Gearing Up for Future Battles: International Criminal Court vs. U.S. Sanctions and Palestinian Displacement
As the world watches the escalating conflicts in the Middle East, the future of international justice hangs in the balance. This is particularly true when it comes to the actions of the United States and its allies in the region. With the International Criminal Court (ICC) poised to investigate high-ranking U.S. officials for their roles in facilitating Israeli war crimes, we need to understand what this means for international law, U.S. foreign policy, and humanitarian efforts in the region.
Unpacking the ICC Allegations and International Crimes by Trump and Biden
The Allegation
The International Criminal Court (ICC) Prosecutor, Karim Khan, has received a 172-paged communication from the DAWN (Defense of Democracy and Human Rights), which calls for the investigation of President Joe Biden, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin for their roles in aiding and abetting Israeli war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. The submission, backed by ICC-registered lawyers and war crimes experts, is a heavy allegation involving a monetary value of at least $17.9 billion of weapons transfers, intelligence sharing, and other aid.
The Trump Card: Sanctions, Disaster, and Accountability
According to Raed Jarrar, DAWN’s advocacy director, the former U.S. President Donald Trump has been attempting to obstruct ICC prosecution. “Trump isn’t just obstructing justice; he’s trying to burn down the courthouse to prevent anyone from holding Israeli criminals accountable,” he said.
The situation was as follows. Trump’s administration planned for the forced displacement of all Palestinians from Gaza, which should also merit ICC investigation for aiding and abetting Israeli crime and ordering forced transfer, a crime against humanity under the Rome Statute.
What follows is that the ICC may force the United States to account for past wrongdoings, which in turn could set precedent for action in eliciting such crimes in the future. This leads us to the bigger picture of international sanctions and their lasting impact.
The Potential Future of International Sanctions Related to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
Given the economic power the United States maintains, sanctions are a popular tool in international law. DAWN insists that the U.S.’s decision to repeatedly veto ceasefire resolutions at the UN Security Council further complicates future repercussions of a failed sanction.
The Legal Landscape
Understanding that this is a complex and changing domain, let’s explore what we know and expect with predictable trends in international law and U.S. anti-war policy.
The impending investigation may lay the groundwork for future accountability mechanisms, affecting not just the United States but also other countries accused of complicity in international crimes. What does this mean for the ICC going forward, as we seek to return crisis zones to stability amidst conflicts such as those in the Middle East or Ukraine?
Did you know?
One way to examine what could unfold in future battles is to look to past motions involving similar circumstances:
| Year/Case | U.S. Hits Back | Resolution |
|---|---|---|
| 1998 | US suspends peace talks in 1998 due to Palestinian terror attacks. Standouts include the 2002 massacre and Netanyahu’s assassination attempt. The problem here was that the Palestinian authority had no control over these bids, especially in Gaza and West Bank. | The Israeli-Palestinian peace process is dead. It enters a moment marked by vehement retribution. |
| 2016 | The United States, manoeuvring between photos of rockets on Israeli soil and propaganda banners across Palestine, leaves peaceful negotiations once more. | Palestine and Israel swap charges again, with Palestinians seeking George Bush for genocide |
There have been fluctuations throughout history, such as when Netanyahu left the Gaza strip or when Iran offered Palestine asylum. Some outcomes were more desirable than others, but what we know for certain is this: the Middle East’s history is deeply intertwined with international law. Its conflicts and resolutions often shape domestic lawmaking and the complex implementation of sanctions.
What Are The Potential Changes In US Policymaking?
The ICC’s communications call for heightened scrutiny that could change how the U.S. approaches past crimes and the dissemination of criminal acts.
Another risk is that these alternative narratives challenge USAID but may reconsider aid, especially – academic collaboration and risks following potential trade bans. Looking back on foreign policy in the United States, trusted allies have already been previously framed for implied involvement in Israeli clashes in military collaboration and arms sales, so this isn’t unchartered waters. If calls to the ICC branch are successful, they could ultimately shake up U.S. politics if Biden wants to avoid a messy battle over justice and troops.
The gridlocked process of politics in the Middle East threatens every faction involved. If displaced, Palestinians would not have the opportunity to integrate into society. Their rights, especially education and work, are questioned entirely.
However, there is immense risk. PAHM has been trying to reshape Gabanona using a reformist agenda, aiming to manipulate part of the plight and notions surrounding ISDP. COVID drew funds away from many organizations looking ahead to the PHC, but the Israeli healthcare system only progressed as their policies drew criticism.
The PLA’s progress appears significant, though real goals remain in play.
Clear-Cut Example: The 2010 Sanctions Against Iran.
There is enough evidence there that palm oil donations from the EU to Palestinians still fixed international sanctions. Regions dependent on agriculture, as agriculture, are a balancing act of law and finance. While many NGOs lease international funding towards bodies like UNICEF and USAID, others aim to prosecute them. While the fresh citizen base of the Muslim Brotherhood could take part, the objectives remain ambiguous.
User Q+A
- Question: What will happen if the U.S. is found guilty by the ICC?
Answer: Given the strain this could put on U.S.-International relations, especially as weighty charges as Biden were overlooked during the prosecution of Hussein, and thusly better known throughout Libya and Syria, criminalizing war activities in the U.S. may open fresh dialogue. The issue here isn’t necessarily with the ICC, however, but lies in the areas of capability. When talking to accused war criminals, the world needs documentation to move forward. However, direct court trials against Criminal Court undertaking are unlikely to grasp the nature of the real problem when assessing the calendar. As resolutions fluctuate from Gaza to information needed for flagged violence towards the West, there will need to be an improvement in approaches to capture useful insights.
Could a Future Without the ICC Be Possible in Foreign Relations?
Given the possible future threats when using the ICC’s jurisdiction, or dangerous pieces, where proxies are required to deter a range of force and policy – we may not have long before we see a shift in the landscape.
The issues are complex, however – situtions like Hastings Prepare a decay mechanism.
Planning for the Future: Expectations for 2025
The conflict will continue as local groups don’t ease their stance against Israel.
The purpose of investigations is to assess the likelihood of identifying weapon suppliers for Israel, like all fighters, those in hiding, being good enough to hide from Hamas.
Call to Action
As the ICC potentially embarks on a path to account for misaligned policy in the Gaza strip and beyond, consider exploring further:
Please comment to alert us of other links involving issues with this problem.