This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/dec/31/palestinian-president-international-criminal-court

The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Palestinian president signs up to join international criminal court Palestinian president signs up to join international criminal court
(about 3 hours later)
The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, has moved dramatically to join the international criminal court, setting Palestinians on a diplomatic collision course with Israel and the US. The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, dramatically moved to join the international criminal court on Wednesday, setting Palestinians on a diplomatic collision course with Israel and Washington, and risking imposition of US sanctions.
Abbas signed the Rome treaty governing the court and 19 other international agreements on Wednesday evening following the rejection by the UN security council of a Jordanian-backed resolution calling for the end of the Israeli occupation by 2017. Abbas signed the Rome statute governing the court and 19 other international agreements, potentially opening the way to Palestinians to pursue Israel for war crimes in the court of last resort based in The Hague.
At the end of 24 hours of high diplomatic tension, Abbas – under pressure from other members of the Palestinian leadership – followed through on the threat to join the ICC, which would open the way to Palestinians pursuing Israel for war crimes in the court of last resort, based in The Hague. It followed the rejection by the UN security council of a Jordanian-backed resolution on behalf of Palestine calling for the end to the Israeli occupation by 2017 and the establishment of a Palestinian state based on pre-1967 borders.
Acceding to the Rome treaty – the first step in joining the court – had been seen by many as the nuclear option in the recent Palestinian efforts to advance their case for statehood in international forums, including at the UN. Abbas’s move came at the end of 24 hours of diplomatic tension when – under pressure from other members of the Palestinian leadership – he followed through on his long-threatened plan to join the ICC.
That campaign had followed the collapse of US-mediated peace talks last year. In response to Abbas’s signing of the treaty Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, warned that it was Palestinians, not Israel, that should be concerned about the ICC.
Abbas has been under heavy domestic pressure to take action against Israel following months of tensions fuelled by the collapse of US-brokered peace talks, a 50-day war between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza, a spate of deadly Palestinian attacks on Israeli targets and Israeli restrictions on Palestinian access to a key Muslim holy site in Jerusalem. “It is the Palestinian Authority – which is in a unity government with Hamas, an avowed terrorist organisation that, like Isis, perpetrates war crimes – that needs to be concerned about the international criminal court in the Hague,” Netanyahu said, adding that Israel would take unspecified “retaliatory steps”.
Tuesday’s defeat in the UN security council further raised pressure on Abbas to act. The US also condemned the move which it described as “deeply troubling” with State Department spokesman Jeff Rathke saying it was “an escalatory step that will not achieve any of the outcomes most Palestinians have long hoped to see for their people”.
“We want to complain. There’s aggression against us, against our land. The security council disappointed us,” Abbas said as he gathered a meeting of the Palestinian leadership in the West Bank. He added: “Today’s action is entirely counter-productive and does nothing to further the aspirations of the Palestinian people for a sovereign and independent state. It badly damages the atmosphere with the very people with whom they ultimately need to make peace. As we’ve said before, the United States continues to strongly oppose actions – by both parties – that undermine trust and create doubts about their commitment to a negotiated peace. Our position has not changed. Such actions only push the parties further apart.”
The long-threatened move to join the ICC came amid a palpable sense of fury in the Palestinian leadership on Wednesday over US- and Israeli-led efforts that derailed a UN resolution that called for the ending of the Israeli occupation by 2017 and the establishment of a Palestinian state based on pre-1967 borders with mutual land swaps. Acceding to the Rome treaty – the first step in joining the court – had been seen by many as the nuclear option in the recent Palestinian efforts to advance their case for statehood in international forums.
That UN resolution was strongly opposed by the US and Israel and saw both the US secretary of state, John Kerry, and Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, call the president of Nigeria, Goodluck Jonathan, on the eve of the vote to persuade him to abstain. “They attack us and our land every day, to whom are we to complain? The security council let us down – where are we to go?” Abbas told a gathering of Palestinian leaders in remarks broadcast on official television.
Before the vote Palestinian officials believed Nigeria was set to back their resolution, which ultimately fell one vote short of a majority of nine votes. “We want to refer to international institutions, and this is one we are referring to, and we’ll complain to these people,” he added, before signing the documents.
Turning to the international criminal court marks a major policy shift by transforming Abbas’s relations with Israel from tense to openly hostile. Abbas has been threatening to join the court since 2012, but held off under American and Israeli pressure. The Palestinians can use the court to challenge the legality of Israeli settlement construction on occupied lands and to pursue war crimes charges connected to military activity. Abbas had been under heavy domestic pressure to take action against Israel following months of tension fuelled by the collapse of US-brokered peace talks, a 50-day war between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza, a spate of deadly Palestinian attacks on Israeli targets and Israeli restrictions on Palestinian access to a key Muslim holy site in Jerusalem. Tuesday’s defeat in the UN security council further raised pressure on Abbas to act. There was a palpable sense of fury in the Palestinian leadership over US and Israeli-led efforts that derailed the UN resolution that called for the ending of the Israeli occupation.
Senior Palestinian officials had warned in the weeks before the failed UN vote that the next step would be for Palestine to join the ICC – not least if the resolution was vetoed by the US. The resolution was opposed by the US and Israel and saw both the US secretary of state, John Kerry, and Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, call the president of Nigeria, Goodluck Jonathan, on the eve of the vote to persuade him to abstain.
Abbas’s decision is expected to trigger a harsh response from Israel. “Even half an hour before the vote Nigeria indicated it was committed to voting for the resolution,” one Palestinian source involved in the negotiations commented furiously. “We knew that Rwanda, South Korea and Australia would not back it, but we believed Nigeria was on board.”
Israel says all disputes should be resolved through peace talks, and such actions are aimed at bypassing negotiations. Britain, Rwanda, Lithuania and South Korea joined Nigeria in abstaining. Welcoming the UN vote, Netanyahu extended his special thanks to Nigeria and Rwanda. “This is what tipped the scales,” he said.
Signalling that the vote would not mark an end to the campaign to win a security council resolution, Palestinian and French officials indicated they would continue working to find a text to put to the UN, perhaps within weeks.
Before the vote the Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the Palestinians could return again to the security council, which will have five new members starting on Thursday who are viewed as more sympathetic to their cause.
However, despite signalling a sharp defeat to the Arab-supported campaign to get security council backing for a moves towards a Palestinian state, the vote held minimal comfort for Israel, seeing two European countries – France and Luxembourg – support the resolution. The US also made clear it was not voting for the status quo in opposing the resolution.
“We voted against this resolution not because we are comfortable with the status quo. We voted against it because … peace must come from hard compromises that occur at the negotiating table,” the US ambassador Samantha Power said.
She criticised the decision to bring the draft resolution to a vote as a “staged confrontation that will not bring the parties closer”. She added that the resolution was deeply unbalanced and did not take into account Israel’s security concerns.
The ICC can prosecute individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed since 1 July 2002, when the Rome statute came into force.The ICC can prosecute individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed since 1 July 2002, when the Rome statute came into force.
According to the ICC’s official website the Rome treaty has been ratified by 122 states.According to the ICC’s official website the Rome treaty has been ratified by 122 states.
The court can pursue an individual only if crimes were committed on the territory of a state party – one that has signed and ratified the Rome statute – or by a citizen of such a state. Israel has signed but not ratified the treaty.The court can pursue an individual only if crimes were committed on the territory of a state party – one that has signed and ratified the Rome statute – or by a citizen of such a state. Israel has signed but not ratified the treaty.
The move came at the end of 24 hours of high diplomatic drama in which Palestinian officials and other observers had appeared convinced that Nigeria would back the Jordanian-tabled resolution that would have set a 12-month deadline for Israel to reach a final peace deal with the Palestinians and called for a full withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Palestinian territories by the end of 2017. If the resolution had got the nine votes it required it would have required a US veto to block it.
“Even half an hour before the vote Nigeria indicated it was committed to voting for the resolution,” one Palestinian source involved in the negotiations commented furiously to the Guardian.
“We knew that Rwanda, South Korea and Australia would not back it, but we believed Nigeria was on board.”
“The UN security council vote is outrageously shameful,” said the senior PLO official Hanan Ashrawi.
Welcoming the UN vote, Netanyahu extended his special thanks to Nigeria and Rwanda. “This is what tipped the scales,” he said.
The Israeli foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, took a swipe at the European countries who backed the resolution. “The Palestinian disregard to the international community’s most important countries – particularly the US – stems from the backing they receive from certain European countries,” Lieberman said.
The Islamist movement Hamas blamed Abbas for the setback, demanding he make good on threats to cut security cooperation with Israel and join the ICC.
Signalling that the vote would not mark an end to the campaign to win a security council resolution, Palestinian and French officials indicated they would continue working to find a text to put to the UN, perhaps within weeks.
Before the vote, the Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the Palestinians could return again to the security council, which will have five new members starting on Thursday who are viewed as more sympathetic to their cause.
However, despite signalling a sharp defeat to the Arab-supported campaign to get security council backing for a moves towards a Palestinian state, the vote held minimal comfort for Israel, seeing two European countries – France and Luxembourg – support the resolution.
Only the US and Australia voted against it.
Britain, Rwanda, Lithuania and South Korea joined Nigeria in abstaining.
Palestinian officials had long believed the resolution was likely to be defeated by a US veto but had hoped to secure the symbolic figure of nine votes to dramatise what they argue is Washington’s partisan advocacy on behalf of Israel in the Middle East peace process.
Indeed the US, Israel’s closest ally, had made clear its opposition to the draft resolution, insisting instead on a negotiated peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, not an imposed timetable.
“We voted against this resolution not because we are comfortable with the status quo. We voted against it because ... peace must come from hard compromises that occur at the negotiating table,” the US ambassador Samantha Power said.
She criticised the decision to bring the draft resolution to a vote as a “staged confrontation that will not bring the parties closer”. She added that the resolution was “deeply unbalanced” and did not take into account Israel’s security concerns.
“Our effort was a serious effort, genuine effort, to open the door for peace,” said Riyad Mansour, the Palestinian UN ambassador. “Unfortunately, the security council is not ready to listen to that message.”
• Agencies contributed to this report.