He is, but many heads of state already declared they are going to ignore that should Netanjahu fancy a visit.

The hypocrisy is stunning.

you say "many" but other than "fotzenfrize" Merz who declared this?

The US isn't a member of the ICC. Clinton signed it, but the senate never ratified the treaty.

France apparently allowed several times the suspect to fly over its territory without arresting him, for instance.

France has a deep history and Macron doesn't want to do anything except raise the defense budget, because that's the best way to avoid problems: condemn violence but don't participate and stay alert.

Hamas leaders are being killed faster then the ICC can get them. That is the ICC's fault of course.

There were zero dead Hamas leaders on Oct 8, but the ICC did nothing, and did not care. Not to mention there are living Hamas leaders in Qatar, today, and the ICC? Does nothing.

They are a joke.

It's a court, not a military force. What do you suppose it should have done, send the special judge forces to Quatar to kidnap them?

The ICC is an institution that requires member nations to adhere to it. Concepts like these require mutual respect for a rule-based world order; an idea that seems to be lost on people like Trump, Putin, or the Quatari.

Their bias against genocide?

Yes, there's an ICC warrant out by for Netanyahu and Gallant.

Basically that just means that they won't travel to or even be invited to countries that would arrest them.

The same goes for Putin.

A lot of pro-Israel people just think the ICC is just a tool used by countries that hold a grudge against Israel and don't take it seriously (e.g. the Biden administration released a statement condemning the ICC when they announced they were seeking the warrants), so having more first-hand witnesses stating clearly that war crimes are happening is relevant.

Ideally we'd have journalists reporting these things, but Israel blocks those from entering Gaza too.

So not related to 10's of thousands of civilian deaths at all?

re ... 10's of thousands of civilian deaths at all..."

Would be a large percentage of Hamas fighter s too.

So, collective punishment, further making the ICJ and ICC cases.

No, but deliberate exaggeration of number of civilian deaths

All indicators are that it's a dramatic undercount of both total deaths and obviously civilian deaths.

Total deaths of up to 400,000 are now being put forward with persuasive rationale. That Israel will not allow external parties in firmly places the burden to disprove on them. Propaganda whitewashing of deaths is not acceptable.

Source please.

Very interesting choice of yours to omit the context, in which Hezbollah also drew his ire. Surely a coincidence and not a product of bias, though, right?

It's fine for him to talk how he wants, it's not fine for him to be the person in charge of investigating Israel if he considers it to be the enemy.

And if he considers Hezbollah the enemy, he should not be investigating them either.

Good news, he isn't; he resigned in order to take his appointment as the Lebanese PM, in which capacity he was speaking in the article you linked. Any more thinly veiled ad hominems you'd like to throw around?

A separate set of recommendations for anyone sincerely making this argument:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post_hoc_ergo_propter_hoc https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

The article gets some minor biographical details wrong but seems well supported otherwise, however it does describe Israeli roadblocks to the mission.

I expect the warrant against Putin will be the same ignored as a warrant against Netanyahu. Both Russia and Israel have certain bribing and soft power, but even ignored as a revenge. e.g. Polish prime minister and president jointly and proactively guaranteed Netanyahu entry to Poland even if otherwise they are from opposing parties and completely polarized the political scene. A gesture which looks outright suicidal considering the Criminal Court and local geopolitics.

Yes. Some additional details for those interested: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Criminal_Court...

"international law" is, i don't know how to say this quite right, largely for show

when both sides seem to be willing and eager to order, participate in, and cheer for atrocities from leadership to the common people... I don't want to take ideological sides or tally up crimes to decide who to root for in millennia old conflict mostly over a single city

it's a terrible shame for the people who want to live together in peace, clearly there are not enough of them

> "international law" is, i don't know how to say this quite right, largely for show

Turns out most law in western democracies was largely for show

...or they are not sufficiently well represented.

You'd need a body enforcing them and I'm not sure if we really want the one world government.