The International Criminal Court (icc) issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant on November 21. According to the court’s press release, the warrants are “for crimes against humanity and war crimes committed from at least 8 October 2023 until at least 20 May 2024, the day the prosecution filed the applications for warrants of arrest.”

The icc also issued a warrant for Mohammed Deif, leader of Gaza’s military. The Israel Defense Forces (idf) claims it killed Deif in July, but the icc says it hasn’t seen significant proof of this. The court also examined charges against former Hamas leaders Ismail Haniyeh and Yahya Sinwar, who are confirmed to have been killed by the idf.

Israel is not a member of the Rome Statute, which established the icc in 2002. But since 2021, the “State of Palestine” is. Because Israel’s actions occurred on land the icc recognizes as the “State of Palestine,” the court claims jurisdiction.

The icc elaborated on its verdict:

The chamber considered that there are reasonable grounds to believe that both individuals intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population in Gaza of objects indispensable to their survival, including food, water, and medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity, from at least 8 October 2023 to 20 May 2024. This finding is based on the role of Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Gallant in impeding humanitarian aid in violation of international humanitarian law and their failure to facilitate relief by all means at its disposal. The chamber found that their conduct led to the disruption of the ability of humanitarian organizations to provide food and other essential goods to the population in need in Gaza.

Easily Disprovable

The allegations are ludicrous for several reasons:

1) The war crime of starvation has never been prosecuted before. War zones aren’t expected to have a free flow of essential goods in general. Political scientist Yuan Yi Zhu noted in the Spectator that “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 United Nations, the activities of Hamas and others. Are they liable to be prosecuted on the same charge?”

2) Russia in its war against Ukraine has admitted to using starvation as a weapon. Ukraine is one of the world’s largest exporters of grain. Russia targeted Ukrainian grain shipments in the Black Sea in the hope poorer nations would starve and the resulting international crisis would get the world to drop Russian sanctions. Russian state media admitted this was the shipping attack’s purpose. Though the icc charged Russian President Vladimir Putin, it did not include similar charges for starvation.

3) The icc implies Israel has total control over Gaza’s borders, but Gaza shares a border with Egypt. Egypt blockaded its border to refugee traffic, but the icc hasn’t accused Egypt of war crimes.

4) The icc’s press release admits Netanyahu allowed foreign aid into Gaza. But according to the court, these decisions “were not made to fulfill Israel’s obligations under international humanitarian law or to ensure that the civilian population in Gaza would be adequately supplied with goods in need,” but rather “a response to the pressure of the international community or requests by the United States of America.” In other words, the icc admits Netanyahu did allow humanitarian aid, but he didn’t allow it in the right mindset. The court is divining Netanyahu’s motives and claiming that is enough for a warrant.

5) Israel didn’t begin its ground invasion of Gaza until Oct. 27, 2023, yet the icc is claiming Israel could be guilty of war crimes as early as October 8 of that year, a mere day after Hamas initiated its war of aggression. This is the icc’s way of claiming any action Israel takes in self-defense is under suspicion of breaking international law.

Israel appealed the icc’s jurisdiction over the case per Article 18(1) of the Rome Statute. The article states that when the court’s prosecutor opens an investigation, it is required to notify all state parties relevant to the investigation. Israel claims it received no such notification. But the icc excused itself, saying, “The chamber recalled that the prosecution notified Israel of the initiation of an investigation in 2021.” The court claims “the parameters of the investigation in the situation have remained the same and, as a consequence, no new notification to the State of Israel was required.” Back then, Gaza was not a war zone like it is today. Back then, Israel did not face an unprovoked invasion of its sovereign borders by soldiers hunting down civilians.

There are 124 members of the Rome Statute, including Palestine. Many of the world’s major powers, including the United States, Russia, China and India are not members. But the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Japan and most of Latin America are. If either Netanyahu or Gallant enters the territory of any of these countries, he could be arrested and sent to The Hague to stand trial.

The reaction of the international community has been mixed. Hungary said it would openly flout the warrant and allow Netanyahu to visit. Canada and South Africa have indicated they would arrest Netanyahu. Other countries, such as France and Germany, have kept their responses ambiguous. Incoming U.S. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said the Senate under him would support sanctioning the icc. President Joe Biden has also expressed disapproval of the court’s decision.

There is one world leader whose opinion may be more consequential than the rest.

Papal Blessing

icc prosecutor Karim Khan requested the warrants on May 20. It took the three judges on the case six months to approve it. Yet the court took a mere 23 days last year to approve an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin for his kidnapping of Ukrainian children. Why did the court take so long this time around?

Arresting a democratic leader in a defensive war under spurious charges is unprecedented. The U.S. threatened sanctions on the icc if it proceeded with the warrant. The UK lobbied the court during the deliberation process to back off. The icc knew going after Netanyahu would be controversial. But a few days before the ruling, it got the green light from one of the most powerful men in the world.

On November 17, Italian daily La Stampa published an excerpt from Pope Francis’s new autobiography, Hope. The book was released on November 19 in Italian and Spanish. The excerpt in question reads:

In the Middle East, where the open doors of nations like Jordan or Lebanon continue to be a salvation for millions of people fleeing conflicts in the region: I am thinking above all of those who leave Gaza in the midst of the famine that has struck their Palestinian brothers and sisters given the difficulty of getting food and aid into their territory. According to some experts, what is happening in Gaza has the characteristics of a genocide. It should be carefully investigated to determine whether it fits into the technical definition formulated by jurists and international bodies.

When Pope Francis published this, Israel was being “investigated by jurists and international bodies”—by the International Criminal Court. Pope Francis knew what the icc was doing. He also knew that approving the warrant request would make Netanyahu a wanted man. At the very least, it would cause Israel major diplomatic problems. At most, it could land him in prison.

Two days after Francis released his autobiography, the icc announced its decision.

Did Francis’s endorsement give the icc judges the courage to go ahead with the warrants?

Francis is the head of the world’s largest religion. His comments at the very least put any traditionally Catholic country in an uncomfortable situation. Flouting the warrant could look like an open challenge to the pope.

Francis has yet to comment on the warrants’ approval. But state-run Vatican News published an article about the decision titled “War Crimes: Hague Court Issues Arrest Warrant for Netanyahu and Hamas Leaders.” Vatican News normally sticks to content involving the pope and the Catholic Church but decided to comment on Netanyahu’s case. The article focused on Hamas’s claimed death toll of Gazans without mentioning that Hamas doesn’t distinguish between civilian and military deaths. It even elaborated on Israeli strikes in Lebanon, which are beyond the scope of the icc probe. No mention was made of Hamas’s October 7 massacre or any significant discussion of Deif’s simultaneous warrant. Printing the article implies the Vatican agrees with the court’s decision.

The Political Pope

Since his 2013 election as pope, Francis has been one of the world’s biggest champions of progressive causes and human rights issues. He has also been remarkably politically active. He has regularly encouraged countries to be open to illegal migration. In 2014, he helped broker a normalization agreement between the U.S. and Communist Cuba. In 2018, he struck a deal with China that unified the Roman Catholic Church and the state-run Catholic Patriotic Association.

He has also been a vocal opponent of Israel. On his first trip to the Holy Land as pontiff in 2014, he visited the West Bank before going into Israel. While traveling between the two, he made an impromptu stop at a portion of Israel’s security fence near Bethlehem for a photo op. The famous spot on the wall has heavy graffiti comparing the West Bank to the Warsaw Ghetto in World War ii. He stood for photographs praying at a section near graffiti reading “Free Palestine.”

“The pope knows how to use symbolism,” Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry wrote of the visit, “and this is the symbol he created to show the world. It did not happen by accident! He created a photo op at that pace for all it symbolized—a ‘symbol of division,’ the Guardian calls it. That implies that it is a symbol of the Nazi spirit, with the Jews as Nazis.”

“The fact is,” Mr. Flurry continued, “the pope wanted the world to see this image. Forget about what happened in World War ii, he is saying. Isn’t he implying that the Jews are the Nazis today? Many people will think so. Look around Europe: Many Europeans are starting to believe that about the Jews.”

Calling Jews genocidal is the same as the pope’s 2014 implication that they are Nazis. If Israelis are Nazis, then that makes Netanyahu Israel’s “Hitler.” And if Israel is the Nazi regime of today, then Francis would have every motivation to urge organizations like the icc to have “Hitler” arrested.

The icc’s campaign against Netanyahu probably won’t go far. The U.S. sanctions against the icc could spell the end of the court. It is hurting itself more than anybody else by pursuing this warrant.

The spiritual leader of over a billion people worldwide—a man seen as the representative of God on Earth—endorsing and encouraging such an attack is an extremely worrisome harbinger. At the very least, it shows what the Vatican actually thinks about Israel.

As Mr. Flurry wrote, “The pope’s words and actions are a dark sign for the future of Europe and the world.” To learn more, read Mr. Flurry’s article “The Dark Side of the Pope’s Visit to Jerusalem.”