Afrasianet - German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock has called on the world to respect the decisions of the International Criminal Court (ICC) and urged them to do everything in their power to implement them. "No one in the twenty-first century should wage a war of aggression with impunity."

Baerbock made this statement during her visit to New York on July 18, 2023, on the occasion of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, which establishes "the international community pledges to work to achieve justice for the victims and to hold perpetrators accountable. The international community will not condone the most horrific crimes anywhere."

But it seems – just a year after this statement – that the German foreign minister and her government have not been serious about asking the world to respect the decisions of the International Criminal Court, of which Germany is the second largest donor. Baerbock's speech to the UN General Assembly does not seem to include the Middle East, at least when Israel is the culprit and Palestinian civilians are the victims.

No one could have imagined that the German government would expiate so quickly the noble principles it has always paid lip service to in international forums. Contrary to the German government's strong position on the ICC's decision when it issued an arrest warrant against the Russian president on March 17, 2023, on the basis of the crime of deporting Ukrainian children to Russia, we now see great embarrassment in Germany's handling of the decision of the same international institution that yesterday called on the world to comply with its decisions when it issued an arrest warrant. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his dismissed Defense Minister Yoav Galant are charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in the Gaza Strip.

This time, the German government has only issued a very brief statement, referring primarily to Germany's unique relationship with Israel and its great historical responsibility towards it, but devoid of anything to suggest that this decision should be implemented, or that the German government intends to abide by what other countries were asked to abide by last year.

It seems that this court – which the German Foreign Minister claimed in her previous speech holds a special place among international institutions, lavished praise on it before the eyes of the world, and thanked all its staff for their dedication, professionalism and independence – is now not so prestigious after daring to make serious accusations against Israel and hold it accountable like any other country that violates international law.

The German government's reluctance to accept the ICC's decision was evident in the reactions of its spokesman, Steffen Hepstrait, who at a press conference last month reflected Germany's confusion and helplessness in the face of the impasse in dealing with the decision.

He tried in vain to evade in an unprofessional manner the journalists' repeated questions about the possibility of his government executing the arrest warrant against the Israeli prime minister and former defense minister, and claimed that the internal procedures resulting from this decision were under close scrutiny, before declaring after several evasions that he "finds it very difficult to imagine that Germany would make arrests on this basis", although this is not negotiable because Germany has ratified the Rome Statute, in addition to Article 25 The German constitution states that general rules of international law are part of federal law and even take precedence over German domestic laws.

However, after this time after Hepstrait's embarrassed statement, the German foreign minister then announced, apparently reluctantly – on the sidelines of the Group of Seven foreign ministers' meeting in Fiuggi, Italy, that the German government "will abide by the law, because no one is above it."

Germany's procrastination in accepting the ICC's latest decision and its flawed stance towards it was not limited to the federal government, but it was a general position that enjoys consensus in German politics of all colors and ideological stripes. Most politicians from the various major parties were on the same issue as one man.

For example, Boris Ryan, the head of the Hesse state government, called the ICC's decision absurd, declaring that "it is absolutely unthinkable to arrest a democratically elected Israeli prime minister on German soil because he defends his country against terrorists," and asserting that "protecting Israel is the supreme interest of the state, and that this also includes protecting its top politicians."

Friedrich Merz, the candidate for the next term as chancellor, had already expressed his position on the issue in May. Not only did he denounce Karim Khan's request for arrest warrants against Netanyahu and Galant, but he also strongly criticized the German government for not having been unequivocal in not complying with the ICC's decisions on the matter.

Meretz was perhaps the most eloquent of the world's perception of international institutions by Germany and the West in general, when he said in an interview with Bild newspaper that "the ICC was created only to hold dictators and authoritarian leaders accountable, not to arrest democratically elected members of the government."

The position of German policy on this issue places Germany in the ranks of countries that have long criticized it and described it with the most vile descriptions. Her reaction today is not much different from, say, the reaction of Russian politicians, who rejected Vladimir Putin's arrest warrant and considered it – like the head of the Hesse state government and other German politicians to consider the recent court decision – absurd and unacceptable.

Moreover, Germany's double standards and selective handling of the decisions of international institutions will inevitably and effectively contribute to weakening the role of these institutions at a time when the world is on the verge of a third world war.

Israel's right to self-defence, which German politicians do not tire of asserting whenever Israel commits a new massacre, does not mean that Israel has the right to exterminate a people it has colonized for 76 years, displaced, besieged and undermined all its elements in establishing its independent State.

Whatever the October 7 attack on Israel, it does not warrant war crimes or crimes against humanity. Germany's historic responsibility towards Israel cannot mean unconditional support for a far-right government that almost amounts to complicity in violating international laws against Palestinians.

As Alfred Grosser, the German-French Jewish publisher and political scientist who won the 1975 German Peace Book Prize, said: "Whoever wants to repudiate Hitler must now defend the Palestinians."