The way the U.S. Congress and the International Criminal Court (ICC) view and handle matters involving the Israeli prime minister is significantly different. The U.S. Congress demonstrates unwavering support for the Israeli prime minister despite widespread international concerns over potential criminal actions. On the other hand, the ICC issued the warrant on November 21, accusing Netanyahu of the following:

War crimes: Utilizing starvation as a method of warfare.

Crimes against humanity: Engaging in acts of murder, persecution, and other inhumane actions.

Targeting civilians: Intentionally directing attacks against civilian populations.

The question is why the U.S. Congress fails to acknowledge these actions, even to some extent. Conversely, if the U.S. Congress is correct, why has the ICC chosen to accept such accusations? There is a need for greater knowledge and understanding of the Middle East conflict. This need could not be addressed by imposing sanctions on the ICC. The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) demands that the U.S. Congress condemn the ICC, impose consequences and act against countries that may detain an Israeli official. Accordingly, the U.S. government is threatening sanctions on the ICC. U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham mistakenly argued, as he often does, that if the ICC can act against Israel, the U.S. could be next, despite there being no similarities between the U.S. government’s actions and the Israeli government’s actions. Furthermore, he threatened other countries (e.g., Canada, Germany and France) with sanctions if they attempted to assist the ICC. Jonathan Freedland, a columnist for the Guardian, suggested that Israel, once aspiring to be a guiding example for the world, is now at risk of becoming isolated and disregarded by other nations due to Netanyahu’s actions and the policies of his far-right government.

The U.S. Congress has no intention of reviewing the evidence the ICC examined to come up with its decision. As a result, the U.S. Congress, like many of our nation, will continue to be a product of the one-sided story imposed by the U.S. media.

The U.S. Congress has no intention of reviewing the evidence the ICC examined to come up with its decision. As a result, the U.S. Congress, like many of our nation, will continue to be a product of the one-sided story imposed by the U.S. media. Historian Maha Nassar, a professor at Arizona State University, found that less than 2 percent of opinion articles about Palestinians are written by Palestinians themselves. This lack of representation silences the other side of the story, like the story doesn’t matter or isn’t worth hearing. That also makes the U.S. Congress and our political leaders extremely biased and unfair because they knew less. They are profoundly unaware of the stories, history and experiences of Palestinians and Arabs. This lack of understanding leads to their irrational response to the ICC, which could damage our nation’s reputation and leadership.

The flaws and misconceptions of nationalist or religiously driven ideologies have increasingly been noticed and understood. A state that promises democracy exclusively for Jewish people, as Ta-Nehisi Coates argues in his book The Message, is not an exemption. True peace can not be achieved without justice. Those who are looking for true peace should support justice.

I understand the argument that Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. However, a democratic system did not prevent Hitler from rising to power and leading the world into the Second World War due to his nationalist ideology. We should not tolerate a supremacy ideology under any circumstances or excuses. Among others, Coates points out the following two unjust practices in Israel:

Jewish citizens of Israel who marry from other countries can pass their citizenship to their spouse and children; Palestinian citizens of Israel can not.

Jewish settlers are subject to civil law, while stateless Palestinians in the same city are subject to military courts. This is maybe why Israeli jails have Palestinian children in them.

During last year, I saw and still see echoes of Eddie Jaku’s experience in Auschwitz, as he described it so beautifully in his book The Happiest Man on Earth, being mirrored in many ways in Gaza and Lebanon. Eddie Jaku recounted how Nazis attacked his home, dragged him into the street and forced him to witness the destruction of his family’s 200-year-old house. At that moment, Jaku said he had lost his dignity, freedom and faith in humanity. He was reduced from being a man to becoming nothing. How is this any different from what Palestinians have been enduring?

Mr. Jaku had many opportunities to survive in Auschwitz at the expense of others, including Jews, political prisoners, Slavs and Freemasons. However, he rejected such paths. See how he explained his refusal to survive at the expense of his morals and the suffering of others:

“I never lost sight of what it was to be civilized. I knew that there would be no point surviving if I had to become an evil man to do it. I never hurt another prisoner, I never stole another man’s bread, and I did all I could help my fellow man. There is no medicine for your morals. If your morals are gone, you go.”

I deeply sympathize with the hostages and their families — for what they endured, are enduring, and will have to endure in the future. Their elected leaders failed to explore numerous avenues of dialogue to secure their release. Instead, they chose and are choosing to take the lives of thousands of innocents, create countless disabled individuals and orphans, and destroy cities, all in the name of upholding their supremacist ideology.

How can the hostages bear such a heavy burden? How can the U.S. Congress live with the weight of knowing that we supported such a brutal response without considering the suffering of hundreds of thousands? We will all realize sooner or later that this story has no ultimate victim. The roles of victim and oppressor constantly shift, and we must be careful in judging, forming opinions, and acting to stay true to our morals and humanity.