Why does Karim Khan of the ICC arrest arrest mandates against Benjamin Netanyahu? – News Israel
Karim Khan, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, hoped that the issuance of arrest mandates against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the former Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant would make the West would turn against Israel, a superior Western diplomat having a first -hand knowledge of the ICC affair announced that West declared to Israel The CPI affair. The Jerusalem post In an exclusive interview.
The diplomat, who spoke under the cover of anonymity, said that he thought that Khan’s decision to issue arrest mandates against Israeli leaders was based on a combination of a desire to see powerful Western countries turn against Israel and inspire the public pressure of pro-Palestinian groups.
He recalled a conversation he had with Khan last year, where Khan would have said: “You are waiting and see. If I ask mandates against Netanyahu, this would give countries like Germany and Canada the excuse they need to turn against the Israeli government.”
“I remember first having thought: how naive can you be?” The diplomat said.
“But secondly, I thought: it is not work. You should be motivated by law and by facts and evidence, and not by the thought that Germany could turn against an elected official,” said the diplomat.
Before the massacre of October 7, Khan was not considered a champion of Palestinian rights.
At the end of 2023, when the war between Israel and Hamas was at its peak, a campaign against Khan launched, led by the BDS movement and the Pro-Palestinian NGOs and the activists who pursued it not to attack Israeli officials for alleged war crimes.
BDS called Khan as a “genocide facilitator”, demanding that it be dismissed and replaced by someone who would go after Israel.
The mandate calendar before Khan’s arrest does not add up
In a letter relating to these statements, Khan insisted that they were “based on false premises” and that his decision to issue arrest mandates was not based on political motivations or personal questions.
Khan also said that he had visited Washington in person at the end of March 2024, “when he informed the senior administration officials he would ask for mandates against people appointed in the mandates by the end of April 2024.”
He indeed met senior US officials at the end of March during two separate meetings.
The first was with the Secretary of State then, Antony Blinken. The second was with the national security advisor at the time, Jake Sullivan and Brett McGurk, the coordinator of the National House Council for the Middle East and North Africa.
However, on the basis of the words of the main diplomat, Khan’s calendar does not add up. Even if he informed the senior officials at the end of March of his decision, the calendar shows that he “acted in bad faith”.
“If indeed, Khan had decided to ask for mandates at the end of March, then all his interactions with senior Israeli officials, United States and other officials concerning his visit to Gaza on May 27 would have been in false claims,” said the diplomat.
Indeed, on March 20, just a week earlier, and before Khan said he informed the senior American officials he had already decided – the CPI prosecutor sent an official letter to Israel requesting information on evacuation orders, safe areas, civilian deaths in Gaza and instructions related to humanitarian aid by entering the enclave.
This information had to be used in Khan’s investigation into possible war crimes committed in Gaza.
In April, an Israeli delegation went to the ICC to discuss the investigation with the Khan team.
On May 1, the chief prosecutor of the ICC spoke to many American senators on the phone, reassuring them that he still investigated the alleged war crimes committed by Israeli leaders and Hamas, and that no decision had yet been made.
“I felt like I had a good conversation, which he was going to go to Israel and hear their side of history, because I thought that the law demanded. I think each senator on this telephone call would be surprised to hear him claim that he had already decided,” said senator Lindsey Graham.
“The way he led was really scandalous. He decided to announce the arrest warrants before hearing the Israeli side of history,” continued Graham. “The only thing that makes sense to me is that he wanted to change the subject, because if he says he had already decided [by then]So all the conversation he had with us was fraud. »»
The best American senator, who also sits on the US Senate Judicial Committee, said Khan had misleaded senators on the telephone call, or that he included a retroactive date which, according to him, helps him with sexual allegations against him.
As a reminder, the ICC said in November 2024 that an external investigation examined the allegations of sexual misconduct concerning the prosecutor.
According to several sources of information, in particular The Wall Street JournalKahn planned to charge Netanyahu and Gallant shortly after the charges against him emerged.
“The main thing is that everyone on the call believed that we had accomplished a lot by simply making him listen to Israel,” said Graham.
Karim Khan spoke to Anthony Blinken
On May 3, Khan spoke to Blinken, that he reassured that the investigation was underway and that he wanted to visit Gaza and Israel to collect more evidence.
Khan was also warned by eyes that the issuance of arrest mandates against Israeli leaders could derail the fragile cease-fire negotiations.
When the CPI chief prosecutor finally announced his decision in a CNN interview on May 20 to charge Netanyahu and Gallant for war crimes, the United States and Israel were surprised.
Blinken told the senatorial committee of foreign relations the next day: “The decision … at so many levels is completely wrong” and that it has questioned negotiations in progress to release the hostages and put an end to the attack on Israel against Gaza.
Israel also reacted fiercely to the surprise announcement, Netanyahu accusing the CPI of anti -Semitism and comparing the case to a “modern [Alfred] Trial of Dreyfus. »»
Netanyahu said that the decision had been taken by a “corrupt chief prosecutor trying to save his own skin from serious accusations against him for sexual harassment and by biases motivated by anti -Semitic hatred of Israel.”
Hamas has also rejected arrest warrants for its best leaders, Yahya Sinwar, Mohammed Deif and Ismail Haniyeh. Sinwar and Haniyeh, however, were killed by Israel earlier that year in Tehran and Gaza, respectively.
Since then, several Western countries have declared that they would not apply the arrest warrants if Netanyahu or Gallant arrived on their soil, notably France, Poland, Austria, the United States, Argentina, Hungary, Italy and Germany.
Arsen Ostrovsky, lawyer and human rights CEO of the International Legal Forum, which was one of the groups that appealed against arrest terms, said Khan “had violated all the rules of the book, including the rule of law”.
“Instead of maintaining the mission of the Court in the continuation of justice, the prosecutor sparked a great injustice in the continuation of these monthly and baseless mandates, and an incessant political program against Israeli leaders for having legally defended the country against Hamas and seeking to save the remaining hostages,” added Ostrovsky.
