NAIROBI, Kenya, May 28 – The International Criminal Court’s (ICC) actions in the Middle East raise fundamental questions about its impartiality.
Israel — not a member of the Rome Statute — has been investigated and its leaders targeted with arrest warrants. Iran — a repeat violator with documented atrocities — faces no ICC action whatsoever.
This pattern of selective justice, as the following analysis will show, is not merely a matter of legal technicality. It not only undermines the Court’s credibility but also points to a lack of political will.
Although Israel is not a state party to the Rome Statute, the ICC initiated an investigation against it in 2021 for reasons that remain unclear. This fact alone constitutes a clear violation of international law. Nevertheless, the ICC asserted that its jurisdiction extends to the Palestinian territories.
Then, on October 7, 2023, Hamas — the de facto governing authority in Gaza — launched a devastating attack on Israel. That assault resulted in the deaths of over 1,000 people, including more than 50 children, wounded over 5,000, and took more than 200 hostages.
In response, Israel, exercising its right to self-defense, began a military operation against Hamas. It would be a reasonable expectation that the ICC impose sanctions or open an investigation into Hamas or the governing authority in Gaza.
Yet in October 2024, the ICC issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant. No action whatsoever followed regarding the atrocities committed by Hamas.
At the same time, the ICC remains silent on Iran’s actions. Mass shootings of civilians in 2019 using heavy weapons and military vehicles; the mass killing of men and women in 2022–2023; and annual executions ranging from several hundred to over a thousand people — none of this has drawn meaningful interest from the ICC.
Not surprisingly, the unprecedented wave of rockets and drones launched at Israel this year — which failed to hit any military target but did harm civilians — has also failed to attract the ICC’s attention.
In April 2026, four women were killed by an Iranian rocket while visiting a bridal shop near Hebron. Numerous attacks on civilian vessels have also been documented, many of which are registered in ICC member states.
Moreover, several civilian sailors have lost their lives due to Iranian attacks on vessels flying the flag of the Marshall Islands — an ICC member state — in the Persian Gulf.
These facts alone give the ICC full jurisdiction to investigate Iran’s actions. In 2010, when nine crew members were killed on a vessel attempting to break the Gaza blockade — with ten Israeli soldiers injured — the ICC used the fact that one of the vessels had been re-registered in the Comoros, an ICC member state, to open a case against Israel that lasted seven years.
All evidence suggests that the ICC is not genuinely concerned with the lack of jurisdiction to begin an investigation into Iran. This reflects a lack of political will, rooted in Iran’s history, which includes multiple attempts to assassinate its critics abroad.
For instance, the assassination of Argentine prosecutor Alberto Nisman in 2015, who was investigating the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires.
The ICC’s inaction now proves that this court has become a political weapon threatening the United States and its NATO partners. Last month, judges refused to remove Prosecutor Karim Khan, even though he has been under investigation for six months for fabricating evidence at the request of third countries.
Khan has denied any misconduct, but an investigation by a team from the United Nations found evidence of “non-consensual sexual contact.” Nevertheless, the ICC ruled that this was insufficient grounds for removal.
Meanwhile, to secure the arrest of a democratic leader from a country not party to the Rome Statute, the ICC applies far lower evidentiary standards than it does to discipline one of its own officials.
