Merz refuses to arrest Netanyahu - "Absurd"
Wolfgang Hansson
This is a commentary text. Analysis and positions are those of the writer.
Published 22.59
Recently, Germany's new Chancellor Friedrich Merz delivered an absolutely astonishing statement for a Western leader who fights for the rules-based world order.
He claimed with a chuckle that it would be absurd if Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu could not visit Germany without being arrested.
Quick version
The fact that Germany, as one of over 120 countries that recognize the ICC, the International Criminal Court in The Hague, has committed to complying with its rules, Merz seemed to dismiss with a shrug.
According to the rules, Germany, and all other member states, are obliged to arrest an indicted leader who lands on their territory.
But Merz apparently believes that Germany can ignore these rules when they themselves consider it justified.
“Of course, an Israeli prime minister must be able to visit Germany,” Merz stated. Anything else would be absurd. Netanyahu is democratically elected in the only democratic country in the region.
When Merz made his statement in Berlin, he was standing next to UN chief Antonio Guterres. The head of the institution that co-founded the ICC as a way to uphold a rules-based world order.
It is strange that Merz's statement has not provoked stronger reactions.
When it comes to Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Merz is fighting alongside the rest of the Western world to uphold the order built after World War II that prohibits countries from seizing another country's territory.
But when it comes to suspected war crimes committed by a democratic country, he suddenly thinks that following the rules is not as careful.
This is largely due to Germany's historical debt to the world's Jews after the Holocaust during World War II. Ever since then, Germany has had a particularly close relationship with Israel. Even more so after the Hamas terrorist attack on October 7, 2023. It is only in recent days that Merz and other German representatives have directed serious criticism of Israel's way of waging the war.
But the idea that a war crimes indictment would stop Netanyahu from visiting Germany does not seem to be on Merz's map.
The ICC indictment against Netanyahu is no small feat. After much deliberation, a group of prominent lawyers has concluded that Netanyahu used starvation as a weapon in Gaza. It should be remembered that the indictment is based on events in the first six months after Israel's invasion of Gaza. Today, the Israeli government itself states that it is stopping humanitarian aid as a weapon against Hamas and the Palestinian population in Gaza.
In recent days, Merz and several other German politicians have questioned for the first time whether Israel's warfare in Gaza is really proportionate and have demanded that Israel allow in enough emergency aid.
But when it comes to the right of an indicted war criminal to visit Germany, Merz sees no problem with receiving Netanyahu if it were to become relevant.
The first foreign leader Mers called after being appointed Chancellor was Netanyahu.
Merz's attitude is very dangerous. International rules of the game must reasonably apply to everyone, regardless of whether they are democratic states like Israel or dictatorships like Russia.
Merz is contributing to eroding trust in the ICC and in the rules-based world order.
If Merz can make exceptions to the rules on his own initiative, how can he argue that authoritarian leaders like Xi Jinping, Erdogan and Putin cannot do so?
Merz should learn from contemporary history.
The fact that the rules-based world order is so threatened today has its origins, among other things, in the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. George W Bush wanted to finish what his father had started, to overthrow Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. That is why he claimed that Iran threatened the world with weapons of mass destruction even though that was not true.
The invasion was a textbook example of the US ignoring the world order that it otherwise worked so hard to maintain.
Russian president Putin belived that if the US could break the rules in any way, he should be able to do so too. Something he made clear in his scathing speech at the Munich Security Conference in 2007. A speech that marked the definitive end of the friendly era between the West and Russia that had prevailed since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Putin followed up by invading Georgia in 2008 and annexing Crimea in 2014. Not to mention the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
So when Merz thinks that he can break the legal agreements that Germany has made with the ICC, it sends an unfortunate and dangerous signal to the rest of the world that the rules are flexible and do not apply to everyone. And that it is up to each country to determine the exceptions for itself.
But if even the world's democracies do not play by the rules, how can we demand that others do so?
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar