United States officials have reignited controversy by invoking the Hague Invasion Act in response to the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.
The 2002 law, officially known as the “American Service-Members’ Protection Act,” allows the US to use military force to shield its nationals and allies from ICC prosecution. Initially aimed at preventing investigations into US war crimes, the act resurfaced after the ICC issued warrants for the Israeli leaders.
Matthew Hoh, Associate Director of the Eisenhower Media Network, criticised the US for undermining international law. He pointed out the stark double standards in Washington’s reactions to ICC warrants, contrasting its enthusiasm over Vladimir Putin’s indictment with its fierce opposition to similar actions against Israeli officials.
Hoh argued that the US sees international law as a tool for controlling less powerful nations rather than holding allies accountable. “This action contravenes the US’ own stated principles about respecting international law,” he said, warning that such moves could erode America’s global influence.
The ICC’s warrants against Netanyahu and Gallant relate to alleged war crimes. However, the US response has drawn accusations of overreach, with critics suggesting it prioritises protecting Israel over upholding international legal norms.
This development shows the growing divide over the ICC’s role and its ability to enforce accountability for leaders of powerful nations and their allies.
