Pedrosian told reporters, “We believe that the Canadian Prime Minister should, of course, reconsider this decision and welcome Prime Minister Netanyahu, the leader of the only Jewish and democratic state in the Middle East, to Canada,” according to The Times of Israel.
In an interview with American media last Sunday, Carney responded to a direct question about whether he would agree to an arrest, saying, “Yes.” He pointed out that “the ultimate goal of Canada’s policy in the Middle East is to establish a free and viable Palestinian state that lives in peace and security alongside Israel,” accusing Netanyahu’s government of “working to undermine this goal,” according to The Jerusalem Post.
Mark Carney explained that the actions of the current Israeli government “contradict the charter and Canada’s consistent approach since 1947,” emphasizing that the Canadian stance enjoys broad international support despite Washington’s opposition.
The statements by Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney came following a ceasefire between Israel and the Palestinian Hamas movement, as part of the peace plan proposed by US President Donald, amid the ongoing consideration of cases against Netanyahu and his former Defense Minister Yoav Galant by the International Criminal Court.
It should be noted that on November 21, 2024, arrest warrants were issued for Netanyahu and Galant on charges of “committing several crimes within the jurisdiction of the court, including war crimes and crimes against humanity, such as starvation as a tool of war, and crimes against humanity including murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts.”
The debate revolves around the role of the International Criminal Court, initially established to consider the most serious global crimes, including genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. Despite achieving historical convictions, the effectiveness of its decisions faces increasing criticism.
The court has faced a longstanding challenge of US opposition, as former US President Donald Trump, during his previous term, rejected the court’s legitimacy and, at the beginning of his second presidential term, imposed sanctions on the court’s prosecutor, reflecting previous tensions but raising new concerns about the court’s ability to operate under external pressures.
