review
- MEMRI
- NGO Monitor
- Palestinian Media Watch
- The Israel Project
- YouTube
Government:
Back
(Spectator-UK) Dr. Yuan Yi Zhu - In issuing arrest warrants against Israeli leaders for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has undermined - perhaps fatally - its own credibility, as well as prospects for a peace settlement in Gaza. The process was compromised from the very beginning, when the ICC prosecutor, Karim Ahmad Khan, convened a "Panel of Experts in International Law" to provide support for his decision to seek the warrants. The panel's entire membership was selected by Khan, which raised concerns about its impartiality. As Lord Macdonald, the former Director of Public Prosecutions, pointed out in September 2024, at least two of the Panel's members had publicly accused Israel of international crimes beforehand, while at least two others had personal links to the prosecutor. The charges themselves are legally problematic. Netanyahu and Gallant are accused of using starvation as a method of warfare, which would be a war crime. Yet as Dr. Emanuela-Chiara Gillard, a leading expert in the law concerning civilian protection, pointed out, the mere existence of food insecurity in a war zone does not mean that a crime has been committed. Many of the issues with aid delivery in Gaza are caused by self-imposed limitations by aid agencies and the UN, the activities of Hamas, and others. Are they liable to be prosecuted on the same charge? Even more troubling is the fact that the Court had no jurisdiction at all to issue these warrants. A fundamental principle of international law is that a state is not bound to the jurisdiction of an international court unless it has agreed to do so. But Israel, like three of the UN's five permanent members, has chosen to not join the ICC, as is its sovereign prerogative, so the ICC does not have jurisdiction over its nationals. As Professor Richard Ekins KC of the University of Oxford writes, the lawfare against Israel only damages the credibility of the institutions that engage in it. The writer is a senior fellow at Policy Exchange and an assistant professor of international relations and international law at Leiden University. 2024-11-24 00:00:00Full Article
The ICC Has Destroyed Its Own Credibility
(Spectator-UK) Dr. Yuan Yi Zhu - In issuing arrest warrants against Israeli leaders for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has undermined - perhaps fatally - its own credibility, as well as prospects for a peace settlement in Gaza. The process was compromised from the very beginning, when the ICC prosecutor, Karim Ahmad Khan, convened a "Panel of Experts in International Law" to provide support for his decision to seek the warrants. The panel's entire membership was selected by Khan, which raised concerns about its impartiality. As Lord Macdonald, the former Director of Public Prosecutions, pointed out in September 2024, at least two of the Panel's members had publicly accused Israel of international crimes beforehand, while at least two others had personal links to the prosecutor. The charges themselves are legally problematic. Netanyahu and Gallant are accused of using starvation as a method of warfare, which would be a war crime. Yet as Dr. Emanuela-Chiara Gillard, a leading expert in the law concerning civilian protection, pointed out, the mere existence of food insecurity in a war zone does not mean that a crime has been committed. Many of the issues with aid delivery in Gaza are caused by self-imposed limitations by aid agencies and the UN, the activities of Hamas, and others. Are they liable to be prosecuted on the same charge? Even more troubling is the fact that the Court had no jurisdiction at all to issue these warrants. A fundamental principle of international law is that a state is not bound to the jurisdiction of an international court unless it has agreed to do so. But Israel, like three of the UN's five permanent members, has chosen to not join the ICC, as is its sovereign prerogative, so the ICC does not have jurisdiction over its nationals. As Professor Richard Ekins KC of the University of Oxford writes, the lawfare against Israel only damages the credibility of the institutions that engage in it. The writer is a senior fellow at Policy Exchange and an assistant professor of international relations and international law at Leiden University. 2024-11-24 00:00:00Full Article
Search Daily Alert
Search:
|