-Analysis-
PARIS — It sure is hard to have principles — and above all, so hard to stick to them!
A press release Wednesday from the French Foreign Ministry caused quite a stir, concerning the arrest warrants issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former Defense Minister, Yoav Gallant.
The Quai d’Orsay ministry’s press office stated that France defends international law, but went on to note that Benjamin Netanyahu enjoys immunity as head of a government of a country that is not signatory to the Rome Treaty establishing the ICC. The press release goes on to say: “Such immunities apply to Prime Minister Netanyahu and the other ministers concerned, and will have to be taken into consideration should the ICC request their arrest and surrender.”
Thus, if the Israeli Prime Minister arrives in Paris, it is now clear that he will not be arrested… The same principle obviously applies to Vladimir Putin, who was the target of an ICC arrest warrant last year.
This stance caused a stir, particularly among human rights activists, and prompted a major French clarification effort Wednesday.
Legal reading
The government defends a purely legalistic line. We note the contrary injunction: the ICC demands that we uphold the law, and at the same time provides an immunity position for non-signatories to the treaty — an apparent bonus for those who do not want international justice.
Although 124 states have signed the Rome Treaty establishing the ICC, others have refused, including Israel, but also the United States, Russia, China… We’re a long way from universality.
The problem is that we are mistaken if we only take a legal view of this affair: it is eminently political. It’s the price to pay for staying in the loop of the Lebanese crisis settlement on Tuesday evening. No French official will admit it publicly, but the coincidence leaves little room for doubt.
The Paris position is a blow to international justice.
It’s true that France is perfectly legitimate about Lebanon, and for a long time even found itself alone diplomatically on the situation. But political relations between Paris and Benjamin Netanyahu have deteriorated sharply in recent weeks, after Emmanuel Macron’s use of the word “barbarism” to refer to the actions of the Israeli army.
Sad day for international law
France’s initial response to the arrest warrants, which staunchly reiterated its support of international law, infuriated the Israeli Prime Minister. U.S. President Joe Biden reportedly even called Emmanuel Macron to convey Netanyahu’s anger, as Israel had for a time wanted to exclude France from the Ceasefire Monitoring Committee.
In the end, the agreement in Lebanon was announced in a joint communication by the American and French presidents, but Netanyahu never mentioned France in his communication.
A few hours later, the statement cited above from the Quai d’Orsay defused Israeli anger, but created incomprehension elsewhere. The NGO Humans Rights Watch spoke of a “deeply shocking” statement; a European diplomat called it “a sad day for international law”.
Even if it is a well-argued legal reading, and a step backwards designed to facilitate an agreement with Lebanon, the new Paris position is a blow to international justice. Netanyahu and Putin, the ICC’s two most illustrious targets, can only rejoice.
