On Nov. 21, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, former Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and Hamas leader Mohammed Deif. ICC prosecutor Karim Khan had originally included Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh in the application for arrest warrants, but the two Hamas leaders were later killed by Israel. Israel has also said it killed Deif in an air strike, but there has not been confirmation of this.
The ICC warrants were in response to the Court’s determination that there were “reasonable grounds” to believe that the Israelis committed “the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts.” Regarding Deif, the Court argued there were also “reasonable grounds” to believe he had committed “crimes against humanity of murder; extermination; torture; and rape and other forms of sexual violence.” Deif was also believed to have committed war crimes, including hostage-taking and sexual violence.
The warrants are unlikely to change much in the current war. For Netanyahu, however, the ICC’s moves might provide a lifeline, however short-lived, as he struggles to maintain his hold on the prime minister’s office.
The chances of arrest are low
It is highly unlikely that Netanyahu and Gallant will ever face trial. The ICC does not have its own military or police force it can send to capture and bring individuals to The Hague for trial. This means the ICC must rely on countries to bring indictees in.
But leaders of established countries, like Netanyahu, have security forces behind them. Unless a leader is overthrown in a coup – as Sudan’s Omar al-Bashir was in 2019 – it would take considerable resources to fight through these institutions.
Heads of non-state organizations – like Mohammed Deif – also have armed guards or paramilitary groups protecting them. Past experience indicates there is typically a heavy cost in lives to capture these leaders. Most governments would not be willing to expend their resources towards this goal.
Several European leaders have already said they would comply with the ICC’s warrants and arrest Netanyahu if he visited these countries. But Israel’s army is the strongest in the Middle East, and Israel is a close ally of the United States. President Joe Biden has called the arrest warrants “outrageous.” Looking ahead, the next U.S. president is even less likely to push for the arrest of either Israeli leader, but because of Donald Trump’s disdain for international law and his suspicions of American friends and allies.
From Israel’s perspective, any effort to use soldiers or police to apprehend Israeli leaders will very likely be seen as a cause for war. Netanyah and Gallant can also avoid traveling to countries that accept the Court’s authority and have pronounced their intent to follow through with the arrest warrants. Since the Court does not try individuals unless they are present in the courtroom, the two Israelis probably feel quite safe.
A comparison to Russian President Vladimir Putin is useful. In early 2023, the ICC also issued an arrest warrant for Putin. Unlike Russia, Israel is well-integrated into global political, cultural, economic, and security networks. This would likely make it harder to isolate these two Israeli leaders, as has happened to Putin.
The rally-around-the-flag phenomenon
Could the ICC warrants actually give Netanyahu a domestic boost? He is unpopular in Israel. Many Israelis blame him for Israel’s lack of preparation for the Hamas attack on Oct. 7, 2023, mismanagement of the war since then, and the disruption of a potential deal for the return of Israeli hostages. On Dec. 10, Netanyahu is also set to testify at his own trial for corruption – a years-long process that has kept his legal troubles in the public eye.
The rally-around-the-flag effect refers to the coalescing of public support for a leader in the face of external threats. Political scientists have often used this concept to explain diversionary wars. That’s when leaders engage in conflicts with another country to try to distract from domestic political or economic problems.
The evidence is mixed on whether taking military action abroad diverts the population’s attention from the country’s internal troubles There are nuances that determine specific conditions under which such diversions are likely to occur, including whether the countries involved are democracies.
Israel is currently engaged in a war with Hamas and Hezbollah, with intermittent exchanges of fire with Iran and with the Houthis in Yemen as well. At the same time, Israeli Jews have long been distrusting of international institutions, believing them to be biased against Israel. For example, a September 2024 Pew Research Center survey of populations around the world found that among 35 countries, Israelis had the highest rate of unfavorable views of the United Nations, at 76%. Views in Turkey came the closest to those in Israel, with 60% holding an unfavorable view of the United Nations.
These factors suggest the arrest warrants will strengthen Netanyahu’s precarious domestic political position, at least in the short term. Even his political rivals have expressed their opposition to the warrants.
The arrest warrants and the subsequent rally-round-the-flag effect in Israel underline how likely it is that Netanyahu will overcome threats to his political position. He has been able, repeatedly, to survive domestic challenges to his power. A major reason for this is because Israeli Jews do not see any serious alternative to his leadership. Israel’s right-wing drift underscores this.
Political scientists have long argued that despite its limitations, international law still plays a vital role in world politics – even when countries or groups ignore these laws. For Israel, it’s quite possible the ICC’s efforts will have the unintended effect of boosting domestic support for Netanyahu and Gallant.
Brent E. Sasley is a 2024-2025 Good Authority fellow.