EU hypocrisy on the parade while Netanyahu goes to Hungary without a glance

The European Union likes to present itself as the last bastion in principle of “international order based on rules” and global justice. However, his real commitment to this order is a bit suspicious. By applying standard doubles, the EU sap in fact, which makes its own exhortations hollow to other international players to respect it.

The collisions around the International Criminal Court (ICC) are an example.

The EU itself has no position with regard to the ICC. This means that its members have sovereign right to decide to join the status of Rome which has established the court or not. That said, since the creation of the ICC, Brussels encouraged its current and budding members, as well as other nations, to ratify the 1998 Rome status and support the work of the court.

The EU lever effect on this issue is more political than legal, but it seems to be deployed selectively, according to which the court chooses to place in the quay.

This week during a visit to the Israeli Prime Minister of Israel Benyami Benjamin Netanyahu in Budapest, Hungary in Hungary announcement that he will withdraw from the ICC.

The capture, however, is that the ICC has published a arrest warrant Against Netanyahu, having accused him of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the current campaign of Israel in Gaza during which more than 50,000 people, mainly civilians, were killed in retaliation for Hamas terrorist attacks, on October 7, 2023 (thousands of others are presumed dead, still disappeared under bombs). The withdrawal of Hungary from the status of Rome, assuming that it is ratified by Parliament, could still take months to take legal effect. Nevertheless, as long as the process is not finalized, Hungary has the obligation to arrest Netanyahu during its four -day stay.

Until now, the reaction of the EU has been attenuated. The spokesperson for the European Commission Anita Hipper, reacting to the reports of the intention of Hungary to withdraw from the ICC, only offered platitudes on the EU support for the Court and predicts “Deep regret” If Hungary should actually leave.

It remains to be seen how the best brass in the EU will react, if this is the case. However, this is not the point. When the EU invokes political will, it could theoretically apply sufficient pressure to avoid unwanted results before materializing, rather than having to react after the act.

In 2023, for example, the EU exerted pressure on South Africa concerning the potential presence of the BRICS summit by the Russian president Vladimir Putin, who, at that time, like Netanyahu, had already been charged by the CPI for war crimes in Ukraine. Brussels reminded South Africa only as a member of the ICC, he had the obligation to arrest Putin if he had to appear in the country and that his status as head of state gave him no immunity in this case.

The statements of EU officials, including the representative from top to bottom for foreign affairs, Josep Borrell, generally expressed a state of mind “with-ou-et-onust”. He has left little room for countries like South Africa, which sought to draw a neutral course – to tolerate the Russian invasion of Ukraine or join the favored sanctions and isolation in the United States and the EU of Russia.

Such Neutrality professions – common in the world of world – were regularly rejected as a sign of “reassuring yourself with Putin”. Although there were no manifest threats of sanctions, European diplomats at the time suggested that Pretoria’s access to European markets and foreign investments could be affected if Pretoria does not comply with its CPI obligations.

EU pressure and the perspective of tense links have clearly played a role in internal deliberations in South Africa; In the end, Putin did not witness The BRICS summit in Johannesburg and rather sent his Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sergei Lavrov.

No leverage was apparent in the case of Netanyahu’s visit to Hungary. It is ironic because Brussels already has a rather conflicting relationship with the Hungarian Prime Minister. Brussels and Budapest regularly clashed on domestic governance issues, in particular with regard to the implementation by Orban of its “Illiberal democracy”, “ in Hungary. However, what really made Orban a pariah in Brussels is his insistence on Opening space for diplomacy with Moscow To end the war in Ukraine.

Frustrated by Orban’s position (which, in fact, is widely shared in the political spectrum in Hungary, but also, More and more, in other EU countries), the senior Brussels officials would have Discuss the means To get expelled from the EU.

However, it would seem that Brussels is only exercised with the perceived flirt of Orban with Putin, but not Netanyahu, although they were both charged by the ICC. Indeed, if the EU’s concern with regard to the ICC and the world justice was as coherent as it claims, it could already consider the non -compliance with the ordinances of the ICC as a violation of the rule of law – to add to the pile of others, Pre -existing disagreements Brussels A with Budapest. However, a political will is necessary for the European Commission to move in this direction, and there is none.

Perversely, Orban is hammered for all kinds of questions, including diplomatic initiatives to end the war in Ukraine, but obtains a pass to welcome a man accused of war crimes.

And there is the node of the problem: the “blob” of Brussels no longer seems to worry about the optics. The chairman of the Ursula von der Leyen commission is like Land a supporter of Israel As she is a Russia Hawk. The contrast is even more pronounced in the case of the new High representative of EU foreign affairs, the former Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas. She focuses obsessively on Russia. This right week, she spoke to the European Parliament of the need to establish a special court On Russian crimes in Ukraine – probably in addition to the accusation of Putin’s ICC. However, a few days earlier, she speak Friendship and cooperation at a meeting with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Israel, Gideon Saar.

It should be noted that she also perceived Bellial Israeli discussion points on Iran constituting a “immense threat to the region and world stability” even if this has never been the official position of the EU.

Such an arbitrary could create a domino effect: Hungary is not the only ally of Israel in the EU. Other countries, such as the Czech Republic and Austria, can follow suit by ignoring their obligations under the ICC, literally without consequences. And Netanyahu will have any incentive to exploit these cracks in the EU to justify his claim to his domestic audience increasingly real than it is respected and authentic.

When the EU puts pressure on other countries, such as South Africa and others in the world South, to align with its geopolitical priorities (on Ukraine / Russia), while giving itself a pass when it is practical (on Israel / Palestine), it climbs in other parts of the world and emphasizes the case even for “international order based on rules” that the EU claims to defend and exempt.