The International Criminal Court's arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant represent a watershed moment in the history of Israel and the Jewish people. This development raises serious questions about the ICC's standing and its suitability for addressing war crimes by terrorist organizations that have seized control of states, such as Hamas and Hezbollah. However, it also compels Israel to engage in soul-searching about how it transformed from an exemplary nation, a light unto nations, and a global source of inspiration, into a pariah state that generates discord and endangers both itself and world Jewry.

Precisely because we knew the ICC was biased, we should have acted with greater caution and responsibility. Instead, we did the opposite.

Israel must now act on two fronts – denounce the ICC for its decisions against state leaders, while proposing an alternative to existing laws of war. Current laws, based on lessons from two world wars where nations fought nations, must be updated to address contemporary warfare between states and terrorist organizations that exploit civilian populations as weapons, forcing organized armies to harm civilians to gain advantage. In fact, existing laws of war, in the context of fighting terrorist organizations, are endangering civilian lives. Terrorist organizations exploit these laws as weapons against organized states.

Israel should have addressed this long ago, but the Prime Minister has been preoccupied with other matters, not necessarily aligned with state interests. There are concerns he will try to make lemonade from this lemon by assuming a leadership stance against "the antisemitic world," only worsening Israel's situation and the security of Israelis traveling abroad, not to mention IDF soldiers and officers.

Examining how we reached this point reveals that at the core of this crisis lies the full-right government and its value system that conflicts with Western moral values – which are, in essence, the old and forgotten Jewish moral values.

What happened here? The legal campaign against Israel in UN corridors and The Hague tribunals was initiated by Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas) as part of his struggle against Hamas. Opposing the military jihad model, Abu Mazen presented a diplomatic warfare model. We should have long ago put Abu Mazen in his place and prevented his Foreign Minister, Riad Malki, from coming to Ramallah, as his sole interest was harming Israel, including indirect connections with Iran via Venezuela, but Israel was complacent and did nothing.

In fact, it didn't need to do much, because the ICC's previous prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, despite sympathizing with Palestinian cases and willingly receiving Riad Malki and Saeb Erekat, dragged her feet and managed to complete her term without taking action. Saeb Erekat told me after meeting with Bensouda that he was confident she would act, but it turned out he misinterpreted her sympathetic words.

When she successfully navigated the Palestinian issue, Karim Khan arrived, and Riad al-Malki rushed to meet him in The Hague. According to Palestinian sources after the meeting, I learned that Riad al-Malki returned disappointed. Khan was less diplomatic than his predecessor and told Malki he had more urgent matters than Palestinian cases, and following this conversation, it seemed the Palestinians had given up, as the frequent meetings that occurred with Bensouda ceased with Khan.

Until the burning of Hawara village.

There was an international conference of jurists in Europe – I don't remember exactly where – and Riad al-Malki rushed to an unplanned meeting with Karim Khan, presenting him with the Hawara file. This was the turning point where the ICC prosecutor became open to listening to the Palestinian side. Malki widened this crack, and when the Gaza war broke out, he again rushed to The Hague with the "Gaza children killing file." When Karim Khan came to meet families from the Gaza envelope and Nova, he also met with Abu Mazen and again received reports on "Israel's war crimes," leading to the scandalous "balance" between Israel and Hamas, reflected in the issuance of arrest warrants for "both sides."

Israel monitored the ICC's moves and knew the warrants were coming, but again did the opposite of what a responsible government should have done.

As long as the Gaza war was perceived globally as self-defense – a legitimate war under international law – Israel enjoyed protection. However, when the war was no longer seen as self-defense but as an occupation war, Israel's position deteriorated. Once the Gaza war became an occupation, Israel became subject to the laws of war as an occupying power, with all the implied obligations toward the civilian population. The harsh images from Gaza that flooded the world, but not Israel, led to growing global sympathy for Palestinian suffering, which Israelis were unaware of.

How President Biden urged Israel to end the war with a deal! He was aware of the erosion in Israel's standing due to what the world saw on television, but Bibi didn't care.

The turning point can be found in the closure of the Rafah crossing. This event transformed self-defense into occupation because once Israel severed Gaza's connection to the Arab world, even countries that rushed to assist Gazans, like Egypt, the Emirates, and Indonesia, and sought to take responsibility for Gazans from Israel, were distanced from Gaza. This created an absurd situation where Israel received international responsibility as an occupier for aid to Gaza, while Hamas received the aid and became Gaza's master again, and the fake law against UNRWA only increased the problematic UN organization's weight in Gaza and the international community.

Initially, Karim Khan's interest in Palestinian cases was due to the settler youth riots, who now control the Defense Ministry. The suspicion that Israel plans to renew settlements in Gaza, and its unwillingness to end the Gaza war stems from its intention to renew settlements – the true war aim of the full-right government – increased Khan's motivation to issue the arrest warrants.

Not to mention the massive weakening of Israel's rule of law system by the government seeking to clear the way for implementing settlement renewal in Gaza, and the feeling in The

Hague that they remain the last barrier against the full-right government rushing toward additional war crimes.

Here lies the great test for Netanyahu's judges. His appearance before them in less than two weeks will be scrutinized critically worldwide. If the judicial panel shows fear of the defendant, international systems will understand there's no choice but to deepen legal involvement in Israel's affairs. Every tourist abroad, officer, and soldier will feel this. But if a miracle occurs and the defendant shows fear of justice, the world will see that Israel has an effective justice system, and the degree of involvement will decrease, if not cease entirely.

And when a normal government is established in Israel, one of its first tasks will be to initiate profound change in war law norms for the reality of fighting terrorism, so that the horrific spectacle of arrest warrants against leaders of a state fighting terrorism in the most successful way possible, paving the way for international victory over terrorism, will never recur.