Deepanwita Martin
The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant marks a dramatic moment in international law. Accused of war crimes for knowingly depriving Gaza’s civilian population of food, water, and medical supplies
What the ICC Arrest Warrants Mean
The ICC’s warrants accuse Netanyahu and Gallant of violating international law during Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, particularly through policies that deprived civilians of essentials like food, water, and medical supplies. These actions, according to the ICC, constitute war crimes under the principle that collective punishment of civilians is forbidden, even in war.
However, Israel is not a signatory to the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC. This limits the court’s ability to enforce the warrants within Israel, leaving enforcement to member states should Netanyahu or Gallant travel abroad. The symbolic nature of the ICC’s decision cannot be ignored; it demonstrates the international community’s condemnation of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. But symbolism alone will not change the realities on the ground.
Who Must Arrest Them and at what cost?
The ICC relies entirely on member states to enforce its rulings, as it has no police force of its own. If Netanyahu or Gallant were to visit a country that is a party to the Rome Statute, that nation would be obligated to act. However, practical enforcement is unlikely.
Arresting sitting or former leaders often creates diplomatic fallout, and Israel’s close allies, including the United States, have criticized the ICC’s jurisdiction in this case. Western governments are unlikely to support or facilitate arrests, given their longstanding ties to Israel and concerns over regional stability.
The lack of enforcement also risks reinforcing perceptions of impunity, where symbolic actions by international bodies fail to translate into real accountability. Yet, even if arrests were made, the entrenched policies driving the conflict would remain untouched.
The Cost of Human Life
The war in Gaza has taken a catastrophic toll. Following the October 2023 Hamas attack, which killed 1,200 Israelis and led to over 250 hostages being taken, Israel’s response has been devastating. Gaza’s civilian population has borne the brunt of the siege, with over 40,000 reported dead, according to Hamas-led authorities. Thousands of children have perished, hospitals are overwhelmed, and essential supplies are nearly exhausted.
These tragedies are the result of systemic issues, not just individual decisions. Israel’s blockade of Gaza and military campaigns are supported by its political establishment and a significant portion of its public. Arresting Netanyahu or Gallant would not end these policies. If anything, more hardline leaders could emerge in their place, perpetuating the cycle of violence.
Hamas, too, remains deeply entrenched in Gaza, controlling the territory through a mix of military strength and coercion. Arresting Israeli leaders would not weaken Hamas’s grip or resolve its conflict with Israel. If anything, it could embolden the group, which would likely present the ICC’s actions as a victory against its adversary.
Justice Must Be More Than Symbolic
While the ICC’s warrants underscore the importance of accountability, they fall short of addressing the systemic nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Arresting Netanyahu or Gallant would not dismantle the Israeli military infrastructure, end the blockade, or open Gaza’s borders. Nor would it resolve the underlying grievances that have fueled decades of violence.
True change requires addressing the root causes of the conflict: the lack of a viable Palestinian state, the blockade’s crippling effect on Gaza’s population, and the deep mistrust between both sides. Symbolic victories, while important, cannot substitute for concrete political solutions.
Dramatic moment in international law:
The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant marks a dramatic moment in international law. But the burning question remains: if these leaders were actually arrested, would it stop the war between Israel and Gaza? Would it bring relief to the starving, bombarded civilians of Gaza? Unfortunately, the answer is likely no.
War, starvation, and suffering are not dictated by the actions of a single individual. They are the product of systems—historical grievances, political ideologies, and entrenched cycles of violence. Arresting Netanyahu, while symbolic, would not dismantle the Israeli military apparatus or resolve the existential fears driving its strategy. Nor would it neutralize Hamas or eliminate its control over Gaza.
The ICC’s arrest warrants accuse Netanyahu and Gallant of war crimes, specifically the deprivation of food, water, and medical supplies to Gaza’s civilian population. These allegations are rooted in international law, which prohibits collective punishment. Yet, while their arrest might offer a sense of justice for Palestinians, it would not address the deeper, systemic issues fueling the conflict.
Reality on the ground:
Consider the reality on the ground. The Israeli government is not built around a single leader. If Netanyahu were arrested tomorrow, someone else—potentially more hardline—would likely take his place. Israel’s policies in Gaza are supported by a majority of its political establishment and much of its public, particularly in the aftermath of the October 2023 Hamas attack that killed 1,200 Israelis. That attack, which included the taking of over 250 hostages, has created an environment where calls for retribution dominate over those for restraint.
On the other side, Hamas remains firmly entrenched in Gaza. It wields power through a mix of military strength and coercion. Arresting Netanyahu or Gallant would not weaken Hamas’s grip, nor would it change its stated goal of resisting Israeli occupation. Instead, it might embolden the group, portraying the ICC’s actions as a victory against Israel.
And what of Gaza’s suffering civilians? The images of children dying in bombed-out hospitals and families scavenging for clean water are gut-wrenching. But these tragedies are the result of a decades-long blockade and ongoing military strikes—policies shaped by a host of actors, not just Netanyahu. Arresting one or two leaders won’t reopen Gaza’s borders or restore its infrastructure.
True change requires more than the removal of leaders. It demands a fundamental shift in the political calculus on both sides. For Israel, this means acknowledging the catastrophic human cost of its military campaigns and blockade. For Palestinians, it requires overcoming internal divisions and building leadership that prioritizes their people’s welfare over endless cycles of retaliation.
The True Cost of War
The ICC’s warrants underscore a sobering truth: wars are rarely about individual leaders. The devastation in Gaza—starvation, bombings, and the collapse of essential services—is the result of a broader system of conflict. Arresting Netanyahu or Gallant might serve as a symbolic victory for international law, but it would not dismantle the mechanisms of war.
This is not to suggest that accountability is meaningless. On the contrary, holding leaders responsible for war crimes is essential for upholding global norms. However, justice must extend beyond the arrest of individuals. It must address the systemic injustices that perpetuate cycles of violence.
Nature follows laws and patterns:
In nature, every action follows laws and patterns. Wars, too, follow patterns—of escalation, dehumanization, and destruction. Arresting Netanyahu might interrupt the cycle momentarily, but it won’t erase the underlying forces perpetuating it. Until both sides reckon with these realities, the deaths, starvation, and despair in Gaza will persist.
The ICC’s actions might spark international conversations about accountability, but without broader efforts toward a political solution, they will remain symbolic gestures in a world that has grown numb to the suffering in Gaza. The war will not end with the arrest of one man; it will end only when both sides decide that the cost of continuing is too high to bear.
The Path Forward
The ICC’s actions have ignited discussions about international accountability, but they must be part of a larger effort to resolve the conflict. For Israel, this means acknowledging the immense human cost of its policies and seeking alternatives to military solutions. For Palestinians, it means fostering leadership that prioritizes their people’s welfare over retaliation.
In nature, every action follows patterns and laws. Wars, too, have their own patterns—of escalation, dehumanization, and destruction. Arresting Netanyahu might interrupt these patterns temporarily, but it would not erase the structural forces perpetuating the conflict.
The war will not end with the arrest of one man. It will end only when both sides recognize that the cost of continuing is too high to bear and commit to the hard work of building peace. Until then, the suffering in Gaza will persist, a stark reminder that justice without action is merely a gesture.
Deepanwita Martin, Sub Editor, The Voice News